|
REGULAR MEETING -- ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Proceedings had and testimony taken in the matters of ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS at City of Novi, 45175 West Ten Mile Road, Novi, Michigan, on Tuesday, March 7, 2006. BOARD MEMBERS ALSO PRESENT: REPORTED BY: 1 Tuesday, March 7, 2006 2 7:30 p.m. 3 MEMBER FISCHER: I would like to call to 4 order the March 2006 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting 5 for the City of Novi. 6 At this time, although not on the 7 agenda, could we all rise for the Pledge of 8 Allegience. 9 (Pledge of Allegience done.) 10 MEMBER FISCHER: I'll ask for a roll 11 call. Miss Marchioni, would you please call the roll. 12 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer? 13 MEMBER BAUER: Present. 14 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Canup, absent 15 excused. 16 Member Fischer? 17 MEMBER FISCHER: Present. 18 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan? 19 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Here. 20 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger? 21 MEMBER KRIEGER: Present. 22 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi? 23 MEMBER SANGHVI: Here. 24 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer?
3 1 MEMBER SHROYER: Here. 2 MEMBER FISCHER: We do have a quorum, so 3 the meeting is now in session. 4 At this time I'd like to go over a 5 couple of the rules of conduct. They all can be found 6 on the agenda, so if you have time please look over 7 them. But I would like to point out that we would 8 like everyone to turn off all pagers and all cell 9 phones. 10 And tonight we do have quite a large 11 agenda, so individuals will have five minutes to 12 address the board, groups will have ten minutes, and I 13 will be asking the secretary to adhere to those rules. 14 The Zoning Board of Appeals is hearing 15 board empowered by the Novi city charter to hear 16 appeals seeking variances from the application of the 17 Novi zoning ordinance. 18 It takes a vote of at least four members 19 to approve a variance request, and a vote of the 20 majority present to deny a request. Tonight we do 21 have a full board, so any decisions made will be 22 final. 23 Are there any changes to the agenda? 24 MS. MARCHIONI: Yes. There's one
4 1 deletion under other matters, the discussion of 2 previous case 06-009 has been removed. 3 MEMBER FISCHER: We'll remove that. Any 4 other changes? 5 MS. MARCHIONI: No. 6 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, I'll 7 entertain a motion to approve as amended. All in 8 favor say aye. 9 (Vote taken.) 10 MEMBER FISCHER: All right. We do have 11 an agenda for tonight. We'll move on to the approval 12 of the minutes. And in our packet we do have December 13 6, 2005, and January 10, 2006. Are there any changes 14 to the minutes? 15 (No response.) 16 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, I'll 17 entertain a motion to approve as submitted. 18 (Motion made.) 19 MEMBER FISCHER: All in favor say aye. 20 (Vote taken.) 21 MEMBER FISCHER: Minutes for those two 22 months have been approved. 23 This brings us to the public remarks 24 section of the hearing tonight. All comments related
5 1 to a case on the agenda, if you could please wait 2 until that case is called it would be greatly 3 appreciated. 4 However, if anyone wishes to address the 5 board on a matter that is not on our agenda tonight, 6 please come forward now. 7 (No response.) 8 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, we'll 9 close the public remarks section of the meeting. 10 11 CASE NUMBER 06-001 12 MEMBER FISCHER: And we'll move to case 13 number 06-001 filed by Matthew Gudaitis for property 14 at 2115 West Lake Drive. The petitioner is requesting 15 six variances for the construction of a new home at 16 said address. 17 And you are the petitioners? 18 MR. GUDAITIS: Yes. I'm Matt Gudaitis. 19 MEMBER FISCHER: And you were both sworn 20 in last month, correct? 21 MR. GUDAITIS: Yes. 22 MEMBER FISCHER: Okay. Then I'll remind 23 you that that still stands, and also remind the board 24 that this was tabled from last month.
6 1 And if you wish to proceed with your 2 altered plans. 3 MR. GUDAITIS: Correct, yes. 4 MR. MAMMOLA: Thank you members of the 5 board. Lee Mammola, Mammola Associates Architects. 6 Since our last meeting here about a 7 month ago, we've had an opportunity to advance the 8 design of the house and listen to some of the comments 9 that were made at the last meeting and try to 10 incorporate and respond to those comments. 11 We've also obtained more accurate and 12 defined site data, full -- what we call a normal 13 architectural site survey data has come in. 14 The design has changed. The house has 15 become narrower, in response predominantly to the 16 concern of our neighbor to the south. To do this, Mr. 17 Gudaitis has altered his initial demands for -- yeah, 18 really requirements, desires, for a connecting 19 bathroom to a guest room that would accommodate his 20 parents when they came to visit. That's now been -- 21 the bathroom has been separated from the guest room 22 and one will have to go into the hallway then to allow 23 significant reduction in width. 24 And we've also indented the front door
7 1 to the entry area, along with an indent to the other 2 side, to the north side of the garage, to allow for a 3 mechanical device to go outside, the cooling unit like 4 that, so as not to interfere with the side yard to the 5 north. 6 We've taken away some storage area in 7 the garage and we've frankly, I think, made the entry 8 to the house a little more attractive by making the 9 front door approach and narrowed the house to a 10 twenty-four feet dimesion. 11 We also looked at some of the designs of 12 the elevation. 13 Excuse me. Before I remove this board, 14 I'd like to point out some important issues. The 15 neighbor to the north, we do not impede his view to 16 the lake, which is very much a concern of his at the 17 last meeting. We got the survey data and we're able 18 to confirm that now. And we've also kept his 19 four-foot distance that you required, so that doesn't 20 change. 21 I will point out, however, that with our 22 new survey data, our property line has moved further 23 from the street towards the lake. We've picked up, 24 depending on which side of the property you're looking
8 1 at, anywhere from twenty-four feet to thirty-one feet 2 in depth. That has the implication to really 3 impact -- to really reduce the extent of the footprint 4 variance if you will. 5 I believe there should be a memo or a 6 letter on your desk tonight. We're in the 7 neighborhood of -- instead of a 13 point some percent 8 variance, 6.6 I believe. It's in the memo, the exact 9 number. 10 And it also eliminates the need for a 11 variance in the rear yard. 12 Now, you could say we couldn't. We have 13 some slack front to back in dimension, and we could 14 move the house further two feet to the rear and 15 eliminate the requirement of the front yard. We 16 really would not like to do that in all -- with all 17 respect to our neighbor to the north by moving the 18 house completely we start to impede his vision of the 19 lake. We told him we would not do that. 20 Additionally, that two foot represents a little two 21 foot by two foot little dib of a corner in the garage, 22 so it's really a minuscule impact to the overall site. 23 And we think that the neighbor's view of the lake 24 being maintained is a more important issue frankly.
9 1 We have, depending upon where you 2 measure our -- from our southerly property line to the 3 southerly wall line, anywhere from four foot seven to 4 four foot nine dimension. 5 It was requested -- after we met at the 6 podium last month, we were met with neighbors and 7 representatives to the south, and they were quite 8 emphatic that we come and meet five feet, it had to be 9 five feet. And if we could meet five feet that they 10 would have no objections. Well, we're not quite able 11 to meet the five feet. We moved every inch that we 12 really could. And I would point out that we've asked 13 for a little bit more than -- there's a four foot one 14 dimension because of the need for posts to support a 15 covered walkway as one would go from the driveway 16 along and into the -- towards the door. So really the 17 wall line at that point is eight foot nine from the 18 property line. It's much more than the five foot that 19 the folks represented they would like to see. It's 20 only for structural posts that we feel we need along 21 that line, that we need that variance. 22 If you look carefully at the site plan 23 that's submitted, you'll find that the -- there's also 24 dimension from the south property line to the existing
10 1 house that's under construction of nine foot seven I 2 believe. Part of their requirement, part of their 3 reasoning, if you will, for us maintaining a five-foot 4 dimension was they had to live by the rule of ten 5 feet. They did not have a variance. Well, if ten 6 foot's the requirement, something happened during 7 construction that that ten foot is less than ten feet 8 now. Those things happen in construction. We feel 9 they're close enough and we'd like you to think that 10 we are close enough at four foot nine where they can 11 (inaudible) property line and measure to our building. 12 Additionally, with respect to the design 13 of the building, the question was about materials at 14 the last month's meeting. We do have a combination of 15 masonry brick around the perimeter of the building, 16 and siding. And I feel, frankly, that materials are 17 part of architecture, but really scale, proportion and 18 texture and color are, frankly, a more important part 19 of architecture as it really defines the shape and 20 form of architecture. 21 We did try to be sensitive to the height 22 and scale of the building immediately to our south. 23 It is about a story-and-a-half before it peaks 24 upwards. And by locating the certain kinds of spaces
11 1 that we have on our southerly wall of our building, 2 stairways, closets, and a small sitting room, those 3 rooms do not require an eight foot wall, so we've had 4 a lower wall. We're able to lower our eave height 5 along the southerly property line. It's not quite as 6 low as the house to our south, but it comes pretty 7 darn close. It's maybe about a two-foot difference. 8 I think you can see that schematically on the drawing 9 to my far left, your right, and should be on the 10 prints that you're looking at as well, too. What this 11 does for us is it, one, not only respects the 12 character of the proportions to the house to the 13 south, but it also allows us to start to create an 14 image of a cottage-like look and scale to the front of 15 Mr. Gudaitis's house. By adding the various peaks, by 16 adding some lines over the garage, we're able to 17 reduce the effect of that wall and to give it a little 18 texture, architectural texture and character, and that 19 inviting feel he wants when visitors come to his 20 house. 21 I also have a floor plan that sums up 22 and shows some of the layout and characteristics and 23 how we tried to squeeze this space down. We really 24 have squeezed it as much we practically can. We can't
12 1 go -- we have to go four-inch increments because of 2 the brick that's being used around the perimeter. We 3 can't move it by one inch or anything of that sort 4 without creating other problems. 5 It was also just recently let it be 6 known to us that the people to the south would like to 7 make sure that we have a ten foot setback between our 8 property, the common property line, and our house. 9 You know, if we were to take another five feet off 10 this house, we might very well be creating -- well, 11 we'd be creating a house that's twenty feet wide, and 12 might very well be creating the need to come to the 13 board to seek an appeal for a similar/dissimilar 14 ordinance. By keeping it in the territory of the 15 width that we have, we're keeping it consistent with 16 the character and the architecture in that 17 neighborhood. 18 With that, I'd be willing to answer any 19 questions of the board or respond to any comments from 20 the audience. 21 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 22 Mr. Mammola. 23 MR. MAMMOLA: Thank you. 24 MEMBER FISCHER: In this case, there
13 1 were twenty-eight notices mailed with zero approvals 2 and zero objections. 3 Is there anyone in the audience that 4 wishes to comment on this case? Please come forward. 5 If you could just state your name and 6 address and proceed with your comments. 7 MR. ROSENTHAL: Good evening. My name 8 is Jan David Rosenthal, this is 9 Patricia Dwyer, and we are going to be the occupants 10 of the said house. My address now is in California, 11 6801 Springview Place, Alta Loma, California 91701. 12 This is Michael Himan. He spoke last month on behalf 13 of me, as well as 14 Mr. Nichey, the architect, who's unavailable tonight. 15 First I'd like to thank you for your 16 time to allow us to address you. Last month you were 17 kind enough to give us time, as well as Mr. Gudaitis, 18 and explicit direction, more than you usually do, in 19 order to help him resolve the issue with us. 20 After the meeting, Mr. Gudaitis, as well 21 as his architect, met with Mr. Himan, as well as 22 Patricia Dwyer, and I was talking to another neighbor 23 out front. At that time, 24 Mr. Himan stated he'd be available every day at the
14 1 house, as well as Miss Dwyer, at anytime, that I was 2 going back to California. Mr. Nichey said he'd also 3 be available at any time to discuss any changes. 4 At that time we stated that we would 5 accept the five foot variance if the materials in the 6 house represented something that was close to our 7 house. 8 In the interim, over the past month, Mr. 9 Nichey had a 30-minute drive-by call by their 10 architect, which was unscheduled, to show him plans 11 that he already designed with variances requesting now 12 a 4.1 variance on my side yard instead of two feet. 13 So he's given up 2.1 more feet. And in the rear he's 14 gone from twenty-seven feet down to twenty-nine. 15 Because they didn't attempt to call Mr. 16 Himan or Miss Dwyer or myself, and just last week 17 talked to Mr. Nichey for 30 minutes, I had to fly out 18 here in order to represent myself because Mr. Nichey 19 couldn't be here. 20 I'm requesting that at least a ten foot 21 variance be maintained on the south side, as fifteen 22 is the normal variance. 23 The house that I'm building has been 24 maintained within that, is on two lots, which I paid
15 1 for, and represents a significant investment; 2 therefore, any closer home to my home impacts the 3 value of my home directly. 4 So I'm asking that he maintain at least 5 the thirty-five foot setback in the rear, as well as 6 least a ten foot setback on the side yard instead of 7 the fifteen, which is what is required. 8 I'd now like to have Mr. Himan address 9 anything more. 10 MR. HIMAN: Thank you. At your request 11 or suggestion as to last week's -- last month's 12 meeting, we did meet outside of this office. We 13 suggested that if they could come up with a five foot 14 variance that we would agree and assist them in trying 15 to get the house built, working it through. At that 16 time I was told that it probably can't be done. I 17 suggested that I've been a designer for well over 18 thirty-eight years and have had many solutions solved 19 by talking, more than one head, having two heads 20 talking it over. I offered my services at that time. 21 I handed them a card and said to them that I would be 22 available at any time to discuss any of the matters 23 with the house, that I could review it on Mr. 24 Rosenthal's behalf. I haven't received a phone call,
16 1 we haven't seen the plans, we haven't seen the 2 elevations, we've seen nothing. Because of that we 3 felt that they did not take your advice and obviously 4 we should go another route. 5 But we would welcome them as neighbors. 6 We would welcome them to have a beautiful home there. 7 We don't want to see the ugly eyesore of the house 8 that's there right now, but we also don't want to have 9 the infringement. We do have some of the concerns 10 that you had brought up as well as maintaining the 11 property, being able to take care of the maintenance 12 and the lawns or what's on the side of the properties. 13 We just have those worries and concerns as well. 14 But, again, we felt that because of your 15 generous offer to suggest and talk to us, we haven't 16 been able to talk to them and give them any of our 17 suggestion or ideas, or maybe even help. We're not 18 suggesting they build a ten-foot wide house or a 19 fifteen-foot wide house. We just believe that looking 20 at it from another angle, or having another eyes look 21 at it, might be helpful. They did not take that, so 22 on Mr. Rosenthal's behalf, he would wish now that he 23 maintain the ten foot rather than even the five foot. 24 Thank you.
