| View Agenda for this meeting View Action Summary for this meeting
REGULAR MEETING - ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CITY OF NOVI TUESDAY, JUNE 10, 2008
Proceedings had and testimony taken in the matters of the ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, at City of Novi, 45175 West Ten Mile Road, Novi, Michigan, Tuesday, June 10, 2008.
BOARD MEMBERS Justin Fischer, Chairperson Gerald Bauer David Ghannam Rickie Ibe Linda Krieger Timothy Shroyer
ALSO PRESENT: Elizabeth Kudla, City Attorney Alan Amolsch, Ordinance Enforcement Charles Boulard, Building Official Robin Working, ZBA Recording Secretary
REPORTED BY: Mona L. Talton, Certified Shorthand Reporter. 1 Novi, Michigan 2 Tuesday, June 10, 2008 3 7:00 p.m. 4 - - - - - - 5 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I would like to 6 go ahead and call to order the Tuesday, June 7 10th, 2008, City of Novi Zoning Board of 8 Appeals meeting. 9 Ms. Working, will you please call the 10 roll. 11 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe? 12 MEMBER IBE: Present. 13 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer? 14 MEMBER SHROYER: Present. 15 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer? 16 MEMBER BAUER: Present. 17 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger? 18 MEMBER KRIEGER: Present. 19 MS. WORKING: Member Fischer? 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Present. 21 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam? 22 MEMBER GHANNAM: Present. 23 MS. WORKING: Member Sanghvi? Member 24 Wrobel?
4 1 Mr. Chair, you have two absences this 2 evening. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We do have a 4 quorum present so the meeting is now in 5 session and I will ask Member Bauer to lead 6 us in the Pledge of Allegiance. 7 BOARD MEMBER: I pledge allegiance to 8 the flag of the United States of America and 9 to the Republic for which it stands, one 10 nation under God indivisible with liberty 11 and justice for all. 12 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Let me note that 13 in the back near the agenda you can find the 14 full set of rules and procedure and rules of