17 1 MR. ROSENTHAL: Thank you for your time. 2 We did send -- I don't know if you got 3 this. Mr. Nichey wrote a letter on behalf of myself 4 and faxed it to the board today. 5 MS. MARCHIONI: I didn't receive 6 anything. I checked the fax at five o'clock. 7 MEMBER FISCHER: You're here and your 8 comments are well noted. 9 MR. ROSENTHAL: Okay. It was an 10 objection. 11 Thank you so much. 12 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you. Is there 13 anyone else in the audience that wishes to comment on 14 this case? 15 (No reponse.) 16 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, I'll ask 17 the building department for any comments. 18 MR. SAVEN: In the presentation you 19 talked about looking at the site again and getting 20 more accurate surveys or dimensions for your property. 21 You further indicated that the rear yard variance 22 would not be necessary; is that correct? 23 MR. MAMMOLA: That's correct. 24 MR. SAVEN: So we're eliminating the
18 1 rear yard variance. 2 Secondly, the issue regarding the lot 3 coverage is now at a point where you're dealing with 4 6.6 percent instead of 13.5; is that correct? 5 MR. MAMMOLA: Yes, sir. 6 MR. SAVEN: And this will be on the 7 survey that you're going to propose? 8 MR. MAMMOLA: That is -- that's -- yes, 9 sir. It's the drawing that you have in your 10 possession. 11 MR. SAVEN: I just wanted to make sure 12 the board was aware of that. 13 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 14 Mr. Saven. 15 And I will open it up now for board 16 discussion. Member Gronachan? 17 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Thank you. First I 18 would like to commend you on your effort of heeding 19 our request last month and certainly doing your due 20 diligence and going back and seeing that less, in 21 fact, was better. 22 I have a question for Mr. Saven, and I 23 need a clarification if you will. 24 Mr. Mammola indicated that if he, in fact, did do the
19 1 five feet side yard variance that the house would have 2 to be less than twenty feet wide. I guess maybe- 3 MR. MAMMOLA: (Interposing) I'm sorry. 4 If we were to add five feet and make it a ten foot 5 setback, the house would be less than twenty feet 6 wide. 7 MEMBER GRONACHAN: And you're in 8 agreement with that; is that correct? Because I'm not 9 an architect, so -- I mean, that's basically what it 10 sounded- 11 MR. SAVEN: (Interposing) I will 12 assume, that based upon his dimensions that he 13 proposed, it would be less than that. 14 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. I'm torn and 15 I'm not torn, and the reason why is that normally, in 16 these type of situations, we look at health, safety 17 and welfare of the neighborhood. We take in several 18 different considerations. I'm going to say my piece 19 and then I'm going to let the other board members jump 20 in, but I'll give them a clue of where I'm at. 21 I feel that the petitioner has 22 demonstrated, beyond the call of duty, why this house 23 can't be built with any less of a variance. I think 24 he's indicated and substantiated in his testimony that
20 1 the view of this house does not -- I'm sorry, that the 2 location of this house does not obstruct any views 3 from the area neighbors. 4 I also indicate -- I also would like to 5 state that material is not a concern of ours and, 6 therefore, although it's part of this house and it's a 7 part of what it is that you do, I don't feel that it 8 adds or detracts from the variances that you request 9 and, therefore, will not -- it has nothing to do with 10 us. 11 And unless the board members at this 12 point have something else to add, given that the 13 petitioner has substantiated what he -- what we asked 14 for last month, I intend to be in support of this, 15 although other people out there know that usually I'm 16 not because of the closeness to the property line. 17 However, we are not talking about the same width of 18 property. We're talking about a 35-foot width lot, 19 and that to me is a hardship in itself. 20 So I will yield to the other opinions at 21 this table and we can take it from there. 22 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 23 Member Gronachan. Member Krieger? 24 MEMBER KRIEGER: I agree with the
21 1 previous speaker, that there was a huge effort in the 2 previous presentation and this presentation in that 3 going from 13.5 to 6.6 percent, and taking the 4 neighbors into consideration and changing the 5 setbacks. 6 And those are my comments. Thank you. 7 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 8 Member Krieger. Member Bauer? 9 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you, Chair. I 10 think we've done -- the architect's done a pretty good 11 job, seeing that the existing house had, might as well 12 say, right on the lot line, and this is going back far 13 enough in between the two homes. They've got 14 fourteen -- almost fourteen feet. And I am in favor 15 it. 16 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 17 Member Bauer. 18 Member Sanghvi, any comments, not to put 19 you on the spot? 20 MEMBER SANGHVI: You're not putting me 21 on the spot. In some way I am at an advantage and a 22 disadvantage in the sense that I wasn't here last 23 month. I have heard you for the first time. To me 24 it's an advantage because I'm just hearing what is
22 1 being presented, what is going to be done instead of 2 what went on in the past. 3 Having said that, I also want to point 4 out that in that neighborhood, the size of lots there 5 and all around there, I don't think anybody could 6 bring in any houses without any variances. It's not 7 possible. They are more or less postage stamp size 8 lots. And if you give the variances you have a five 9 foot there and nothing else left. So variances are 10 necessary. 11 I also find out that you reduced the lot 12 coverage by almost 50 percent. I don't how you did 13 it, but magic miracle measurements and precision. 14 Considering everything, I do not have 15 any problem in supporting current application for 16 variances. 17 Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 18 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 19 Mr. Sanghvi. Mr. Shroyer? 20 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you, sir. I 21 agree with all the previous speakers. Anytime we're 22 faced with one of these lake side lots, or lake 23 frontage lots, they're all narrow. There's always 24 going to be difficulties. There's always -- try -- we
23 1 always try to come up with some type of a give and 2 take to be fair to everyone surrounding the area. We 3 don't want to ever obscure anybody's view of the lake, 4 et cetera. 5 All -- basically all of the items that I 6 brought up at the last meeting have been addressed. 7 If you go back and look at your original submittal 8 back in February, 9 actually February 7th, the original request was 10 twenty-three percent lot coverage variance. That's 11 almost a quarter of the whole property. You've 12 reduced that to 6.6 percent. I think that's very 13 admirable. 14 I am disappointed that there wasn't some 15 type of resolution worked out with the neighbors to 16 the south. You're going to have to live next to them. 17 They're going to have to live next to you. 18 I would -- if we pass this the way it 19 stands, we're giving them minimum requirements, 20 correct, for the minimum variance on each of these? 21 Consequently, if they choose at a later 22 time to lessen that variance, they wouldn't have to 23 come back to us; is that correct? 24 MR. SAVEN: If it stayed within the
24 1 footprint as defined by the board. 2 MEMBER SHROYER: Okay. So that is the 3 way I'm going to vote. I'll be in support of the 4 motion, if somebody cares to make one. 5 But I would also encourage you to work 6 with your neighbors to the south. If there's anything 7 more you can do to minimize their concern, I'm sure 8 everybody would be happier. 9 Thank you, Chair. 10 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 11 Member Shroyer. Member Sanghvi? 12 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you, 13 Mr. Chairman. After having heard the board members, 14 if I may, I would like to make a motion that in case 15 number 06-001, that currently requested variances be 16 granted because of the lot configuration. 17 MEMBER FISCHER: There's a motion. 18 MEMBER BAUER: Join. 19 MEMBER FISCHER: There's a second. 20 Member Gronachan? 21 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I would like to add a 22 friendly amendment, Member Sanghvi, if I could, and 23 that would be that -- specifically to the discussion 24 previous in regards to the effect that petitioner has
25 1 demonstrated all of the concerns previously brought up 2 by this board, and due to lot size and configuration, 3 along with the statement given by the architect that 4 the house would be too small if the variances were not 5 granted, creating thus a practical difficulty. You 6 took the words right out of my mouth. Thank you. 7 Would you accept that? 8 MEMBER SANGHVI: Sure. 9 MEMBER FISCHER: Does the second concur? 10 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 11 MEMBER FISCHER: There's a motion and a 12 second. Any further discussion? 13 (No further discussion.) 14 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, closed. 15 MR. SAVEN: But the modification to the 16 request for the variance based upon testimony given 17 tonight in regards to there would be no rear yard 18 setback variance, and also that there was a reduction 19 in the lot size coverage, lot coverage. 20 MEMBER SANGHVI: I thought that was 21 covered by the word current request. 22 MR. SAVEN: I do apologize, sir. 23 MEMBER FISCHER: Mr. Schultz, are you 24 fine with that?
26 1 MR. SCHULTZ: I think that's an 2 excellent thing to add, if I may, Mr. Chair. I guess 3 the other point in terms of incorporating into the 4 motion, all members of the board spoke on this, and I 5 think the consensus was was practical difficulty, was 6 because of the lot width. The petitioners reduced the 7 width of the house as much as possible to deal with 8 that burden, and this is the minimum variance that the 9 board feels can be granted while still giving both the 10 neighbor and this property owner substantial justice. 11 If that could be added, I think that's a fair 12 summation of the comments that I heard. 13 MEMBER FISCHER: Do you wish to make 14 those comments part of the motion? 15 MEMBER SANGHVI: Let it be. 16 MEMBER FISCHER: And the second agrees? 17 Any other discussion? 18 (No further discussion.) 19 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, 20 Miss Marchioni, will you please call the roll. 21 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi? 22 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 23 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer? 24 MEMBER BAUER: Yes.
27 1 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fischer. 2 MEMBER FISCHER: Aye. 3 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan. 4 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes. 5 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger. 6 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 7 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer. 8 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 9 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to 10 zero. 11 MEMBER FISCHER: Variances have been 12 granted. Please see the building department. 13 14 CASE NUMBER 06-002 15 MEMBER FISCHER: At this time I would 16 like to call case number 06-002 filed by NorthStar 17 Signs for Campus Tech Park. The applicant is 18 requesting one sign variance to erect a construction 19 identification sign located north of Eleven Mile Road 20 and east of Meadowbrook. 21 Is the petitioner here tonight? 22 And the applicant is requesting the sign 23 to be 63 square feet. This case was also tabled from 24 last month due to not being able to -- not sure where
28 1 the property was, correct? 2 MR. ASH: Correct. 3 MEMBER FISCHER: All right. And you 4 were sworn in at this time, and that still stands 5 tonight. 6 So if you wish to state your name and 7 address and proceed. 8 MR. ASH: Robbie Ash, 950 Lakeview, 9 that's Waterford. 10 Very briefly, my client is continuing to 11 work with his clients to finalize the drawings to get 12 them submitted to you as quickly as possible. And 13 even if you could just give us a short-term variance 14 on this, just allowing him enough time to get 15 something finalized. As I had mentioned last month, 16 there will be a development here. They're just, you 17 know, hashing out the details. And as soon as they 18 get those resolved they will be submitting those plans 19 for permits. 20 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you. Is there 21 anyone in the audience that wishes to comment on this 22 case? 23 (No response.) 24 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, I'll let
29 1 the board know that in this case there was sixteen 2 notices mailed with zero approvals and zero 3 objections. 4 Building department make a comment? 5 MR. AMOLSCH: No comment, sir. 6 MEMBER FISCHER: I'll open it for board 7 discussion. Member Shroyer? 8 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you, 9 Mr. Chair. At the last meeting we did have one 10 objection. It was a Mr. Paul Fenkell on Bridge 11 Street. Were new notices mailed out? 12 MS. MARCHIONI: New notices were mailed 13 out. 14 MEMBER SHROYER: Okay. He chose not to 15 respond? 16 MS. MARCHIONI: I didn't hear from 17 anyone. 18 MEMBER SHROYER: I wanted to ask the 19 petitioner, the sign that's currently up there is four 20 foot by four foot, so that is the one that you're 21 looking at retaining in the location, or are you going 22 to replace it with the one you have down here, seven 23 foot by nine foot? 24 THE WITNESS: To be replaced with seven
30 1 foot by nine. 2 MEMBER SHROYER: And that falls within 3 the size maximums; is that correct? 4 MR. AMOLSCH: For a construction sign, 5 yes, sir. 6 MEMBER SHROYER: That's all I have, Mr. 7 Chair. 8 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 9 Member Shroyer. Other members. 10 Member Gronachan? 11 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I have no problem. I 12 think that the mixup was if this property was right, 13 and that's all been resolved. Miss Marchioni, I'm 14 sure, checked that all out. And I'm confident that 15 this is correct, so based on the testimony, I will be 16 in full support of this temporary permit. 17 And if there's no other, I'll go with 18 the motion. In case 06-002 filed by NorthStar Signs 19 for Campus Tech Park, I move that we approve this 20 sign, replacing the current four by four sign, and 21 thus the height being five by nine. 22 MEMBER SHROYER: Seven by nine. 23 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Seven by nine, I'm 24 sorry. And for a period of two years.
31 1 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 2 MEMBER GRONACHAN: For two years. 3 MEMBER SHROYER: Support. 4 MEMBER FISCHER: There is a motion and a 5 second. Any further question? 6 (No further discussion.) 7 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, 8 Miss Marchioni, will you please call the roll. 9 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan? 10 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes. 11 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer? 12 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 13 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fischer? 14 MEMBER FISCHER: Aye. 15 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger? 16 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 17 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi? 18 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 19 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer? 20 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 21 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to 22 nothing. 23 MEMBER FISCHER: Your variance has been 24 granted for a period of two years. Please see the
32 1 building department, and good luck. 2 3 CASE NUMBER 06-013 4 MEMBER FISCHER: We'll move along to 5 case number 06-013 filed by Novi Urgent Care at 24230 6 Karim Boulevard. The petitioner is requesting one 7 sign variance to add language of Novi Urgent Care to 8 an existing business center sign north of Ten Mile 9 Road and west of Haggerty. The variance requested is 10 seven square feet. 11 And you are the petitioner? 12 DR. NASRY: Yes. I'm Dr. Nasry. 13 MEMBER FISCHER: If you can take one 14 second and be sworn in by our secretary. 15 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Raise your right 16 hand, please. Do you swear or affirm the information 17 that you're about to give in the matter before you is 18 the truth? 19 DR. NASRY: Yes, I do. 20 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Thank you. 21 MEMBER FISCHER: You can then state your 22 name and address and then proceed with your comments. 23 DR. NASRY: Okay. I'm Dr. Nasry, 24 N-a-s-r-y. I'm the medical director Novi Urgent Care,
33 1 24230 Karim Boulevard, suite 125. I'm also the 2 medical director for the River Urgent Care in Trenton. 3 We opened this urgent care on 4 March 1st, and one of the main obstacle was the sign 5 that we were given by the owner of the building. 6 We're leasing the front suite in that 7 building, and in order for us to -- I mean, I'm going 8 to push this from two points. Number one, I'm a 9 businessman bringing business to the city of Novi, and 10 the City needs to meet the requirement of an urgent 11 care. Urgent care cannot be found by people if it's 12 hidden in the back of a building. We need to put the 13 sign on the street that people walking by can see. 14 And, on the other hand, for the sick and injured in 15 the middle of the night looking for a place for quick 16 care, we need to show them that there is a place here 17 where you can have a laceration sewn, a cold treated, 18 antibiotic shot, a flu vaccine. 19 So we propose actually adding a sign to 20 the bottom of the present sign so people can see it 21 from the street. 22 However, after we did that -- I want to 23 show this picture to the members. 24 MEMBER FISCHER: If you want to place it
34 1 right on the overhead there, they should be able to 2 pull it up for us. It will pull up. Is it on the 3 correct side, facing up? 4 DR. NASRY: Correct side, yeah. 5 MEMBER FISCHER: There we go. 6 DR. NASRY: After we made the proposal, 7 we discovered that if we add the sign to the bottom of 8 the present sign, the light fixture is going to be 9 blocking the view of the sign. So now we are now 10 requesting, if you would help us out here, by allowing 11 us to raise the whole sign another foot and keep the 12 present square footage of the sign, just raise the 13 sign about one foot, one-foot-and-a-half so it's not 14 blocked by the light fixture. 15 And I want to present to you a few 16 other- 17 MEMBER FISCHER: (Interposing) Can I 18 ask one quick question of the building department? 19 DR. NASRY: Sure. 20 MEMBER FISCHER: I think I have a 21 concern here. If we have to do that and grant that 22 variance, we would have to renotice, which means we 23 would have to table it, and there's no point in making 24 the whole presentation at this time if we have to
35 1 renotice from the City's point of view. 2 MR. SAVEN: Let me ask the question. 3 Alan, (inaudible), if it was to be raised an 4 additional foot, would that be something we would have 5 to renotice? 6 MR. AMOLSCH: Yes. Because it's five 7 foot now (inaudible). 8 MEMBER FISCHER: So if we took it from 9 five feet up to six feet, then it would require one 10 foot height variance, and in order to grant that 11 tonight, then -- we wouldn't be able to grant that 12 tonight. 13 DR. NASRY: Would I be allowed to keep 14 it in this position until we have the meeting next 15 month? The business is open. 16 MEMBER FISCHER: The mockup sign? 17 DR. NASRY: Yeah. 18 MEMBER FISCHER: I would leave it up to 19 the board. I don't see an objection. 20 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I don't have a 21 problem with it. 22 MEMBER FISCHER: So if you want to leave 23 it for our purposes, then that would be great. 24 DR. NASRY: That's fine. I need to show
36 1 you a couple of other things and see what you have to 2 tell me about. 3 I'm comparing myself to other urgent 4 care in the area, but I want you to see what type 5 of -- this is our competition on Haggerty and north of 6 Maple, the Lakes Medical Center. It's a big building, 7 like four, five times the building that I'm in, and 8 look at the urgent care sign at their entrance. 9 MEMBER FISCHER: And we do look at each 10 case on a case by case basis, so -- but we will give 11 you this opportunity to present all this next time and 12 it will be fresh in our minds at that time. Then we 13 can make a decision at that time. 14 DR. NASRY: Okay. 15 MEMBER FISCHER: Mr. Saven? 16 MR. SAVEN: As a point, I'd like to 17 bring to you in regards to the previous picture that 18 you have -- if you put that back up again just for a 19 second, so that we don't have to deal with issues that 20 are maybe a foot. If you take a look at where that 21 sign's location is in reference to the light, please 22 make sure the dimensions that you're going to give us 23 is accurate in accordance with what you're wanting to 24 do to get it above that sign.
37 1 DR. NASRY: Okay. 2 MR. SAVEN: One I foot, I don't think, 3 is going to take you to that point you're talking 4 about. 5 DR. NASRY: Okay. Very good. Thank 6 you. 7 MEMBER FISCHER: But we do look forward 8 to meeting with you next month. 9 And if I can have a motion to table next 10 month. 11 MEMBER BAUER: Motion to table. 12 MEMBER FISCHER: All in favor, say aye. 13 (Vote taken.) 14 MEMBER FISCHER: All right. So we'll 15 see you next month with revised plans. 16 17 CASE NUMBER 06-014 18 MEMBER FISCHER: At this time I would 19 like to call case number 06-014 filed by Metro PCS 20 Michigan, Incorporated, for 21 42380 Arena Drive. The petitioner is requesting a 22 variance to the requirement of a face brick exterior 23 equipment shelter building on all four sides located 24 at said address. The applicant wishes to install a
38 1 metal equipment cabinet that is not an approved 2 material. 3 If you could raise your hand and be 4 sworn in by our secretary. 5 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or 6 affirm that the information that you're about to give 7 in the matter before you is the truth? 8 MR. JERSON: Yes. 9 MEMBER FISCHER: If you could state your 10 name and address and proceed. 11 MR. JERSON: Thank you, sir. My name is 12 Matthew Jerson. I'm with Richard, Conner, Riley and 13 Associates, and I represent Metro PCS. My address is 14 30150 Telegraph Road, suite 420, Bingham Farms, 15 Michigan 48025. 16 Metro PCS currently in its initial 17 infrastructure build plan phase here in the state. 18 They are the latest wireless carrier to enter this 19 market in Michigan, and they plan to launch service 20 here in this first quarter of 2006. 21 I'm happy to report all of the sites 22 that we have identified during this initial phase for 23 the city of Novi have been co location sites. We've 24 worked very hard to make sure that that's been the
39 1 case. We are simply asking the board tonight to be 2 fair and equitable in treating the equipment cabinets 3 that we are proposing. 4 Like many of the other carriers in Novi 5 and throughout southeastern Michigan, in fact, 6 throughout the country, we utilize, as part of our 7 network infrastructure, outdoor equipment cabinets. 8 Some carriers use shelters. Some carriers use 9 buildings. 10 This particular equipment is designed to 11 be placed outdoors, and that is the that equipment 12 we're proposing tonight. 13 I would indicate this equipment is more 14 streamline, takes up less space. And, again, it's 15 designed to be placed outdoors, not within another 16 enclosure. 17 I have -- this evening I brought some 18 additional pictures of an actual installation. This 19 picture is of a site in the city of Farmington that's 20 actually been recently installed. It will give you an 21 idea of the real life proportions and look of the 22 equipment. 23 I would note for the board that this is 24 a minimal installation. We are proposing one radio
40 1 equipment cabinet with one battery cabinet. The 2 battery cabinet Is the smaller shorter cabinet 3 adjacent to it. 4 On the submitted drawings we're also 5 proposing expansion of one additional radio cabinet 6 and one additional battery cabinet. 7 I would note at this site I was involved 8 in the initial (inaudible) for Sprint at the ice arena 9 for the location. This is really, in many respects, 10 an ideal location to minimize the visual impact of 11 these sites. 12 The road is not thru road. The only 13 cars that are really traveling down to the site are 14 representatives of the tower companies to service and 15 maintain it. 16 There's existing pine trees, evergreen 17 trees, that are planted around the entire compound. 18 There's also a large -- relatively large berm that's 19 along the north and west sides, which further blocks 20 the view. 21 As a practical matter, you can't see 22 this site when you're at the ice arena. You have to 23 actually travel down the road to be there. 24 I would also note that there are a few
41 1 carriers there with outdoor equipment currently. 2 We're proposing to place this between Sprint and 3 T-Mobile. And from the front of the entrance, as a 4 practical matter, you wouldn't even see our equipment. 5 T-Mobile's equipment which may, in fact, be bigger, 6 it's probably comparable, but I know that there's more 7 pieces, cabinets there than we're proposing is 8 actually screening the view from the front. 9 And I would note two other additional 10 comments. The brick building, I am certainly -- I'm 11 certain that a brick building is going to have more of 12 a visual impact as far as the size and the look and 13 appearance than the outdoor equipment cabinets. Most 14 Communities, in fact, prefer outdoor equipment 15 cabinets as opposed to a shelter or a building. 16 Lastly, I would note, too, the ordinance 17 specifically requests face brick only with respect to 18 shelter buildings. And we're, in fact, proposing a 19 cabinet. We're not proposing a building. 20 So, with that, I would ask for the 21 board's support. 22 I would be happy to answer any questions 23 that you might have. 24 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you very much.
42 1 In this case there were fourteen notices 2 mailed with zero approvals and zero objections. 3 Is there anyone in the audience that 4 wishes to comment on this case? 5 (No response.) 6 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, I'll ask 7 the building department if they have any comments. 8 MR. SAVEN: I think this is a very tough 9 issue because, number one, I think from a standpoint 10 of view this is one of the waves of the future, all of 11 these cabinets and equipments and things of this 12 nature that's associated. But I think where the most 13 impact is going to be is the visual impact, where this 14 is relative to the site, and it's probably more of the 15 things that the board should take into consideration 16 in this matter. 17 MEMBER FISCHER: Anything else? I'll 18 open it up for board discussion. 19 Member Krieger? 20 MEMBER KRIEGER: I have a question. Is 21 the surrounding developed? 22 MR. SAVEN: I think for where the arena 23 drive is, I think you have the industrial application 24 which is directly south, and this is where the Novi
43 1 Ace Arena is at. It's located on the properties of 2 the Novi Ice Arena, I believe, and the tower location 3 is there, which sits to the rear of the property. 4 MEMBER KRIEGER: So it would not have a 5 visual impact except for the ice arena? 6 MR. SAVEN: It's located in the rear of 7 the ice arena. 8 MEMBER KRIEGER: Thank you, 9 Mr. Chair. 10 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 11 Member Krieger. Member Gronachan. 12 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Forget my name for a 13 minute? 14 MEMBER FISCHER: Wanted to. 15 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Mr. Saven, the 16 petitioner indicated that there's other cell companies 17 at this same location. And did I understand that 18 correct? 19 MR. JERSON: Yes. 20 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you know what the 21 material is of these other- 22 MR. SAVEN: (Interposing) No, I do not. 23 MEMBER SHROYER: I do. 24 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Member Shroyer,
44 1 through the chair. 2 MEMBER SHROYER: Right now, Sprint on 3 the northwest corner is on a platform; Cingular, 4 northeast corner, is on a pad; and T-Mobile is on a 5 pad on the southwest corner. They're all exposed to 6 the elements. There is one brick-faced shelter with 7 gabled roof, and that's Nextel, currently sits on the 8 southeast corner at this location. 9 MEMBER FISCHER: Must be why I get 10 crummy service through Nextel. 11 MEMBER GRONACHAN: So -- you're saying 12 platform. You're saying that they're in cabinets like 13 this then? 14 MEMBER SHROYER: Right. 15 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. So there's two 16 that have these cabinets? 17 MEMBER SHROYER: Three. 18 MEMBER GRONACHAN: And one with a brick 19 face besides the -- this petitioner. 20 Sir, I have a question. 21 MR. JERSON: Sure. 22 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Why not build with 23 brick? You indicated everything else, but you never 24 answered the question as to why you wouldn't use the
45 1 brick. 2 MR. JERSON: Well, the equipment is out 3 -- it's designed and manufactured to be outdoors. You 4 can't actually enclose it. There's air conditioning 5 units, there's heat problems that would result if you 6 did that. I think that probably the reason Nextel is 7 a brick face is because they probably proposed a 8 shelter. I know that Sprint originally had proposed 9 an outdoor equipment cabinet. I'm not sure about the 10 other companies. But certainly there's three 11 companies that are using cabinets. I think the 12 ordinance requirement specifically states it's only 13 brick face with respect to shelter buildings. 14 And I think when you look around, 15 typically Nextel does use shelters usually. 16 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I have nothing 17 further. Thank you. 18 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 19 Member Gronachan. Member Shroyer. 20 MEMBER SHROYER: I did want to ask the 21 City if they know the sequence of applications as they 22 came in on the cell applications. Was Sprint the 23 first one that came in, or Cingular or- 24 MR. JERSON: (Interposing) Sprint is
46 1 the first one. Sprint was the company that actually 2 built the site. 3 MEMBER SHROYER: Was Nextel the last 4 one? 5 MR. JERSON: I don't know. 6 MEMBER SHROYER: What I'm trying to get 7 at is I know the City has had a lot of discussions 8 around this through, and through the planning 9 commission especially, and if they're saying, you 10 know, from here on out we want to make sure that every 11 single application coming into the City is going to be 12 brick shelter with gabled roofs, I sure would like to 13 know that before we act on this tonight. If they 14 haven't addressed it, that's fine, too. And I know 15 we're within our rights by following the ordinances 16 and acting on it as we may, but I was -- I really 17 wanted to know the sequence that that fell into and 18 where we're headed, because in visiting other sites in 19 the city -- and I can think of one right off the 20 bat -- is Harold on Grand River. There's also a brick 21 face building with Gabled roof storing cellular 22 equipment. 23 So where are we going with this? If the 24 City doesn't know, maybe we need to table it and come
47 1 back to it at a later time. 2 I'll yield to Mr. Schultz. 3 MR. SCHULTZ: If I may, through the 4 Chair. I can't speak to the sequence of when the -- 5 which cabinets came. But I did speak to 6 Tim Schmidt today about this just briefly, and I can't 7 say that his position represented -- represents the 8 planning department's or commission's views, but it 9 did not appear to me that this is the subject of an 10 ongoing discussion or anything like that at planning 11 commission or planning department level. 12 I think there was a recognition in the 13 conversation we had that this ordinance is kind of 14 written with the assumption that a provider's going to 15 come in with an actual building, so if they do that 16 and they come in proposing a shelter building, here's 17 what we want it to look like. The ordinance is not 18 particularly set up to deal with somebody who comes in 19 with an open outdoor cabinet that's designed to be an 20 outdoor cabinet. 21 But has the City gotten to the point of 22 trying to resolve this with an ordinance amendment, I 23 don't think there's any work with that that's ongoing 24 with that.
48 1 This is kind of squarely in your lap, 2 interpreting the ordinance and then giving a variance 3 if you find that that's appropriate. 4 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you. I 5 appreciate that. I was concerned about that. 6 I know at least probably two years ago 7 the request came in from a gas company concerning the 8 same thing at the dead end of Clark Street and Grand 9 River. They were told you build a brick building with 10 gabled roofs, things like that, As well to store 11 equipment. I don't know if it was equipment designed 12 to be outdoors, et cetera. 13 One of the questions I would ask the 14 petitioner, I'm sure that this meets all safety and 15 OSHA and MIOSHA standards- 16 MR. JERSON: (Interposing) absolutely. 17 MEMBER SHROYER: -et cetera? 18 Is there a reason for it being -- the 19 one you provided in Farmington Hills -- being on a 20 platform as opposed to being on a pad? 21 MR. JERSON: Typically our sites are 22 built on elevated platforms. There are certain cases, 23 usually smaller installation, where they are put on 24 concrete pads. I'm not sure if this one could be
49 1 placed on a pad or not. I think somebody had 2 mentioned, too -- I think one of the carriers, I 3 believe it's T-Mobile directly to the south of this, 4 is also on a elevated platform, so I think we have 5 both situations there. 6 MEMBER SHROYER: Sprint. 7 MR. JERSON: We typically do it on a -- 8 Sprint usually Does it on a elevated platform, too. 9 MEMBER SHROYER: Sprint's on a platform. 10 T-Mobile's on a pad. They will be blocking your view 11 -- or the view of your equipment from the entry- 12 MR. JERSON: (Interposing) Yes. 13 MEMBER SHROYER: -but they are shorter 14 pieces of equipment, so yours will show above it. 15 I don't see any disconcernable viewings 16 of your equipment that would prevent me from being 17 okay with this request. 18 MR. JERSON: I'm not actually sure if 19 they're -- I think they're comparable in height. 20 I have been at the site recently, and I 21 can tell you -- oh. The fact that it's on the -- that 22 may have impact as to the total height. I'm sure the 23 equipment is very comparable. 24 And the number -- the number of boxes
50 1 that we're proposing, again, with the possible 2 expansion is still less than at least T-Mobile, and I 3 think both Cingular and Sprint, too. 4 MEMBER SHROYER: The property is 5 surrounded, as he mentioned, by I believe white pines, 6 they go all way around it. It doesn't totally block 7 out the view, but it is in the back of the ice arena 8 area going down Cingular Drive a ways. I don't 9 anticipate any additional building going on in the 10 immediate area. 11 Basically I don't see a problem with 12 this request, and I'll be in favor of a motion for 13 this. Thank you. 14 MEMBER FISCHER: Any other discussion? 15 (No further discussion.) 16 MEMBER FISCHER: You were on a roll. Do 17 you care to make a motion for our consideration? 18 MEMBER SHROYER: I planned not to talk a 19 lot tonight because I'm getting over a flu. 20 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I'll do it. 21 MEMBER FISCHER: Member Gronachan. 22 MEMBER GRONACHAN: In case number 06-014 23 filed by Metro PCS Michigan, Inc., I move that we 24 approve the variance as requested for the applicant to
51 1 install metal equipment as opposed to the face brick 2 and gabled roof based on the petitioner's testimony, 3 and that this is outdoor equipment placed on the 4 outdoors, it's been indicated that this is a minimized 5 -- that the -- sorry -- that the site of this project 6 is minimal, that there's minimal exposure. And that 7 also I recommend that the -- this ordinance be sent to 8 ordinance review for further clarification for 9 anything else that comes before us in the future on 10 this matter. 11 MEMBER BAUER: Second. 12 MEMBER FISCHER: There's a motion and 13 the second on the table. Any further discussion? 14 MEMBER SHROYER: Can we add -- I'd like 15 to see the verbiage in there that the petitioner has 16 stated that it will meet all MIOSHA standards for 17 safety purposes. 18 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I accept that 19 amendment. 20 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you. 21 MEMBER FISCHER: Any other discussion? 22 (No further discussion.) 23 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, 24 Miss Marchioni, will you please call the roll.
52 1 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan? 2 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes. 3 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer? 4 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 5 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fischer? 6 MEMBER FISCHER: Aye. 7 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger? 8 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 9 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi? 10 MEMBER SANGHVI: Aye. 11 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer? 12 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 13 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to 14 zero. 15 MEMBER FISCHER: Your variance has been 16 granted. 17 MR. JERSON: Thank you. 18 19 CASE NUMBER 06-015 20 MEMBER FISCHER: Don't go too far. I'd 21 like to call case number 06-015 filed by Metro PCS 22 Michigan, Inc., for 45500 Grand River. 23 The petitioner is requesting to install a metal 24 equipment cabinet that is not of an approved material.
53 1 If you could raise your hand and be 2 sworn in for this case. 3 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or 4 affirm that the information that you're about to give 5 in the matter before you is the truth? 6 MR. JERSON: Yes. 7 MEMBER FISCHER: Name and address and 8 proceed. 9 MR. JERSON: Thank you. Matthew Jerson. 10 I'm with Richards, Connor, Riley and Associates. I 11 represent Metro PCS. My address is 30150 Telegraph 12 Road, suite 420, 13 Bingham Farms, Michigan 48025. 14 I would ask the board to consider the 15 general and the specific comments that we had 16 mentioned from the previous site, because they are 17 applicable to this one, but I would make additional 18 comments, too. 19 Like the other site, this site is hard 20 to see from the areas where people would be traversing 21 in their cars. Along Grand River, the site is blocked 22 by the existing building that's adjacent to it. 23 There's also large -- in this case, much larger 24 evergreen trees along the east, and I think they also
54 1 go into the south a little bit, too, which block the 2 views from Taft Road which, as you know, is a dead end 3 street, doesn't normally receive a lot of traffic. 4 I've been by the site a few times. I've 5 been by there most recently tonight. I can tell you, 6 driving down both those roads, also noting the fact 7 that the access into the site is restricted. There's 8 locked gates both from 9 Grand River and Taft. 10 This site is hard to see. The only 11 place you can actually see the ground equipment is 12 from Taft, probably halfway down the road towards a 13 dead end, so it's not a site that's going to be 14 heavily viewed. 15 I would also note before, just to 16 reiterate the important points, a brick faced shelter 17 would actually have a more visual, stronger, larger 18 impact than would the equipment cabinets. The picture 19 that we have up is the same equipment that we'd be 20 proposing at this site as the last site. This 21 equipment, again, is designed to be placed outdoors. 22 It doesn't function within an enclosure. 23 And I would also note the comments about 24 the ordinance. The ordinance really is specifying --
55 1 a brick face applies specifically and only to 2 equipment shelter buildings. 3 So with that I'd be happy to answer any 4 questions you might have. 5 MEMBER FISCHER: In this case there were 6 twenty-three notices mailed with zero approvals and 7 zero objections. 8 Anyone in the audience that wishes to 9 Comment on this case? 10 (No response.) 11 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, I'll go to 12 the building department for their comments. 13 MR. SAVEN: No comments. Same as 14 previous case. 15 MEMBER FISCHER: And board discussion. 16 Member Gronachan? 17 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Again, based on the 18 testimony of the petitioner, this particular case is 19 in a more of a desolate area. I believe that there's 20 minimal exposure, and that the petitioner has clearly 21 stated the advantages of using this metal cabinet as 22 opposed to a brick building. And I will be in support 23 of it. 24 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,
56 1 Member Gronachan. Member Shroyer? 2 MEMBER SHROYER: Just a quick question, 3 sir, from the petitioner. You indicated that both of 4 these sites, the one prior and this one, are 5 co-locations. I couldn't find another cellular usage 6 on this site. Is there another one there, or you're 7 referring to co-location meaning that it's an existing 8 tower that's used for other purposes? 9 MR. JERSON: Right, the later. Just 10 that it's an existing tower. We're actually the ones 11 co-locating on that site. 12 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you. 13 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 14 Member Shroyer. Any other board members? 15 MEMBER FISCHER: You did so well last 16 time, Member Gronachan, do you wish to enter a motion 17 to entertain? 18 MEMBER GRONACHAN: In case number 06-015 19 filed by Metro PCS Michigan, I move that the request 20 for the variance for the metal equipment Cabinets be 21 approved based on the discussion at this table and 22 given by the testimony of the petitioner. 23 MEMBER BAUER: Second that motion. 24 MEMBER FISCHER: Any other further
57 1 discussion? 2 (No further discussion.) 3 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, 4 Miss Marchioni, will you please call the roll. 5 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan? 6 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes. 7 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer? 8 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 9 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fischer? 10 MEMBER FISCHER: Aye. 11 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger? 12 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 13 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi? 14 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 15 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer? 16 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 17 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to 18 zero. 19 MEMBER FISCHER: Your variance has been 20 granted. Please see the building department and good 21 luck. 22 MR. JERSON: Thank you. 23 24 CASE NUMBER 06-016
58 1 MEMBER FISCHER: I'd like to call case 2 number 06-016 filed by Singh Management for Main 3 Street Village. The petitioner is requesting an 4 extension to allow the existing sign to remain on the 5 property. This is at 6 25300 Constitution, around Main Street Village. 7 If you want to raise your hand and be 8 sworn in by our secretary. 9 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or 10 affirm that the information that you're about to give 11 in the matter before you is the truth? 12 MR. KAME: I do. 13 MEMBER FISCHER: And if you'll give your 14 name and address and proceed. 15 MR. KAME: Sure. Mike Kame, 16 Singh Development Company, 7125 Orchard Lake Road, 17 West Bloomfield, 48322. 18 I'm here this evening to discuss our 19 development sign at Main Street Village, our second 20 phase, which is the one closest to downtown Main 21 Street. 22 We realize the board has been very 23 understanding and considerate with this development. 24 Unfortunately, given the trying economic
59 1 times that we're facing, particularly in the apartment 2 industry, lease-up on our apartment developments has 3 been slow, and we take two steps forward and three 4 steps back. 5 So we're here this evening to beg your 6 assistance in giving us another year on this sign to 7 allow us to try to continue to lease this development 8 up and to obtain sustained occupancy. 9 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you very much. 10 I'll note that in this case there were 11 thirty-eight notices mailed with one approval. The 12 approval is from Joseph Evangelista at 46850 Grand 13 River Ave., with no comments. 14 Is there anyone in the audience that 15 wishes to comment on this case? 16 (No response.) 17 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, building 18 department? 19 MR. AMOLSCH: No comment, sir. 20 MR. SAVEN: I'd just ask how much longer 21 for the sign? 22 MR. KAME: I wish I knew, Don. I mean, 23 with the economy, you know, is tough, you know, we 24 hope within the next year that things are going to
60 1 start looking up and that we'll reach sustained 2 occupancy. We'll all cross our fingers. 3 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 4 Mr. Saven. Board members? Member Shroyer. 5 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you. 6 Mr. Kame, last year in June you indicated that you 7 were at 84 percent occupancy or leasing. 8 MR. KAME: Right. 9 MEMBER SHROYER: Where do you stand 10 today? 11 MR. KAME: Pretty much the same. 12 MEMBER SHROYER: About the same. 13 Unfortunately, you probably lost as many as you 14 gained? 15 MR. KAME: Yes. Or more. 16 MEMBER SHROYER: Or more. 17 MR. KAME: Yes, unfortunately. Because 18 we -- because of the higher-end nature of our 19 developments, we -- a lot of transferees are a large 20 part of our market. And, unfortunately, with the auto 21 industry being in the situation that it's in, a lot of 22 the transferee market dried up, so we suffered along 23 with them. 24 MEMBER SHROYER: Phase one is pretty
61 1 much done? 2 MR. KAME: Phase one is not much 3 different situation. But that sign, unfort -- that 4 sign has gone away, so -- we could bring it back, I'd 5 love to come in here for that occasion. 6 MEMBER SHROYER: The location of the 7 current sign, I think, serves both? 8 MR. KAME: Yeah. From the west it does, 9 that's correct. We just lost our exposure on Grand 10 River. 11 MEMBER SHROYER: I assume you're still 12 in the point where you need pretty much the 90 13 percentage to get the permit financing? 14 MR. KAME: To get there, yes. 15 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you. That's all 16 I have, sir. 17 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 18 Member Shroyer. Any other board members? 19 I'll state that, you know, in this case 20 I look at the intent of the ordinance, and the intent 21 was to insure that something doesn't stay too long 22 when people are there, but I don't see many objections 23 to this. It is tucked in a little bit, like you said, 24 losing the Grand River frontage. So I have no
62 1 objections. 2 I'll leave that to other board members 3 at this time. Member Bauer. 4 MEMBER BAUER: You know, I have no 5 objections to this, but you got to stop sending the 6 people away. 7 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Is that a motion? 8 MEMBER SANGHVI: Mr. Chairman? 9 MEMBER FISHCER: Member Sanghvi. 10 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you, sir. 11 (Inaudible) Left for me to make a motion in case 12 number 06-016 we grant the request of the applicant 13 for continued sign variance at 14 25300 Constitution for a period of one year. 15 MEMBER BAUER: SECOND. 16 MEMBER FISCHER: There's a motion and a 17 second. Any further discussion? 18 (No further discussion.) 19 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, 20 Miss Marchioni, will you please call the roll. 21 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi? 22 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 23 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer? 24 MEMBER BAUER: Yes.
63 1 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fischer? 2 MEMBER FISCHER: Aye. 3 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan? 4 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes. 5 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger? 6 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 7 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer? 8 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 9 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to 10 zero. 11 MEMBER FISCHER: You've been granted a 12 variance for one year. Good luck. 13 MR. KAME: Thank you. 14 MR. FISCHER: We'll do one more and then 15 we'll take a break. 16 17 CASE NUMBER 06-017 18 MEMBER FISCHER: Case 06-017 filed by 19 Singh Management for Waltonwoods at 20 Twelve Oaks, the applicant is requesting two -- is 21 requesting sign extension variances for two marketing 22 signs at Waltonwood at Twelve Oaks. 23 Could you please raise your hand and be 24 sworn in by our secretary.
64 1 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or 2 affirm that the information that you're about to give 3 in the matter before you is the truth? 4 MR. KAME: I do. 5 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Thank you. 6 MEMBER FISCHER: Name and address again 7 then proceed. 8 MR. KAME: Mike Kame, Singh Development 9 Company, 7125 Orchard Lake Road, 10 West Bloomfield, 48322. 11 Sadly, my story here is not that 12 different than one I just gave you. 13 Somewhat unique in this case, Waltonwood 14 at Twelve Oaks is a continuum of care, senior housing 15 development that has independent living, assisted 16 living and memory care, and it was developed in two 17 phases. The first phase, the independent living, the 18 sign that we have for that is on the ring road of the 19 mall. The second phase, which is the assisted living 20 and memory care, was recently completed, and that sign 21 is on the finger road that goes out to Twelve Mile 22 Road. We have an entry that faces the finger road. 23 In this particular case, we're suffering 24 from kind of two things. One, the second phase is in
65 1 its initial lease-up phase, and as the case of many of 2 these continuum of care retirement communities, a 3 great deal of the people who move into our assisted 4 living and memory care are those who were living in 5 our independent living, who have aged in place and 6 have now got to the point where they really need 7 additional assistance. So a number of people who have 8 moved over to our assisted living and memory care 9 actually were, and continue to be, our residents but 10 just in a different phase. what that does is empty 11 out the first phase. 12 So we are suffering in this particular 13 case somewhat from a slow economy, but to a large 14 extent we're just going through aging in place and 15 lease-up of a continuing care/retirement community 16 where some of our independent living residents are 17 moving over to the development that's under -- 18 currently under lease. 19 And that project, the second phase, is 20 approximately 45 percent leased at this point. 21 What it's done, it's depleted our 22 independent living, and that one is down in the lower 23 to mid eighties. 24 So we really need the signage to try and
66 1 -- in this particular case, because we're on a corner, 2 we really get traffic exposure from two different 3 roads, we have two different frontages with these 4 signs. 5 So we're asking for the board to grant 6 us an additional year to help us get this development 7 up to full occupancy. 8 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, sir. And in 9 this case there were seven notices mailed with zero 10 approvals and zero objections. 11 Anyone in the audience that wish to 12 comment on this case? 13 (No response.) 14 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, I'll move 15 to the building department. 16 MR. AMOLSCH: No comment, sir. 17 MEMBER FISCHER: Board members? Member 18 Gronachan. 19 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Well, I can 20 appreciate the fact that you're having a tough time. 21 And I want to say that. I also want to say that I 22 welcome and support all of the businesses in Novi. 23 However, this sign has been out there for a very long 24 time, and I don't think that identification is the
67 1 problem, or lack of. I'm not too sure that the 2 economy doesn't play part of it. And I'm affiliated 3 with this industry and have had quite a bit of 4 exposure to your facility which, by the way, is an 5 absolutely wonderful facility. 6 I'm looking for a new place to move to, 7 but I don't think expended care is what I'm ready for 8 yet. I opened myself up for that one. 9 However, seriously, and without -- I 10 certainly do not want to insult anyone here, but I 11 don't feel that extending this sign any longer is 12 going to change the -- I lost my train of thought -- 13 occupancy in this building. I really feel that it's 14 the economy more than anything else. I feel that a 15 lot of people know where your building is. I do know 16 that there's a lot of stages, and I will have to say 17 that Waltonwood development is very highly 18 recommended, or very highly regarded. 19 So I just don't know that this sign 20 serves the purpose, And I'm reluctant to support the 21 sign again because I don't want it to become a 22 advertising sign as opposed to -- so that's where I'm 23 torn. 24 And I'll turn it back to the Chair and
68 1 wait to hear from other board members on their issues. 2 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 3 Member Gronachan. Other board members? 4 Member Shroyer. 5 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. I have some 6 concerns as well. I did want to get some 7 clarification from the City, if I may. the violation 8 notice dated 9/02/05 for restoration, the new request 9 we did receive wasn't until 2/2/06, some five months 10 later. What happened in the interim? 11 MR. AMOLSCH: Well, they failed to 12 respond to the letter, and then I believe they filed a 13 application with no money. there's some confusion 14 with the company I believe. 15 MEMBER SHROYER: Was there citations 16 issued? 17 MR. AMOLSCH: Yes, there were. 18 MEMBER SHROYER: Paid; are we paid and 19 current? 20 MR. AMOLSCH: The case is ongoing until 21 the decision of the board. 22 MEMBER SHROYER: The other question I 23 had, this is for our attorney, if I may, is there any 24 type of statutes and limitations on signage?
69 1 Is there -- can we do this forever, or 2 after so many years does it become a permanent sign 3 and we can't change it? 4 MR. SCHULTZ: Through the Chair. It 5 doesn't become a permanent sign unless you make it a 6 permanent sign through the action of this board. Can 7 you do it forever? I guess you theoretically you 8 could. 9 MR. SHROYER: If I may, back to the City 10 again, do you have any recommendations of options or 11 alternatives to continuously granting this? Because 12 there's no immediate signs of the economy turning 13 around. I wish there was, obviously, but we don't see 14 any, and I very easily could see Mr. Kame back here 15 again next year asking for the same thing. I'm 16 looking for guidance or suggestions, or is there other 17 options out there that should be presented? 18 MR. AMOLSCH: Not through the ordinance 19 unless it's changed by the council. 20 MEMBER SHROYER: Is there something that 21 we should recommend to council for their review or 22 consideration or looking into -- regarding matters in 23 this -- this like this? 24 MR. SAVEN: I think it's a real tough
70 1 issue, strictly for the fact of a marketing standpoint 2 of view, and specifically to the housing that he is 3 proposing at the independent care, senior facility, 4 this type of thing. It's a special type of a 5 scenario, and when you're dealing with that particular 6 issue, the turnaround time, it isn't like you're doing 7 a single family home where the market is there for 8 everybody. It's a different market. It's a very 9 difficult situation. 10 If you want to talk about how we can 11 review this from maybe a policy type of situation, 12 what percent of occupancy are you looking at before 13 the sign is removed, that type of thing, that might be 14 something the board would want to take a look at in 15 the future. Maybe in this particular case is whether 16 or not you want to continue this as long as it's 17 reasonable. 18 That's all I can say. 19 MEMBER FISCHER: Mr. Schultz? 20 MR. SCHULTZ: Just briefly, similar kind 21 of answer, I guess a different approach. You know, at 22 this point, this is almost six years this sign has 23 been in place. It kinda (inaudible) a permanent sign. 24 But my guess is, knowing who is involved in the
71 1 planning process at the City, and planning department 2 and people who might have opinion actually very 3 question you're asking, what should we do, does this 4 become different than a lease or available sign. 5 So, you know, I don't think anybody 6 sitting here today has thought about what else might 7 be done other than extending the sign, but you can 8 certainly decide what to do. 9 MEMBER SHROYER: I believe we're 10 beginning to see a trend here. I think it's -- would 11 be worth the time, maybe somebody within the City to 12 put a second set of eyes on this and try to figure out 13 alternate solutions that may assist our very 14 hard-working vendors so to speak as they come forth 15 and make these requests. 16 I'll also make a comment quickly that it 17 may help our applicant as well. When you live in the 18 city and you live in an area for so many years and you 19 drive by the same sign day in and day out, it gets to 20 the point where you never read it again. And I wonder 21 if you may want to consider changing the sign, having 22 it look different. 23 MR. KAME: True. 24 MEMBER SHROYER: The next time somebody
72 1 drives into Twelve Oaks Mall, all of a sudden they see 2 something that sticks out; oh, gee, I didn't realize 3 those that those are still for lease or for rent or 4 available. I'm not suggesting you do that, but it's 5 something you may want to consider looking at. I've 6 said it just becomes old hat when you drive by the 7 sign so many times and it doesn't even dawn in your 8 mind that you may want to recommend that location to 9 somebody because you just don't read the signs 10 anymore. They've been there so long it almost seems 11 like a permanent sign. 12 With all that babble, I don't have a 13 problem with recommending one more year, but I do 14 think we need to look at some type of alternate 15 solutions and recommendations. 16 Thank you, Mr. chair. 17 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you. 18 Member Gronachan. 19 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Thank you, 20 Mr. Chair. I would -- I think that this should be 21 sent to the planning department for a recommendation 22 as opposed to just extending it for another year. As 23 Mr. Schultz said, we have six years on the books with 24 this sign, and I don't think that they -- the
73 1 departing ways of Waltonwoods is ever going to change. 2 It is what it is. It's senior housing. There's going 3 to be a constant change in residency, and I think that 4 if we send this back to the planning department and 5 they -- they may be able to come up with something 6 that's even better for you as opposed to coming back 7 here, you know. And then it would be a permanent 8 solution, perhaps, that they might give us some 9 guidance on. And also, the proper identification, 10 because this business is different and unique than 11 just a regular housing market or an apartment 12 building. 13 So I don't know how we go about doing 14 that to- 15 MEMBER FISCHER: (Interposing) 16 Personally -- 17 MEMBER GRONACHAN: To sending to the 18 planning department. 19 MEMBER FISCHER: Personally, I can't 20 agree more, sending it for some type of review. 21 Obviously, I think everyone's shaking their head yes, 22 but in that -- in your comments you stated several 23 times -- everyone's stated that it's a very unique 24 type of living arrangement. And I'm not willing to
74 1 make this petitioner wait around as we do send this 2 for review, and I don't have a problem with extending 3 it one more year either, so -- I'm sure we can send it 4 for some type of review, not necessarily for a formal 5 thing. So I think that could be part of the motion. 6 Indeed, Miss Marchioni would take notes and send it 7 people's way. That's where I stand. 8 If there's other comments or a motion. 9 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you, 10 Mr. Chairman. I will make a motion that in case 11 number 06-017 we grant an extension of one more year 12 to the sign as standing; and, B, we also send a copy 13 of the minutes and comments of the different members 14 of the board for review by the planning department, 15 and also send a copy to all of the members of the city 16 council and the ordinance review board. Thank you. 17 MEMBER FISCHER: There's a motion on the 18 table. Do you have a time limit that you'd like to 19 put on this? 20 MEMBER SANGHVI: One year. 21 MEMBER FISCHER: Okay. Is there a 22 second? 23 MEMBER BAUER: Second. 24 MEMBER FISCHER: There is a motion and a
75 1 second. Any further discussion? 2 (No further discussion.) 3 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, 4 Miss Marchioni, will you please call the roll. 5 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi? 6 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 7 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer? 8 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 9 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fischer? 10 MEMBER FISCHER: Aye. 11 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan? 12 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes. 13 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger? 14 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 15 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer? 16 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 17 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to 18 zero. 19 MEMBER FISCHER: Your variance has been 20 granted for one year. Good luck. Please see the 21 building department. 22 MEMBER FISCHER: Yeah, let's go ahead 23 and take a break. We'll take a ten-minute break and 24 we'll be right back out.
76 1 (A short recess was taken.) 2 3 CASE NUMBER 06-018 4 MEMBER FISCHER: At this time I would 5 like to call case number 06-018 filed by Toll Brothers 6 for Island Lake of Novi Subdivision. Petitioner is 7 requesting several ground signs to be erected in said 8 development. The development is located between Grand 9 River and Ten Mile Road on Wixom Road. 10 If you could be -- raise your hand and 11 be sworn in by our secretary. 12 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or 13 affirm that the information that you're about to give 14 in the matter before you is the truth? 15 MR. HARDING: Yes. 16 MEMBER FISCHER: State your name and 17 address and please proceed. 18 MR. HARDING: Lance Harding with Toll 19 Brothers, 30500 Northwestern, 20 Farmington Hills, Michigan. 21 Asking for a variance on some signs that 22 are in our site. They're all directional signs and 23 information signs. 24 We were here about a year ago and asked
77 1 for a variance, you granted those. At the time there 2 were some that needed to be removed, which have. 3 These are just the existing ones that have remained. 4 MEMBER FISCHER: Anything else? 5 MR. HARDING: No. 6 MEMBER FISCHER: In this case there were 7 409 notices mailed with one approval from Diane Byrne 8 and Jim Quinlan at 24827 Reeds Pointe, and there were 9 zero objections. 10 Is there anyone in the audience that 11 wishes to comment on this case? 12 (No response.) 13 MR. FISCHER: Seeing none, building 14 department, any comments? 15 Ms. Marchioni? 16 MS. MARCHIONI: The approval letter was 17 contingent on some items. I don't know if you want to 18 read that. 19 MEMBER FISCHER: Sorry. Thank you for 20 bringing that to my attention. I'll ask the secretary 21 to read our correspondence. 22 MEMBER GRONACHAN: We request that Toll 23 Brothers provide a tree line along Wixom Road, Reeds 24 Pointe Drive, as was originally promised comparable to
78 1 the tree line along 2 Napier Road. Currently there are some scattered trees 3 along Wixom Road but nothing that provides an 4 obstructed view between the Reeds Pointe Condos and 5 the Wixom Road traffic. In contrast, the condos on 6 the opposite end of the lake have a beautiful tree 7 line between their street and Napier Road with many 8 other things, nicely blocking the view of the road. 9 The solid tree line between Reeds Pointe and Wixom 10 Road would make the signs much easier to tolerate. 11 And that's from Diane Byrne, B-y-r-n-e, 12 and Jim Quinlan, Q-u-i-n-l-a-n. 13 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you Madam 14 Secretary. 15 Anything else from the building 16 department? 17 MR. AMOLSCH: No. 18 MEMBER FISCHER: Then I'll open it up 19 for board discussion at this time. 20 Member Gronachan. 21 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Thank you, 22 Mr. Chair. 23 Mr. Harding, what is the percentage of 24 occupancy now in your subdivision?
79 1 MR. HARDING: I don't have the exact 2 number, but it's -- occupancy is probably 50 percent, 3 a little bit more I think. 4 MEMBER GRONACHAN: And do you feel -- or 5 do you know when completion of your subdivision -- 6 when will you reach build-out? 7 MR. HARDING: It will probably be about 8 four years before the last home is settled. 9 We've gone through, and as we're going 10 through, we remove signs that aren't necessary. These 11 are all located kind of on the south side, which is 12 where our sales offices are. So these are directional 13 signs, just to get people who haven't been to our 14 community, to our sales offices. But when a sign's 15 not needed, we take them down. 16 The last time I was here we had a 17 variance for, I think, eleven signs, and we've removed 18 some of them and we're taking signs down as we need 19 them. These are ones just to get people to our 20 models. 21 MEMBER GRONACHAN: So you're indicating 22 to this board tonight that these six signs that you're 23 requesting to keep are directional signs to all of 24 your models; am I understanding you correctly?
80 1 MR. HARDING: Directional and 2 information signs about the community. 3 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. And this is 4 mostly on the south side of the subdivision; is that 5 correct? 6 MR. HARDING: Yes. 7 MEMBER GRONACHAN: So you say four more 8 years. But you're certainly not thinking that you're 9 going to need these signs for another four years? 10 MR. HARDING: No. 11 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. How long do 12 you think you're gonna need these signs? 13 MR. HARDING: For these, I'm guessing 14 probably two, but, you know, that might be adjusted if 15 our sales are different and as product lines -- we 16 have three different -- or four products right now. 17 As our products diminish we don't need as many signs 18 because there's less places for potential homeowners 19 to go. 20 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I'll tell you the one 21 sign that I am not in support of to last for another 22 two years, and the reason why -- first off, it's the 23 sign on the northwest corner of Ten Mile and Wixom 24 Road. And the reason why is that this subdivision is,
81 1 as it's more developing along Wixom Road, it's very 2 identifiable, your entrance, of what you are, okay. 3 And I just don't feel that that big of a sign out 4 there is necessary for that length of time. 5 I just want -- I guess I'm not clear as 6 to when people come into your subdivision, are they 7 saying they can't find the things? 8 MR. HARDING: Absolutely. Yeah. We 9 have a hard time getting people to our models. We try 10 to get people with fresh eyes drive through it, 11 pretend that they were a homeowner, or potential 12 homeowner and come there and how our directions to get 13 to our models, and that is one of the complaints we 14 have, is they're not -- because it's such a large 15 community, they're not sure where to go. 16 MEMBER GRONACHAN: What about this 17 resident that's asking about the trees on -- alongside 18 Wixom Road? 19 Are you able to answer that question or 20 address that issue? 21 MR. HARDING: I'm not positive about 22 this, but I know at one situation we had is, on Wixom 23 Road, Wixom is a much more -- it's a busier road. And 24 we did have pine trees on there, and I believe that
82 1 the City asked us to remove them. I'm not sure. But 2 one of the complaints they had is that children can 3 hide behind pine trees and that if they ran out into 4 the road cars wouldn't be able to see them. I'm not 5 positive that was the reasoning, but I believe it was. 6 Where Napier, there is a berm and it's a dirt road, 7 that landscaping approvals were different and we 8 planted both sections according to the plan approved 9 by the City. 10 MEMBER GRONACHAN: So it's your belief 11 that this is a safety concern and that's why those 12 trees aren't there? 13 MR. HARDING: Yes. 14 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I'm going to ask you 15 to do me a favor, and perhaps, when you get a minute, 16 to contact Sarah Marchioni, our secretary, and address 17 that with this resident- 18 MR. HARDING: (Interposing) Yeah. 19 MEMBER GRONACHAN: -so she doesn't think that 20 her concerns were not addressed. And also that if it 21 is a safety concern, I'd like you to research that and 22 if it could be resolved that it does. 23 MR. HARDING: Yes. 24 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I know it wasn't --
83 1 but it's a complaint from a resident. 2 MR. HARDING: Yes. 3 MEMBER GRONACHAN: That's all I have 4 this evening. Well, not the evening. 5 MEMBER FISCHER: I was hoping, being 6 optimistic. Thank you, Member Gronachan. 7 Any other board members? 8 Mr. Saven? 9 MR. SAVEN: I'm not a board member, but 10 I would like to comment on what 11 Member Gronachan was indicating. On any site or any 12 development that's going on in the City, there's 13 normally going to be landscape plan for that 14 particular project. It's reviewed and approved by the 15 landscaping consultant or person on in-house staff. 16 And during that time those are the plantings that 17 needed to be done. If they're not done they're bonded 18 for a period of time to ensure that the plantings are 19 done. 20 The issue may be that this young lady 21 may want above and beyond what is there, but we do 22 have an approved plan that we have to stick into the 23 development of that particular project. 24 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,
84 1 Mr. Saven. Any other board members? 2 Member Bauer? 3 MEMBER BAUER: I think they've come a 4 long way. They had eleven signs and they only have 5 six now. They've dropped five. I'm for having them 6 get their renewals. 7 MEMBER FISCHER: Agreed. Member 8 Gronachan, is that a motion? 9 MEMBER BAUER: Nope. 10 MEMBER FISCHER: Mr. Shroyer? 11 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you, 12 Mr. Chair. I tend to agree with Member -- my esteemed 13 colleague; therefore, I think what I would like to do 14 is see us go ahead and approve these but for a limit 15 of a year as opposed to two years. That way, if there 16 is an increase in sales, perhaps that sign number four 17 at the corner of Ten Mile and Wixom can be removed. 18 Therefore, I'll go ahead and make a 19 motion in case number 06-018 filed by 20 Toll Brothers for the Island Lake of Novi Subdivision, 21 I move for approval of a one-year extension or 22 sell-out by area represented, which ever comes first, 23 for the signs numbered three, four, five, eight, ten 24 and eleven, which includes a continuance of a real
85 1 estate sign variance as indicated in the application. 2 This motion is due to the need indicated by the number 3 of units yet to be sold. 4 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Support. 5 MEMBER FISCHER: There's a motion and a 6 second. Any further discussion? 7 (No further discussion.) 8 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, 9 Miss Marchioni, will you please call the roll. 10 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer? 11 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 12 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan? 13 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes. 14 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger? 15 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 16 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi? 17 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 18 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer? 19 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 20 MEMBER FISCHER: Aye. 21 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to 22 zero. 23 MEMBER FISCHER: Your signs have been 24 granted for a period of one year. Good luck.
86 1 MR. HARDING: Thank you very much. 2 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you. 3 4 CASE NUMBER 06-019 5 MEMBER FISCHER: I'll move on to case 6 06-019 filed by Thurber Building Company for 7 Cheltenham North Subdivision. The applicant is 8 requesting permission to erect a 64 square foot 9 entranceway sign. 10 Would you please raise your hand and be 11 sworn in by our secretary. 12 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or 13 affirm that the information that you're about to give 14 in the matter before you is the truth? 15 MR. THURBER: Yes, I do. 16 MEMBER FISCHER: If you'll state your 17 name and address and proceed. 18 MR. THURBER: My name is 19 Matt Thurber, and address is 932 McDonald Drive, 20 Northville, Michigan 48167. 21 And I'm applying for a temporary sign, 22 information sign, for Cheltenham Subdivision. I need 23 a variance because the sign is not on my property. 24 I've purchased the 27 lots at Wilshire
87 1 Abbey, and this is the only access sign that I'll have 2 to promote the community as I try to sell it. 3 I have the support of Cheltenham 4 homeowner's association. There's two members that are 5 here tonight. They've also had a general meeting of 6 all their residents, and there wasn't any objections 7 to the sign going there as well. 8 And I'm requesting it for a two-year 9 period, if possible. 10 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you very much. 11 In this case there were eighteen notices mailed with 12 zero approvals and zero objections. 13 Is there anyone in the audience that 14 wishes to comment on this case? 15 Come forward. Please state your name 16 and address and share your comments. 17 MR. GRESS: My name is Doug Gress. I 18 live at 47550 Aberdine Drive in the Cheltenham 19 Subdivision, and I am a member of the board. I'm the 20 vice president of our homeowner's association board. 21 And our board has been working with 22 Matt Thurber and Thurber Building on the permission to 23 erect this sign, actually on our common ground, which 24 borders along Beck Road. The board supported that.
88 1 We did take it to a meeting of our association, and it 2 was unanimously supported by the quorum of homeowners 3 present at that meeting earlier. So we are in full 4 support of this. 5 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you very much. 6 Anyone else in the audience that wishes to comment on 7 this case. 8 (No response.) 9 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, I'll ask 10 the building department for any comments. 11 MS. MARCHIONI: I would like to make a 12 comment on the E-mail I sent. I had thought that Matt 13 had talked to one of our (inaudible) about the 14 Wilshire Abbey doing business as Cheltenham North. He 15 actually talked to your attorney. 16 MR. THURBER: Yes, I did. And Pete 17 talked to Beth, and they gave him a verbal -- thought 18 verbally that it would be okay to do that. And 19 they're gonna -- the two of them are going to follow 20 up, and that way we don't have to go through the 21 replanning process to formally be -- we'll be doing 22 business as Cheltenham North. 23 One of the reasons we're doing that is 24 because of using the Cheltenham entrance for all our
89 1 traffic, it was a bit confusing in my mind to call it 2 Wilshire Abbey, and people would know where the 3 entrance was. 4 Also, we're trying to combine the two 5 associations, and that will go through some type of 6 formal approval process. 7 But in lieu of having two separate 8 associations there, we want to have one combined, so 9 they sort of have joint spending power. We're also 10 going to spend a fair amount of money in upgrading the 11 entranceway, recognizing that I don't have a formal 12 entranceway, so I'm willing to contribute to improving 13 that entranceway. 14 I also had tried to buy the adjacent lot 15 to the north that Bill Locke owned and put the sign 16 there and I wouldn't need a variance to -- come before 17 you for a variance, but the homeowners at Cheltenham 18 didn't want the additional traffic coming in the 19 construction access behind the homes, and they 20 actually prefer the sign be put around the front where 21 it is -- where it's placed now. 22 So that's how- 23 MS. MARCHIONI: (Interposing) I want 24 you to make sure before you have the sign put up
90 1 (inaudible.) 2 MR. THURBER: Yeah. Pete did call your 3 attorneys in the last couple days. 4 MEMBER FISCHER: Mr. Schultz, if you 5 wish to comment on this information. 6 MR. SCHULTZ: I guess, just to clarify, 7 and I'm sure the board knows, the plat for this parcel 8 was originally Wilshire Abbey and they want to be 9 Cheltenham North. Sounds to me like there's been 10 correspondence initiated by Miss Marchioni. 11 I don't think the board needs to say 12 anything other than that. What ever the name turns 13 out to be, we're not approving it tonight. We're 14 approving the location of the sign and we'll let the 15 City attorney and property owners' attorney work out 16 the names (inaudible). 17 MEMBER FISCHER: So I guess, Alan, would 18 you like to- 19 MR. AMOLSCH: (Interposing) I just want 20 to make one comment. The issue here is not location 21 of the sign. The location is approved by ordinance. 22 It allows an off-premis sign if the subdivision does 23 not have an entrance through a thoroughfare. The 24 ordinance allows a sign at that location where the
91 1 access point to the thoroughfare is, provided they 2 have permission from the property owners. 3 The issue here right now is they do not 4 have building permits yet. 5 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you for that 6 clarification. 7 MR. THURBER: And they have been issued 8 now, I think, as of today. I think as of today 9 they've been issued, or maybe. 10 MS. MARCHIONI: I know something has 11 been applied for. 12 MR. THURBER: I think they just -- they 13 waited for the silt fence inspection, which was today, 14 and that should have been just the building permits. 15 MR. SAVEN: I think we have the Ready 16 for Use letter for your project. Then we have Ready 17 for Use and compliance to all the environmental 18 issues. Those are the things that need to be complied 19 with. 20 MR. THURBER: You're waiting on that you 21 said? 22 MS. MARCHIONI: Do we have that. 23 MEMBER FISCHER: Okay. To the issue at 24 hand, it's our understanding, as a board, that the
92 1 permits have not been issued, and that's the case that 2 we're looking and the variance that we're looking at, 3 so that's what we'll be deciding on tonight. 4 MR. THURBER: Okay. 5 MEMBER FISCHER: Any other comments from 6 the building department? 7 (No repsonse.) 8 MEMBER FISCHER: If not, I'll open it up 9 for board discussion. I have a -- 10 Member Gronachan. 11 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I want to verify the 12 size of the sign. It is 64 square feet or it's 96? 13 I'm confused here. So we don't have anything on the 14 size. It's just simply the sign because there's no 15 permits? 16 MR. AMOLSCH: That's correct. The sign 17 meets the ordinance in every way except for the 18 building permit. 19 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. I don't have a 20 problem with this. 21 MEMBER FISCHER: Quickly -- go ahead, 22 Member Krieger. 23 MEMBER KRIEGER: I have a question. Do 24 we need to have something in writing from the other
93 1 subdivision members? 2 MR. AMOLSCH: No. 3 MEMBER FISCHER: I was just going to 4 kind of follow up on that. I see a letter here that 5 says that a letter from the property owner will be 6 needed. 7 MR. AMOLSCH: That's correct. 8 MEMBER FISCHER: So -- and are we -- is 9 it the board members of the- 10 MS. MARCHIONI: (Interposing) Yeah, the 11 board members. 12 MEMBER FISCHER: The board members of 13 the homeowners assiciation, that letter signifies the 14 necessity to have property owners' approval, so that 15 checks out in my book and I agree. I have no problem 16 as well. 17 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. I guess I'll 18 make a motion. In case number 06-019 filed by Thurber 19 Building Company, I move that we approve the request 20 for one sign variance to be erected on the entranceway 21 of the Cheltenham North Subdivision located north of 22 Nine Mile and west of Beck due to the testimony given 23 by the petitioner here this evening. 24 MEMBER FISCHER: And does the maker wish
94 1 to put a time limit? 2 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Oh. For two years. 3 MEMBER FISCHER: There is a motion. Is 4 there a second? 5 MEMBER BAUER: Second. 6 MEMBER FISCHER: Is there any further 7 discussion on the motion? 8 MR. AMOLSCH: Might be -- just to say 9 until the first building permit is issued. 10 MEMBER FISCHER: Two years or 11 building -- 12 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. I'll amend my 13 motion and say for two years or until the first 14 building permit is issued. 15 MEMBER FISCHER: Which ever's first? 16 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Which ever's first. 17 MEMBER FISCHER: Does the second agree? 18 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 19 MEMBER FISCHER: Any other discussion? 20 (No further discussion.) 21 MEMBER FISCHER: Miss Marchioni, will 22 you please call the- 23 MS. MARCHIONI: (Interposing) I have a 24 question. Do we need to incorporate the attorney
95 1 approval? 2 MR. SCHULTZ: I think that's on the 3 record. 4 MS. MARCHIONI: Okay. Member Gronachan? 5 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes. 6 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer? 7 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 8 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fischer? 9 MEMBER FISCHER: Aye. 10 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger? 11 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 12 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi? 13 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 14 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer? 15 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 16 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to 17 zero. 18 MEMBER FISCHER: Variance has been 19 granted. Good luck. 20 MR. THURBER: Thank you very much. 21 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you. 22 23 CASE NUMBER 06-020 24 MEMBER FISHER: Move along to case
96 1 number 06-020 filed by Radiant Sign Company for Leo's 2 Coney Island. The applicant is requesting to erect an 3 additional wall sign of 36 square feet. The 4 property's located at 5 47830 Grand River in Westmarket Square. 6 If you could, please raise your hand -- 7 will you both be speaking? 8 UNIDENTIFIED: Probably. 9 MEMBER FISCHER: You can both your hand 10 and be sworn in. 11 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or 12 affirm that the information you're about to give in 13 the matter before you is the truth? 14 THE WITNESSES: Yes. 15 MEMBER FISCHER: If you could state your 16 names and address and proceed. 17 MR. WEINSTOCK: Paul Weinstock, 30943 18 Centersville Court, Farmington Hills. 19 MR. KRELL: Phil Krell, 20 47830 Grand River, Novi, Michigan 48374, 21 Leo's Coney Island. 22 MEMBER FISCHER: Proceed with your case. 23 MR. WEINSTOCK: What we're proposing is 24 a second sign facing the eastbound traffic of --
97 1 coming off the ramp off 96 going on to the Beck Road 2 exit. 3 Leo's Coney Island's been around in that 4 shopping center for six years, and they've had one 5 sign that faces south, you know, onto Grand River. 6 There's actually no exposure to Leo's Coney Island for 7 people exiting the freeway unless they know it's 8 there. 9 He's had some, you know, problems in the 10 past couple years with all the construction going on. 11 He's trying to boost his, you know, sales and 12 everything back up to where it was, and he thinks -- 13 we think that the second sign stating that there's a 14 restaurant there would be an addition. 15 And we have support from the property 16 owner also. We have a letter from the property owner. 17 MEMBER FISCHER: Do we have one on file 18 or -- 19 MS. MARCHIONI: No. 20 MEMBER FISCHER: Can you please submit 21 it to Miss Marchioni. 22 Anything else? 23 MR. KRELL: Covered everything. 24 MEMBER FISCHER: In this case there were
98 1 sixteen notices mailed; two approvals and zero 2 objections. 3 Madam Secretary, will you please read 4 the correspondence. 5 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Certainly. First one 6 is an approval from Joseph Gerack at 7 28 Barber Lane in Bloomfield Hills. And I don't know 8 how Mr. Gerack is affiliated. Gerak Associates Real 9 Estate Investment Development. The next letter is an 10 approval from 11 James Woltersom, W-o-l-t-e-r-s-o-m, vice president, 12 corporate facilities, for TCF Bank. Business in the 13 area have hardships with one sign restriction. TCF 14 Bank customers have commented on the -- our lack of 15 identity driving south on Beck Road. Okay. We highly 16 support Leo's request for additional signs. The 17 address for Mr. Woltersom is 41 East Liberty Street, 18 Ann Arbor, Michigan. 19 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you 20 Madam Secretary. 21 Is there anyone in the audience that 22 wishes to make comment on this case? 23 (No response.) 24 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, building
99 1 department? 2 MR. AMOLSCH: No comment, sir. 3 MEMBER FISCHER: I'll open it up for 4 board discussion. Which one of you would like to 5 start? 6 MEMBER SHROYER: Ladies first. 7 MEMBER FISCHER: Madam Gronachan. 8 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Thank you. I raised 9 my hand. Do you feel that the -- you said that your 10 business has gone down. 11 MR. KRELL: Over the last three years, 12 with construction on Grand River, each year we widened 13 it, then with the bridge closing, it hurt us a little 14 bit. Since the bridge is open, it's a blessing, but 15 we're trying to bring our sales back up. And I think 16 by allowing customers to see our -- a new sign as 17 they're exiting onto Beck Road, that would really help 18 us capture people that don't know where they are. 19 MEMBER GRONACHAN: So this would be 20 basically in the back of the building as opposed to in 21 the front? I mean, I don't have- 22 MR. WEINSTOCK: It's on the side 23 actually. 24 MEMBER GRONACHAN: On the side.
100 1 MR. KRELL: I'm on -- I'm in the corner 2 location, the front side, and this would be a sign on 3 the side of the building. 4 MR. WEINSTOCK: It faces the 5 Home Depot and the on/exit ramp. 6 MR. KRELL: I'll be attracting the 7 eastbound traffic getting off the ramp. 8 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you have people 9 that come in and say I've driven for days and I can't 10 find you, or what made you decide -- is this just to 11 drive -- to increase people coming in but not so much 12 as people not being able to locate you? 13 MR. KRELL: I get people that tell me 14 how long have you been here, I didn't know you were 15 here. I've been seeing that for a while, and 16 especially people that just move to the area. They 17 say we've been here five months, six months, didn't 18 know you were there. We usually get people that go to 19 Home Depot or Kroger, and that's how they find us. 20 Because we're not visible from Grand River. The 21 distance is so far, you really can't read out the 22 sign. So usually I get a lot of people that come into 23 Home Depot and that's how they find us. 24 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Actually, that might
101 1 be your bonus point that you just presented, and that 2 is true. You can't see you from Grand River, and the 3 only time that you can find you is if you go -- if 4 happen to go into the Home Depot. 5 I will tell you that you reminded me of 6 something, and because you just made that statement I 7 will change my view on this. I will be in support of 8 the sign, and because of the layout of the -- the 9 actual layout of the complex it does make it very 10 difficult to see you guys. 11 It wouldn't make any difference to me, 12 on a personal note, if there was a sign there or not 13 because I would come in anyways, as I do often. 14 But you just -- and that's what I was 15 looking for, the reason why you needed the sign, and 16 you hit the nail on the head. So you just covered 17 your own case. That's all I need. 18 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 19 Member Gronachan. Any other comments? 20 Mr. Bauer. 21 MEMBER BAUER: What size is the sign in 22 front? 23 MR. WEINSTOCK: The size in front is a 24 24 square foot sign which was allowed by the City
102 1 originally. It was the maximum that was allowed. It 2 was kind of at -- we had a bad placement due to the 3 structure of the building. You had to kind of stack 4 it. It really wasn't across the front like all the 5 other stores you see based- 6 MEMBER BAUER: (Interposing) How far 7 are you from Grand River? 8 MR. KRELL: How many feet? 9 MEMBER BAUER: Yeah. 10 MR. KRELL: I don't know. 11 MR. WEINSTOCK: It's got to be a 12 thousand feet. 13 MEMBER BAUER: How far are you from Beck 14 Road? 15 MR. KRELL: From Beck Road. We're on 16 the- 17 MR. WEINSTOCK: (Interposing) The 18 plaza's on the corner really. 19 MR. KRELL: Yeah. We're not far -- the 20 actual location of my location is far from Beck, but 21 the actual building itself is -- 22 MEMBER GRONACHAN: A thousand feet. 23 MR. WEINSTOCK: Yeah, about a thousand 24 feet. But you're -- he's tucked in the corner of the
103 1 plaza. Really, the only way you're going to see it is 2 if you're at the Home Depot. 3 MR. KRELL: Yeah. You can't see me from 4 Beck Road. 5 MEMBER FISCHER: Anyone else? 6 Mr. Shroyer. 7 MEMBER SHROYER: I've always been a 8 proponent of additional signage along entrance ramps 9 and major thoroughfares, so that's a plus there. 10 One of the questions I do have, however, 11 is if we approve this sign to be erected on the 12 building, would you intend on removing the sign that's 13 in the window on that side of the building? 14 MR. KRELL: It's never crossed my mind. 15 I would probably say yes, because it's more like a 16 decal. That's the only reason we had it there, 17 because we didn't have lit sign. 18 MR. WEINSTOCK: There was no exposure 19 towards the Home Depot. 20 MEMBER SHROYER: And I could understand 21 what the need would be, but if the sign was on the 22 building I wouldn't see any reason to have the sign. 23 MR. WEINSTOCK: We can definitely remove 24 that.
104 1 MEMBER SHROYER: Would it be appropriate 2 to make that contingency? I mean, that would be the 3 way that I'm agreeing to this case. I would be in 4 favor of the sign, but only with the understanding 5 that the sign in the window be removed. 6 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 7 Mr. Shroyer. 8 I would tend to agree with all the other 9 speakers. My question is, does the sign in front turn 10 off at all? And -- let me ask that first. 11 MR. KRELL: Yes, it does turn off. 12 MEMBER FISCHER: Will it be -- will the 13 new sign be on the same schedule as the old sign? 14 MR. KRELL: It could be very -- it can 15 be flexible. 16 MEMBER FISCHER: What is your intention? 17 MR. KRELL: I would like to leave the 18 sign that faces the freeway on as long as possible. I 19 didn't know if there was a time limit or not. 20 MR. WEINSTOCK: At least til the, you 21 know, the bar crowd, Two o'clock in the morning, three 22 o'clock in the morning, until the bar crowd is gone. 23 MEMBER FISCHER: What about after hours; 24 do you intend to have it on after you close?
105 1 MR. WEINSTOCK: It's going to be on 24 2 hours, like all night long? 3 MEMBER FISCHER: Right. 4 MR. WEINSTOCK: It's not our intention. 5 MEMBER KRELL: It wasn't our intention. 6 MEMBER FISCHER: I would agree with -- 7 especially the comment Mr. Shroyer made about major 8 thoroughfares and on and off ramps and -- you know, 9 we've had a lot of cases in the area where my comments 10 have been that Beck Road is a regional corridor now. 11 It's attracting people from all over southeast 12 Michigan, if not, you know, mid Michigan and western 13 Michigan to the 14 Expo Center and the way things are building up there. 15 And I think that promoting business in this way is a 16 great idea. 17 And I think that the corner store 18 provides, you know, ample practical difficulty as 19 well. 20 So, like these guys, I'll be willing to 21 support as well. 22 Member Krieger. 23 MEMBER KRIEGER: In case number 06-020 24 filed by Radiant Sign Company for
106 1 Leo's Coney Island at 47380 Grand River at Westmarket 2 Square, that they be granted a variance for the 3 sign -- the additional sign facing the entrance ramp 4 to Beck Road, and contingent that the sign on the west 5 side also is removed from the window as previously 6 stated, and that the -- with the previous discussion. 7 MEMBER SANGHVI: Second. 8 MEMBER FISCHER: There's a motion and a 9 second. Any further discussion? 10 (No further discussion.) 11 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, 12 Miss Marchioni, will you please call the roll. 13 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger? 14 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 15 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi? 16 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 17 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer? 18 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 19 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer? 20 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 21 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fischer? 22 MEMBER FISCHER: Aye. 23 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan? 24 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes.
107 1 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to 2 zero. 3 MEMBER FISCHER: Your variance has been 4 granted. Best of luck to you. 5 MR. KRELL: Thank you. 6 MR. WEINSTOCK: Thank you. 7 CASE NUMBER 06-021 8 MEMBER FISCHER: We'll move along to 9 case number 06-021 filed by James Weiner at 2094 10 Austin. The applicant is requesting four variances 11 for the construction of a new home located at said 12 address. 13 And if you could please raise your hand 14 and be sworn in by our secretary. 15 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or 16 affirm that the information that you're about to give 17 in the matter before you is the truth? 18 MR. WEINER: Yes, I do. 19 MEMBER FISCHER: Do you want to state 20 your name and address and- 21 MR. WEINER: (Interposing) Yes. My 22 name is James C. Weiner. My current address 286 Lake 23 village Drive in Walled Lake, Michigan 48390. 24 I -- I'm requesting a variance to allow
108 1 me to build a reasonable size house on a piece of 2 property here that the current address is 2094 Austin. 3 It is vacant but it does have a street address. That 4 will be the street address. 5 The variances from side to side are -- I 6 will be hitting the minimum setbacks -- excuse me. 7 May I -- if I can do this, this is the 8 packet that I've done. This is a lakefront lot on 9 Shawood Lake. 10 And what I'm requesting -- the front -- 11 the very front of the property here is 60 foot wide. 12 And I'd like to build out 35 feet wide for the house, 13 which -- because it's a slight taper into the back, 14 it -- to the back of the lot -- it's only about 58 15 feet wide in the back, I need this corner of the house 16 right here. Just this little corner in the back right 17 here is a one-and-a-half to 1.75 foot variance that 18 I'm requesting for side to side. I will hit the ten 19 foot minimums on both sides. It's just the -- but the 20 combined twenty-five foot, or the fifteen foot once 21 you put ten foot, is two of the three variances that 22 I'm requesting. 23 The proposed house here, and the garage 24 also, cover approximately twenty-seven percent of the
109 1 property, of the lot. And I'm requesting a -- that's 2 a two percent variance from the twenty-five percent 3 maximum that this City allows in that area. 4 The issue becomes -- and the biggest 5 variance that I'm requesting is I'm -- is right here 6 in front. I'm requesting a 11.25 foot variance so -- 7 from the thirty foot setback. I will still be 8 eighteen-and-a-half feet, eighteen feet from the front 9 of the property. I'll be approximately twenty-five 10 feet from the road. I will still have adequate 11 parking. 12 The reason is -- that I want that is, if 13 you look at it, I'm trying not to block my neighbors' 14 views. If you look where the pen is there, that's the 15 rear of the neighbors' houses, and I'm trying not to 16 block my neighbors' views. I'm trying to move the 17 house away from the lake. 18 The other issue becomes one of, the lake 19 is actually right here, and it goes out here. 20 This -- and the lot line was actually 21 plotted in the 1920s. 22 So that this rear lot line, I assume, 23 used to follow the lake level or the shoreline. The 24 shoreline has straightened itself out. And I can show
110 1 that a little bit better with this lot here. Okay. 2 If you look, and -- I don't know. Here. If you look 3 here, it's from here to here. It's from here to here, 4 and from right here is where the actual -- the actual 5 lake level, the lake lot line is actually another ten 6 to twelve feet out from the end of the plotted lot 7 that was plotted in 1927. So I'm trying to maintain 8 it -- maintain as far away from the lake as possible 9 to not to block my neighbors' views. 10 The issue becomes one of, like I say, 11 not blocking the neighbors' views and still allowing 12 me to putting a reasonable size house. 13 The proposed -- the plot plan of the 14 house is only a thousand square feet, so -- it's only 15 approximately a thousand square feet that -- you know, 16 in the footprint, plus the garage, that I'm trying to 17 build here, and this is a -- the reasonable size for 18 this area. 19 Hopefully it will renovate and -- I 20 mean, the normal plot -- from what I understand, the 21 normal size house is well in excess of twenty-two to 22 twenty-five hundred square feet, and I'm going to -- 23 you know, it's a thousand square foot footprint is 24 what I'm proposing, plus the garage like I say.
111 1 It will have adequate -- and I'd like to 2 also point out here, I'm 18.7 -- eighteen-and-a-half 3 of what I'm proposing from the lake. 4 Immediately next to me, Mr. Korte's 5 house, is approximately twenty feet, plus there's a 6 porch on it. Over here it's ten feet plus there's a 7 porch on it, or ten feet. I don't know about a porch 8 on it. Over here it's twenty-eight feet. Here it's 9 only four feet from the lake -- from the right-of-way. 10 This house right here in this lot is only four feet 11 from the front. This house here, there's a garage 12 here that's only six feet from the front. 13 And as I noted here, this house here in 14 1990 -- or, excuse me, 2003, just a couple years ago, 15 this board granted the people that lived in this house 16 a variance to go to approximately ten -- again, 17 approximately the same level, eighteen feet from the 18 road, and that was with -- that was only four feet 19 from the lot line. That doesn't even hit minimum of 20 ten feet. So I'm keeping the minimum ten feet on the 21 two sides, on both sides, and I'm keeping -- and I'm 22 trying to, like I say, minimize the impact on my 23 neighbors by not blocking their view. 24 And I hope that -- I mean, I could slide
112 1 the house back towards the lake and I would still hit 2 the minimum probably. I think I could still hit the 3 minimum from the lake, the actual current lake level, 4 lake line, but I just as soon not impact my neighbors, 5 if you know what I mean. I'm trying to be nice to 6 them so that I'm not impacting their lake view at all. 7 Is there any questions? 8 MEMBER FISCHER: We'll get to those if 9 you're done with your presentation at this time. 10 MR. WEINER: I believe that's it. Dean 11 is my builder. Dean is my actual builder. 12 MEMBER FISCHER: If you can also be 13 sworn in by our secretary. 14 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or 15 affirm that the information that you're about to give 16 in the matter before you is the truth? 17 MR. SUTTON: Yes, I do. 18 MEMBER FISCHER: State your name and 19 address and then proceed. 20 MR. SUTTON: James Sutton, 20 -- 2270 21 Crown Drive in Novi. And I'm actually the property 22 owner only two doors down from where he's proposing to 23 build this house. 24 And from any aspect of that, I mean, I'm
113 1 welcoming it. It's -- just because it's gonna be a 2 huge improvement on the neighborhood because it'll 3 actually maybe draw more people in to renovate and 4 rebuild and make it a place that it could be. 5 And then along with what Mr. Weiner was 6 talking about, with all the setbacks -- I mean, you 7 stated four variances, but there are only three. 8 There's a small two percent footprint variance, and 9 then there's only a one-and-a-half pie shaped piece 10 out of the back corner of the house, and then there's 11 the large variance, which is bringing the house closer 12 to the road. But it just fits in conservatively with 13 every other house on that street because it's just -- 14 it varies from as little as four feet to -- I guess on 15 average it's probably twelve to fifteen feet, so he's 16 well conservatively below the average. So I think it 17 fits in from, you know, a point of being a neighbor, 18 and a point of just, I guess, requesting the variance 19 and -- anything else? 20 But I think that's about it. 21 MEMBER FISCHER: Okay, thank you. And 22 in this case there were thirty-seven notices mailed 23 with one approval and zero objections. The approval 24 was from T. Malicki at 2213 Austin approving of this
114 1 new house. 2 Is there anyone in the audience that 3 wishes to comment on this case? Please come forward. 4 If you'll state your name and address- 5 MR. KORTE: (Interposing) Korte, Sha -- 6 MEMBER FISCHER: If you'll state your 7 name and address and proceed. 8 MR. KORTE: James Korte, and I'm living 9 at 2034 Austin, just to the north. 10 And the house is not twenty feet. The 11 house is thirty feet from the road. And where the 12 problems of all of us came in, I have a six-and-a-half 13 foot front porch that is into the thirty feet. So it 14 isn't twenty, it's twenty-four. 15 All of these houses here generally 16 started with thirty foot from the road. In the '50s 17 and '60s, after the war, we had good times and they 18 put their front porches on, and we lost the thirty So 19 that's how much of the area got into the position it's 20 in. 21 I have no problem with the house being 22 built. He is paralleling ten feet to the north lot 23 line and 2034 is reasonably six foot, six-and-a-half 24 foot parallel upon that lot line.
115 1 When you work on pie shaped pieces of 2 property, what is square to where? Then you don't 3 even got a good triangle because the road comes in at 4 another angle, so you can't do the side, you can't do 5 the front, and it's clumsy to get any square upon 6 this. 7 I talked with a Paul -- or I tried to 8 talk with Paul Taylor today. He is one of the 9 consultants. I don't understand why 10 similar/dissimilar is not one of your issues today. I 11 am pursuing that, but it's not an issue. I feel that 12 similar/dissimilar, with all the reviews that the 13 final plans will have to go through, is going to 14 become a problem, but -- and that's just for the 15 record. 16 The next problem is flooding, flooding, 17 flooding from the lot itself, and I'm in a hole. And 18 any house that's built there is going to have to be 19 very specific as to how they do their drainage, 20 especially when these giant houses come in, that I 21 don't get anymore water, because I'm already too low. 22 I started in 1924. 23 Now, the next thing that has to get on 24 record is I question, and it doesn't necessarily mean
116 1 a whole lot to me, the topography. When you look at 2 the benchmarks that were taken by his certified 3 people, they went from the gate valve that I had moved 4 last summer. So I would imagine that the topography 5 is not specifically correct, and I will prove that 6 because I talked with Sarah Marchioni and she dug up 7 the approved plans from 1997, 1998, that specifically 8 show my corner at 936. Now, since that time I'm now 9 937. And I tell you I wish I could raise myself a 10 foot every five years because then I wouldn't be in a 11 hole. Now, it doesn't make any difference if I'm at 12 936, 938 or 932, as long as I don't get flooded. 13 But I think we have to get these 14 documents right. And as I say, the flooding of my 15 property is a major problem. 16 When the house to the south went, all of 17 the property was owned by one owner, Michael Morgan, 18 filled in probably ten to fifteen feet on Mr. Warners' 19 property, and put all of his water onto the empty lot. 20 Now, he has to deal with that. I complained at that 21 point in time it's wrong, it's illegal, and Terry 22 Marrone said to me are you flooding. I said no. And, 23 of course, you know I have a mouth. I said well, when 24 the jerk buys here and thinks he can do that to me, I
117 1 have a problem. So flooding, flooding, flooding. 2 There in there -- and the only plan I 3 have is the alternative if you don't grant the 18. 4 Now, there seems to be some problem, if 5 the house goes in at thirty, then he doesn't have 6 thirty-five to the back. 7 Now, my 115 north side is eleven foot 8 farther, and his comes in just a little, which he may 9 reclaim with no problem with the City and no problem 10 with the State; therefore, I don't understand -- and I 11 have represented so many people here -- why we still 12 fight the issue of a lot line at lakeside. His 13 property goes out into technically the lake more than 14 it should. 15 MEMBER FISCHER: Mr. Korte, I will ask 16 you to wrap up at this time. 17 MR. KORTE: All right. I've done 18 benchmarks. I've done similar/dissimilar. The side 19 yard variance is nothing. The lot coverage is 20 nothing. I question the eighteen feet, and I question 21 it for off-street parking reasons, understanding that 22 five feet from the road would be better for me. The 23 farther it gets away from my view the better it is. 24 But I have to look at the greater picture and question
118 1 the eighteen feet. 2 Thank you. 3 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you. Anyone else 4 in the audience that wishes to comment on this case? 5 (No response.) 6 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, we'll move 7 to the building department for any comments. 8 MEMBER SAVEN: Just a couple things I'd 9 like to bring to your attention. Number one, the City 10 of Novi has a flood plan ordinance, FEMA -- or the 11 flood insurance study. One of the things that we take 12 a look at very strongly is the issue regarding the 13 flood elevations that are surrounding lake areas and 14 how this affects this property. This property in 15 particular is one of those properties on that side of 16 the street, is dealing with a tremendous amount of 17 changes in elevations. 18 The -- one of the reasons I would assume 19 that this building is brought forward was strictly 20 because of the elevation. What you're looking at at 21 934 as being the flood plane elevation, which is 22 depicted on the map in itself. 23 Our ordinance -- our ordinance states 24 that you have to be at least one foot above the base
119 1 of the elevation, so that would be the 935, and take a 2 look at 935. It relates to property and you see how 3 close it is to the rear of the property. So these are 4 one of the things that we would take a look at, 5 certainly from an engineering standpoint of view. Not 6 put into flood plan already, and that's a positive 7 feature, and I can see how that request for the 8 setback to move the building forward would be to that 9 advantage. 10 The only other issue that I'd like to 11 bring up is that we also have an engineering firm, 12 consulting engineer, that looks at these plans for 13 issues regarding grading and drainage and things of 14 this nature (inaudible). 15 By virtue of what's being said tonight, 16 and Mr. Korte's concern for his property, that these 17 particular items will be taken a look at and make sure 18 that they're not flooding onto the adjacent neighbors' 19 property. 20 And I would like to ask, based on the 21 information that you have here, you're showing the top 22 of a wall which is adjacent to your property. I 23 assume this is to divert the drainage and prevent any 24 other drainage going up?
120 1 MR. WEINER: What I was actually 2 thinking about doing -- and the surveyor put those 3 walls in without my knowledge -- and it cost me a lot 4 of money to change it. What I was actually thinking 5 about doing was leaving the existing side -- the 6 elevation on that side, the ten foot, leaving it 7 almost exactly the same and cupping it between my 8 property and the north property line so that there 9 would be a drainage ditch down that side, and probably 10 keeping it graveled so there's almost a walkway down 11 to the lake on that side, so that -- and then 12 keeping -- can we turn this on? I don't know how to 13 turn this on. 14 MEMBER FISCHER: You just place the 15 paper there. 16 MR. WEINER: Okay. And then keeping -- 17 keeping this -- keeping this area almost the existing, 18 and then I will have to do -- I'd like to note that 19 there is a big tree right -- there's a hickory tree 20 that I'm trying to save here. It's the last tree on 21 the lot. So that's one of the reasons why I'm ten 22 foot from this property line. We could only do the 23 minimum ten foot to the side. I'm trying to save the 24 tree. But what I intend to do is keep this almost the
121 1 same and gutter it so that Mr. Korte does not have 2 drainage issues. 3 I -- I've at least got a mental plan on 4 what I'm planning on doing. 5 MR. SAVEN: Make sure this is reflected 6 in your plot plan. 7 MR. WEINER: I'm planning on -- yeah. 8 MR. SUTTON: It was done by a 9 professional, certified surveyor that does work with 10 Novi, so they were aware of all of the rules, and they 11 did it according to the rules. MR. 12 WEINER: You know, what that -- that was -- mentally 13 that's what I was planning on doing, was not changing 14 the elevation on that ten foot side, almost so that if 15 I need to I can get something, you know, a cart down 16 there so that -- and then all of the elevation would 17 be -- changes would be on the front side. 18 I do -- there's a tree right here that 19 I'm -- that I'm going to try and save, but I'm -- I 20 hope I don't have to fill in too much on the -- over 21 the roots on that because it's already filled in to 22 the north side here. I'm trying to do that. I'd 23 really would like to keep it. It's a hickory or 24 chestnut, something like that, that could be a
122 1 valuable tree in the future. So I'm really trying to 2 save that one, and that's the reason. 3 But I really want -- I plan on putting 4 gutter on that side. I'm planning on putting adequate 5 drainage in there so that it's not going to be a 6 problem. And -- at least I don't expect it to be a 7 problem, let's put it that way. 8 The -- and I still think -- if you 9 notice where Austin Drive is here, from here to here 10 there still is a significant four, five feet between 11 the front of the property line and the road, so I'm 12 really not too worried about off street parking 13 because I'll have twenty-five feet. 14 MEMBER FISCHER: Well, that was -- let's 15 stick to Mr. Saven's concern. 16 MR. WEINER: Sorry. 17 MEMBER FISCHER: And if the board wants 18 to talk about that they will. 19 MR. WEINER: Okay. 20 MR. SAVEN: Show the swale. Show the 21 swale. That's all I want to make sure. 22 MEMBER FISCHER: If Mr. Saven has 23 anymore concerns, then he can ask you. Otherwise 24 we'll move to board discussion.
123 1 MR. SAVEN: Go to board discussion. 2 MEMBER FISCHER: Are you sure? 3 MR. SAVEN: Yes. 4 MEMBER FISCHER: Okay. Board 5 discussion. Member Krieger. 6 MEMBER KRIEGER: I have a question. Are 7 we going by the plot plan or the alternative? 8 MR. WEINER: We're going by the original 9 plot plan. The alternative actually shows what it 10 would be like if I put the thirty foot front yard 11 setback, and it shows that I would have to move it 12 pretty back -- pretty far back and I would actually be 13 blocking the view of 14 Mr. Korte's view. I'm still going to be -- I would be 15 almost -- the rear of the house would be almost thirty 16 feet in front of the rear of his house, and I just -- 17 and this way it's only approximately ten or fifteen 18 feet, just -- and so I'm trying to minimize the 19 blockage of the view that way. 20 MEMBER KRIEGER: Thank you. 21 MEMBER FISCHER: Mr. Saven. I have a 22 question, in your most expert opinion, as always. 23 What could potentially, should the variance be allowed 24 for the front yard setback, what could be potentially
124 1 built in the back now? 2 Could an addition be built on and then 3 he gets the best of both worlds? 4 MR. SAVEN: An addition can be placed on 5 the building provided it does not increase the 6 nonconformance of the building. Depending on how it's 7 set back, he may defeat the thirty-five foot setback 8 requirement, if that's what you're looking at. But he 9 also has to maintain the side yard setbacks. 10 MEMBER FISCHER: Right. My concern is 11 -- I think it's very noble to move on forward to- 12 MR. SAVEN: (Interposing) Bear in mind, 13 just what I said earlier about this flood plane issue. 14 It is one he has to watch very carefully. 15 MR. WEINER: May I ask what the -- 16 I would ask- 17 MEMBER FISCHER: Mr. Schultz. 18 MR. SCHULTZ: Just briefly, and to add 19 to Mr. Saven's comments, you can address as a 20 condition (inaudible) moving the building forward and 21 future building improvements at the rear as a 22 condition on a motion. 23 MR. WEINER: May I point out one thing? 24 I'm asking-
125 1 MEMBER FISCHER: (Interposing) Not at 2 this time. 3 MR. WEINER: I'm sorry. 4 MEMBER FISCHER: Let the board discuss 5 it. If there's any questions- 6 MR. WEINER: (Interposing) I'd just to 7 point out the issue- 8 MEMBER FISCHER: (Interposing) I just 9 -- if there's any questions then we will ask you to 10 address them. But my question was for 11 Mr. Saven. And I'll turn the table over to 12 Miss Gronachan. 13 MEMBER GRONACHAN: How did I get 14 involved? 15 MEMBER FISCHER: You were raising your 16 hand. 17 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Oh, okay. I don't 18 have a problem with these requests. I would like to 19 put the condition on, if this -- given the other board 20 members are also in approval with this agreement with 21 this, and the reason, as previously stated, is that 22 because of that flood plane back there, would be the 23 reason why I would approve the front yard setback. 24 The petitioner is requesting a minimum
126 1 size house. A thousand square feet is not a lot to 2 live in. This is an unusual lot shape, and certainly 3 with the age of this plot and the uniqueness to this 4 lot, this petitioner has demonstrated going beyond the 5 call of trying to minimize a negative impact on his 6 neighbors with -- by requesting what I foresee as 7 minimum variances and, therefore, I would be 8 supporting this request. 9 Thank you. 10 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 11 Member Gronachan. Member Krieger. 12 MEMBER KRIEGER: Another question, I'm 13 sorry. Regarding the water, the drainage, the 14 slopeage, if there are any issues because of the 15 grade, this would all be -- according to this, what 16 they're saying, that they're going to take care of the 17 grade? 18 MR. SAVEN: I think what you indicated 19 is what we discussed earlier on that. This is going 20 to be part of what's required by the design and 21 structural standards of the City. (Inaudible) 22 specifically the issue regarding the cupping or the 23 swaling or whatever it is that you're proposing for 24 that side to insure that that drainage is going to be
127 1 in line with what the existing conditions are of the 2 adjacent home. That is one of the things his engineer 3 is going to have to provide. 4 MEMBER KRIEGER: Thank you. 5 MEMBER FISCHER: Any other board members? 6 Member Shroyer. 7 MEMBER SHROYER: Just a couple quickies. 8 I agree with all the previous speakers. I do want to 9 emphasize as well that the issue of flooding, of 10 course, needs to be addressed during construction as 11 well as after, so -- quite often when we get into 12 moving dirt and moving everything else, a lot of the 13 thoughts of water movements remains a secondary issue, 14 and we have to make sure that our neighbors and 15 everybody is pleased with what goes on there as well. 16 If not, we'll be getting calls I'm sure concerning 17 that. 18 I am very much opposed to the 19 alternative plot plan, so I'm not even going to 20 address that any further. 21 And the first one I think is very 22 reasonable. I do like the idea that even with the 23 specified front yard setback you are pretty much in 24 line with the residences on either side of you. Even
128 1 though that may be a concern to some, I think that's 2 adequate with the streets being as narrow as they are 3 and the off-street parking being as cumbersome at 4 times as it would be on that street, I think this 5 should actually help improve it. 6 So basically I guess I'm saying I'm in 7 favor of these variances as well. 8 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 9 Member Shroyer. 10 Any other comments from board members? 11 MEMBER SANGHVI: I've been trying to 12 figure out, what is the kind of house you are going to 13 put there? 14 MR. WEINER: I'm probably going to put a 15 two-story house. I may be building it up. That would 16 be the idea. I'm not -- it's going to be a big box 17 with a garage in front of it. And the -- I don't have 18 definite plans yet. It will be a walkout basement, 19 but it's -- it's -- I built a bump out there because 20 I'd like a -- kind of a bay window in the back looking 21 over the lake because -- obviously to maximize the 22 lake view. I really don't have specific plans yet. 23 I'm hoping to do -- hoping to make it look nice and 24 make it be one of the nicer houses in the subdivision
129 1 anyways. And I don't want to put something too small 2 in there that can't be resold that's -- because I'm 3 hoping that this whole neighborhood renovates in the 4 future. 5 It was plotted basically for cottages in 6 the 1920s, and I -- just like 7 Walled Lake proper did, I think this area is ripe for 8 renovation. 9 And I don't want to make it too small so 10 that I -- so that the house is not one that when it 11 does renovate that it's, you know -- it's a brand-new 12 house and small. 13 And may I ask -- may I just point one -- 14 go off subject for just a second? I'm asking for a 15 variance for the two percent variance. I won't be 16 able to put any additions on this once I build it 17 without another variance because I'd be over the 18 twenty-five percent. 19 MR. SUTTON: It's already aligned with 20 the back lot line. That's the point. 21 MR. WEINER: So I'm not planning on 22 putting -- you know, I'm thinking this is the maximum 23 that can -- that -- without another variance and 24 coming before this board again, I won't be able to do
130 1 any additions. 2 But I think it'll -- I'm looking for 3 nice lake views off the back of the house, and most of 4 the house is going to be off the back. 5 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 6 Member Sanghvi. Mr. Saven. 7 MR. SAVEN: Just as a point of interest, 8 so that everybody's clear in regards to the 9 habitability portion of this thing for the size of 10 the -- talking about for the addition that may go out 11 there, he is incorrect. In fact, he's already here 12 for a variance based upon the lot coverage. What can 13 be installed is a deck. 14 MEMBER FISCHER: With a sunroom? 15 MR. SAVEN: The deck's -- no sunroom. Open 16 unenclosed deck can be installed up to the point 17 (inaudible) what is required for the rear yard 18 setback. And -- but you got to bear in mind, 19 unenclosed. This is very important, so that there's 20 no misunderstanding here, no sunroom on top of the 21 deck, anything like that. It's just one of the 22 issues. 23 MR. SUTTON: We're aware of that. 24 MR. WEINER: The other thing I am aware
131 1 of, there is a twenty-five foot minimum requirement 2 from the lake, so I -- there's no way I can build any 3 closer, even for the deck. There's no way. 4 MR. SAVEN: Just watch very carefully 5 the flood issue. 6 MR. WEINER: I was planning on it. I 7 don't- 8 MR. SAVEN: (Interposing) I'm the one 9 who gets audited for the City. 10 MR. SUTTON: My engineer puts a seal on 11 it for a reason so that somebody's liable. 12 MR. WEINER: I'm not planning on the -- 13 this is the 935. The 934 is the lake level. This lot 14 -- this line right here is 935 of what he was saying. 15 The front of the property is 949, and even if I went a 16 ten foot basement, from a --from ten foot deep down, I 17 should be -- the base of the property, I should still 18 be -- 19 MR. SAVEN: That will be reviewed during 20 the course. 21 MEMBER FISCHER: You can talk about that 22 all you want when the plans come through, but we have 23 variances to look at tonight, so I'll open it to the 24 board again.
132 1 MEMBER KRIEGER: I'm sorry, one other 2 question. Regarding the number 935, 936, what is that 3 based from? 4 MR. SAVEN: The 934 is the elevation of 5 the flood plane for properties as plotted. The City 6 of Novi ordinance, 935, is what is required by virtue 7 of the ordinance to build one foot above the base 8 flood elevation. So the lowest elevation of that 9 house has to be at least at that particular point or 10 higher. 11 MEMBER FISCHER: Any other questions or 12 motions? Member Gronachan. 13 MEMBER GRONACHAN: In case number 06-021 14 filed by James Weiner at 2094 Austin, I move that the 15 request for the variances be approved based on the 16 discussion here this evening, particularly to my 17 comments in that the size of this house is minimum, 18 that the unusual lot shape, the unusual dimensions of 19 this lot, that the petitioner has indicated that 20 his -- he does not want to negatively impact his 21 neighbors and, therefore, has substantiated why these 22 variances are necessary. 23 MEMBER BAUER: Second. 24 MEMBER FISCHER: There is a motion and a
133 1 second. Any other discussion? 2 (No further discussion.) 3 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, 4 Miss Marchioni, please call the roll. 5 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan? 6 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes. 7 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer? 8 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 9 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fischer? 10 MEMBER FISCHER: Aye. 11 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger? 12 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 13 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi? 14 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 15 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer? 16 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 17 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to 18 zero. 19 MEMBER FISCHER: Your variance has been 20 granted. Good luck to you. 21 MR. SUTTON: Thank you. 22 MR. WEINER: Thank you. 23 MR. SUTTON: Have a good night. 24 MEMBER FISCHER: You, too.
134 1 2 CASE NUMBER 06-022 3 MEMBER FISCHER: We'll move along to 4 case number 06-022 filed by Glen Klocke. The 5 applicant is requesting three variances for the 6 construction of an addition at 44480 Eleven Mile Road. 7 A note to the board, that this was a 8 previous approval granted but the project has not 9 started, so the applicant is now requesting an 10 additional two foot front setback variance, but 11 basically the same other ones. 12 MR. KLOCKE: Yes. 13 MEMBER FISCHER: I'll ask you to be 14 sworn in by our secretary. 15 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or 16 affirm -- would you raise your right hand, please. 17 Do you swear or affirm that the 18 information that you're about to give in the matter 19 before you is the truth? 20 MR. KLOCKE: I do. The reason I'm 21 asking for the extra two feet here is so I can put a 22 handicap ramp inside the garage. That's the only 23 reason for the change in the application from '04 to 24 '06. Other than that, it's for the same reasons. We
135 1 just didn't think that this was going to come about 2 because we didn't think she'd ever be coming back to 3 my house to live, so -- for health reasons. 4 MEMBER FISCHER: In this case there 5 twenty-five notices mailed with zero approvals and 6 zero objections. 7 Is there anyone in the audience that 8 wishes to comment on this case? Please come down. 9 MR. McPHERSON: Hi. I'm Brian McPherson 10 from 25998 Petros Boulevard. We're the corner lot of 11 Cedar Spring Estates, corner of Eleven Mile and 12 Petros. We basically have the house that is directly 13 across from Eleven Mile from Klockes. 14 And just to be brief, we're in full 15 support of any of variances here, so -- that's one of 16 the nicer properties on Eleven Mile in that stretch, 17 so we are in support completely. 18 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you. And anyone 19 else in the audience? 20 (No response.) 21 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, I'll ask 22 the building department for any comments. 23 MR. SAVEN: I think everything else was 24 pretty much (inaudible).
136 1 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 2 Mr. Saven. 3 And might I just say that -- especially 4 for Member Sanghvi, but all for the board, I think, 5 personally for me, the reason we brought this case 6 back was to renotice it in case any neighbors wanted 7 to make any comments. So I will be in full support of 8 a motion. 9 Member Gronachan. 10 MEMBER GRONACHAN: In case number 06-022 11 filed by Glen Klocke at 44480 Eleven Mile Road, given 12 the previous information in the case that was 13 presented to this board on December 7, 2004, as well 14 as the additional information added by the petitioner 15 for this evening, I feel that there's no other reason 16 but to approve these variances as requested. 17 MEMBER KRIEGER: Second. 18 MEMBER FISCHER: There's a motion and a 19 second. Any other discussion? 20 (No further discussion.) 21 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, 22 Miss Marchioni, will you please call the roll. 23 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan? 24 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes.
137 1 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger? 2 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 3 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi? 4 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 5 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer? 6 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 7 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer? 8 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 9 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fischer? 10 MEMBER FISCHER: Aye. 11 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to 12 zero. 13 MEMBER FISCHER: I wish all cases were 14 that easy. 15 MR. KLOCKE: Thank you. 16 MEMBER FISCHER: Your variance has been 17 granted. Good luck to you. 18 19 CASE NUMBER 06-023 20 MEMBER FISCHER: I'll call case number 21 06-023 filed by Home Depot at 22 47950 Grand River. The applicant is requesting a 23 temporary use permit to allow a tent sale in a parking 24 lot at said address, Home depot. Applicant would like
138 1 to have outdoor tent and patio furniture from May 14 2 of 2006 to June 6, 2006. 3 And could you please raise your hand and 4 be sworn sworn in by our -- will both of you be 5 speaking? 6 UNIDENTIFIED: Possibly. 7 MEMBER FISCHER: Okay. If you both want 8 to both be sworn in. 9 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or 10 affirm that the information that you're about to give 11 in the matter before you is the truth? 12 THE WITNESSES: Yes. 13 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Thank you. 14 MEMBER FISCHER: Just state your names 15 and addresses and proceed. 16 MR. CAMPBELL: James Howard Campbell. 17 Address is 3270 South Milford Road, Milford, Michigan 18 48381. 19 MR. MENIER: Thanks. Mick Menier, 20 address 16434 Whitehead Drive, Lyndon, Michigan. 21 MEMBER FISCHER: And if you want to 22 proceed. 23 MR. CAMPBELL: We're requesting to have 24 a temporary outdoor tent patio sale from
139 1 May 14, 2006, to June 6, 2006. We're requesting this 2 to provide a larger selection at a greater value to 3 our customers. Due to the size of the building, we 4 are unable to fit the event inside of the four walls. 5 We're using this to offset the 6 Beck Road overpass being closed last spring. Our 7 business has suffered roughly 19 percent compared to 8 the previous year. 9 The tent size is approximately eighteen 10 hundred square feet, and will be located in the 11 parking lot with sides and is securable. 12 MEMBER FISCHER: Okay. In this case 13 there were sixteen notices mailed with zero approvals 14 and zero objections. However, on file we do have the 15 landlord of Westmarket Square as supporting and having 16 no objections to the tent. 17 Is there anyone in the audience who 18 wishes to comment on this case? 19 (No response.) 20 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, building 21 department? 22 MR. SAVEN: We've had previous approvals 23 for the tent to be erected within the site, in the 24 parking lot area. One of the things we always like to
140 1 monitor is the fact if we have any complaints or any 2 issues, that we would bring this up to the board. 3 During the time of the construction of the tent I 4 didn't receive any complaints regarding this issue. 5 Based on the (inaudible) the temporary use permits 6 which I could allow for, the fact that these things 7 are repeated and they keep coming back, it gets to the 8 point where what the ordinance says I can do and for 9 the approval process is now bringing this back before 10 the board because I'm limited as far as my approvals. 11 You're going to see this in actually both cases, this 12 case and the next case, to be honest. 13 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you. 14 Mr. Amolsch? 15 MR. AMOLSCH: Also, I want to remind the 16 petitioner there's no signage, such as banners or 17 anything like that allowed for this tent sale. 18 19 MR. CAMPBELL: Correct. I know that. 20 MEMBER FISCHER: I'll open it for board 21 discussion. Mr. Shroyer. 22 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you, 23 Mr. Chair. This is to one of the applicants, whoever 24 wants to address it.
141 1 Why -- and, of course, I'm familiar with 2 the tent sales. Unfortunately, spent quite a bit of 3 money at them. 4 Is there a reason why we are not using 5 Retail West as the side location as opposed to out in 6 the middle of the parking lot? 7 MR. CAMPBELL: Retail West is actually undeveloped. 8 It's actually just a sand soil. 9 MEMBER SHROYER: Great. 10 MR. CAMPBELL: So if we were to put an 11 actual tenting right there, it's not a hard surface. 12 We would be able to secure the tent to the site; 13 however, the traffic would actually pose a safety 14 hazard because it's uneven ground and sandy, rocky, 15 and so forth. 16 MEMBER SHROYER: Okay. I didn't know if 17 there was a reason. It just seemed like that was an 18 obvious place to put a tent sale. 19 MR. CAMPBELL: That's quite a large 20 area. 21 MEMBER SHROYER: And plenty of room, 22 safety wouldn't be an issue having to do with egress 23 and ingress. But I understand if the topography is 24 bad, I guess if it rains just before erecting the tent
142 1 or something like that, it would create issues as 2 well. 3 That was the main question I had 4 regarding that. The other one was on the approval of 5 the owner of the plaza, and I see we have a letter on 6 file now. 7 That's all I have. 8 MEMBER FISCHER: Member Krieger. 9 MEMBER KRIEGER: I just have a question. 10 Are you going to have the Nascar (inaudible)? 11 MR. CAMPBELL: We have not been notified 12 if we're one of the locations that are actually going 13 to have it this year. They do not give us ample 14 (inaudible) notice. 15 MEMBER GRONACHAN: But if Jamie calls me 16 I'll let you know. 17 MEMBER FISCHER: Getting back to the 18 variance request, Member Sanghvi. 19 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you, 20 Mr. Chairman. If I may, I would like to make a motion 21 in case number 06-023 filed by the 22 Home Depot at 47950 Grand River, to grant the 23 applicant's request for a temporary use permit for the 24 dates mentioned in the application.
143 1 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Support. 2 MEMBER FISCHER: There is a motion and a 3 second. 4 I notice in previous times that we have 5 mentioned the tent size in the motion. Do you suggest 6 we do that? 7 Would it be inappropriate to do so, Mr. 8 Schultz? 9 MR. SCHULTZ: It would not be 10 inappropriate, Mr. Chair. I think it would be a good 11 idea so everyone knows (inaudible). 12 MEMBER FISCHER: Then I would propose a 13 friendly amendment to include that it no larger than 14 forty by sixty as stated on the applicant's 15 application. 16 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes. 17 MEMBER SANGHVI: Amendment accepted. 18 MEMBER FISCHER: Any other discussion? 19 (No further discussion.) 20 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, 21 Miss Marchioni, will you please call the roll. 22 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi? 23 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 24 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?
144 1 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes. 2 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger? 3 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 4 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer? 5 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 6 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer? 7 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 8 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fischer? 9 MEMBER FISCHER: Aye. 10 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to 11 zero. 12 MEMBER FISCHER: Your application has 13 been granted. 14 You're up next. 15 16 CASE NUMBER 06-024 17 MEMBER FISHCER: I would like to call 18 case number 06-024 filed by Home Depot at 47950 Grand 19 River. The applicant is requesting a temporary use 20 permit to allow a sidewalk sale at said address. 21 If you could raise your hand and be 22 sworn in for this case. 23 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or 24 affirm that the information that you're about to give
145 1 in the matter before you is the truth? 2 THE WITNESSES: Yes. 3 MEMBER FISCHER: Names and addresses 4 again and proceed. 5 MR. CAMPBELL: Howard Campbell, 6 3270 South Milford Road, Milford, Michigan 48381. 7 MR. MENIER: Mick Menier, Lyndon, 8 Michigan; 16434 Whithead Drive, 48151. 9 MR. CAMPBELL: We are requesting at this 10 time to have a temporary sidewalk sale from May 15th 11 to September 6 to sell live goods and promotional 12 items. The items that would be out there would be 13 non-temporary. They'd be moved in every night. That 14 would be such as flower racks for color, either annual 15 or perenial, and also a variety of grills. 16 But, once again, it would all be 17 temporary and be able to be brought in every night at 18 the time of the building closing. 19 We turned in the location of the items 20 where it would actually be merchandised, which would 21 be on the north and south end of the exterior garden 22 gates, which is facing 23 Coney Island, which is the -- which is where the 24 majority of the traffic actually enter the building
146 1 during the summertime. 2 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you very much. 3 In this case there was sixty notices with zero 4 approvals and zero objections. Once again, I'll note 5 that Westmarket Square has no objection to this 6 request either. 7 Anyone in the audience that wishes to 8 comment on this case? 9 (No response.) 10 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, I'll move 11 to the building department. 12 MR. AMOLSCH: Same comment about the 13 signage. 14 MEMBER FISCHER: When you first said -- 15 I'm glad that you cleared it up -- live good was, I 16 thought it was cows and horses and livestock. Shows 17 how much I know about flowers. Board 18 members? Member Shroyer. MEMBER 19 SHROYER: Thank you, 20 Mr. Chair. Unlike the other one that I had no problem 21 with, this one I have a little bit of concern, and the 22 main thing is the length. Before we were talking 23 three weeks on the previous application. The history 24 items here, we're talking anywhere from one week to
147 1 five weeks as listed. What you're asking for this 2 time is four months, and to me that's not temporary. 3 That's an entire summer. 4 Apron merchandising basically causes a 5 congregation of shoppers on the sidewalk that may 6 spill into the parking lot, so I have some safety 7 concerns about that. As you have mentioned, it is 8 right at the main entrance to that area. 9 Specific sales for limited times with 10 restrictions requiring, say, a minimum of four foot or 11 six foot of unoccupied sidewalk buffer between the 12 merchandise and the parking lot I would be okay with. 13 Bottom line, safety of the pedestrians 14 is my concern. 15 I think we need more restrictions on the 16 request than what is currently listed if we're going 17 to pursue this any further. Length of timing -- I 18 mean length of time, and also in approved area for 19 merchandising to make sure that there's adequate 20 sidewalk available for the shoppers to view the 21 merchandise without spilling over into the parking 22 lot. 23 Thank you. 24 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,
148 1 Member Shroyer. Member Gronachan. 2 MEMBER GRONACHAN: In the past didn't 3 the sidewalk sale coincide with your tent sale or 4 something, or am I confused? 5 MR. MENIER: No. We've only done one 6 tent sale in the past, and that was last year. That 7 was actually towards the fall (inaudible) garden 8 season. 9 What we've done is -- at that end of the 10 building- 11 MEMBER GRONACHAN: (Interposing) You 12 need to walk up to the microphone so they can hear 13 you. 14 MR. MENIER: Oh, I'm sorry. At that end 15 of the building, the -- there really --the parking lot 16 is actually across the 17 Leo's Coney Island. There's actually a drive-thru 18 between there, and the garden gate's off -- and, 19 actually, the sidewalk -- I don't have exact, but it's 20 at least 20 feet deep right there, so it wouldn't be 21 impeding too far into the road -- or parking lot, 22 sorry. 23 MEMBER GRONACHAN: So I guess my 24 question to you though is, why to have this for four
149 1 months? 2 What's the purpose of it? I don't think 3 you really covered the actual extent for the length? 4 MR. MENIER: We've done temporary use 5 permits before, like Memorial weekend, Fourth of July 6 and Labor Day weekend. What we're running into is 7 just the vast amount of customers who want to keep 8 their flowers out there all the time, so we turn it 9 over and keep it fresher and in a better selection. 10 And that way, you know, we (inaudible) for 11 merchandising, keep it on wheels so we can move it 12 back and forth. 13 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Great. But then 14 that's not a temporary use, and that's what I'm 15 concerned with as well, so -- at the way that you're 16 requesting for this -- it's late and I'm tired. 17 Sorry. Based on how you are asking for this, I would 18 not be able to support the length of time. 19 And I understand Member Shroyer's 20 concern for safety, but if it's not there to begin 21 with then we don't even have to worry about safety 22 issues. 23 I don't feel that this is a temporary 24 use request and, therefore, I will not be supporting
150 1 your request for this. 2 Thank you. 3 MEMBER FISCHER: Member Krieger? 4 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. Regarding in the 5 summertime, the garden area, do people -- what's the 6 percentage of people that load at that area? 7 MR. CAMPBELL: Generally what happens 8 is, as an entrance, when we put plants out there and 9 when people can actually see the actual color, you 10 actually see the customers, the -- obviously the 11 females go to the right of the store and the males go 12 to the left of the store when -- as they exit the 13 parking lot. Not a lot of loading actually happens 14 down there. 15 And as you can see -- if you turn this 16 back on -- this is actually the end of the actual 17 parking lot. This is actually the end of the parking 18 lot, and this is actually the Coney building right 19 here. There is no traffic that actually comes around 20 this parking lot other than delivery trucks, which 21 delivery trucks enter from this side of the building. 22 These spaces right there is actually a fire lane, so 23 there is no parking actually allowed here. 24 Other than that, there's really not a
151 1 lot of through traffic. The loading zone that we 2 actually have when people actually purchase large 3 quantities out of there actually happens right there, 4 which we usually have it coned off for designated 5 areas, that way the cars know where they can actually 6 go to, and it's actually a safety zone area which is 7 at -- I think it's actually twelve feet away from any 8 of the merchandise that would actually be there. 9 MEMBER KRIEGER: So what you're 10 proposing would increase the concentration of people 11 coming there, and you have loading, so that would be 12 my concern. 13 MR. CAMPBELL: Correct, ma'am. On the 14 right side of the garden gate is actually a covered 15 overhang which is where majority of the product 16 actually would be, the direction. And the loading 17 zone is actually on the other side of the garden gate, 18 which is where the beginning of the fire lane starts, 19 too. So there's no vehicles that can actually come up 20 in this location because it's actually a covered area, 21 which is located between our tool rental center, which 22 is the main entrance, and the garden gate which, with 23 the overhang, there's actually pillars to where people 24 cannot actually drive their cars up in there.
152 1 MEMBER KRIEGER: Thank you. 2 MEMBER FISCHER: Member Sanghvi? 3 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you, 4 Mr. Chairman. Like everybody else, I have a concern 5 with the period you want this permit for. And what 6 you are really doing by what you are requesting is 7 increasing the size of your store for four months. 8 It's not a sale event really. If it was an event for 9 a specified period of time I would have no problem in 10 helping and assisting, but this way if -- you heard 11 what everybody said, it is not going to go. 12 What can you live with? That is my 13 question. 14 MR. CAMPBELL: What can we live with? 15 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. I don't think you 16 were actually prepared this number of four months 17 (inaudible). 18 MR. CAMPBELL: We can actually resubmit 19 it to where- 20 MEMBER SANGHVI: (Interposing) You're 21 not going to get a temporary use permit for four 22 months from this board, from what I hear. 23 MR. CAMPBELL: We can actually resubmit 24 it to where we can shorten the time frame down to
153 1 where it's two days prior to a weekend holiday and two 2 days after that to actually be able to sell through 3 what we actually bring in. 4 MEMBER SANGHVI: Would be specific 5 dates? 6 MR. CAMPBELL: Correct. I can resubmit 7 it with specific dates. 8 MEMBER FISCHER: You'd have to go back, 9 talk to those guys and come back to us. 10 MR. CAMPBELL: Well, we already know 11 what holidays, I don't have a calendar in front of me 12 to- 13 MEMBER SANGHVI: (Interposing) I think 14 you want to think again and maybe you want to come 15 back again and tell us. 16 MR. CAMPBELL: Correct, for this one. 17 MEMBER SANGHVI: This is not going to 18 fly. 19 MEMBER FISCHER: Mr. Saven. 20 MR. SAVEN: As a follow-up, 21 Mr. Sanghvi had indicated for the present board 22 members, it might behoove you to do a layout of the 23 area so that they could see where the sidewalk's at, 24 so when they go out there they can actually see what
154 1 they're looking at for allowing this temporary use to 2 take place. I think that would be to your advantage, 3 and have your days that you're looking at. 4 The only reason why I couldn't do the 5 temporary again is the fact I brought them before the 6 board when Frank Brennan was here. Frank loves Home 7 Depot. 8 The bottom line is, we have to make sure 9 the safety aspect was there when we did this. The 10 size of the tiers that you had for the plants and 11 how -- where it was at at the wall versus how much it 12 projected out, this is what the board's going to want 13 to see, and for that length of wall so you're not 14 obstructing the path of travel. 15 MEMBER BAUER: Is it tabled then till 16 next month? 17 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 18 MEMBER FISCHER: Agreed with you guys as 19 well? 20 MR. CAMPBELL: Yes. 21 MEMBER FISCHER: All right. I'll 22 entertain a motion to table this case to next month. 23 MEMBER SANGHVI: So moved. 24 MEMBER KRIEGER: Second.
155 1 MEMBER SHROYER: Ready for discussion? 2 MEMBER FISCHER: Did you have anything 3 that you wanted -- or do you want to wait till next 4 month? 5 MEMBER SHROYER: I'm fine with the 6 motion. I just want that (inaudible). 7 MEMBER FISCHER: Okay, thanks. All in 8 favor, say aye. 9 (Vote taken.) 10 MEMBER FISCHER: Motion passes to table 11 to April. 12 Mr. Shroyer, if you wanted to give more 13 feedback. 14 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you. I'm not 15 sure you fully understood what Mr. Saven was talking 16 about. We're a very visual board, and if you took 17 your twenty foot apron sidewalk and even laid a string 18 of tape or something along the line, this is how far 19 the merchandise would come out, this is the buffer 20 between the end of the merchandise and the traffic 21 flow, or put up some concrete blocks with the 22 temporary walls, anything like that. I'm there every 23 week, so I pretty much understand it. And I 24 understand the flowers and everything, that's very
156 1 important. It's the area that's more at the entrance 2 coming in where you're extending that out that I'm 3 more concerned about than the rear part of the 4 building. 5 MR. CAMPBELL: Road versus sidewalk. 6 MEMBER SHROYER: Exactly. 7 MR. CAMPBELL: I understand that. 8 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you. And we look 9 forward to seeing you next month. 10 MR. CAMPBELL: Thank you. 11 MEMBER FISCHER: That concludes our 12 cases. 13 I would like to take a minute and 14 introduce and -- well, reintroduce and welcome Sarah 15 Marchioni for helping us. She did give us our ZBA 16 caps. And I'll entertain a motion to have Cindy wear 17 the cap through the rest of the year, if that's 18 applicable. Okay, apparently not. 19 I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. 20 All in favor in adjourning say aye. 21 (Vote taken.) 22 MEMBER FISCHER: The meeting hereby 23 stands adjourned. 24 (The meeting was concluded at
157 1 10:31 p.m.) 2 - - - 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
158 1 C E R T I F I C A T E 2 3 I, Cheryl L. James, do hereby 4 certify that I have recorded stenographically the 5 proceedings had and testimony taken in the 6 above-entitled matter at the time and place hereinbefore set 7 forth, and I do further certify that the foregoing 8 transcript, consisting of one hundred seventy (170) 9 typewritten pages, is a true and correct transcript of my 10 said stenograph notes. 11 12 13 ------------------------- Cheryl L. James, CSR-5786 14 15 --------------
|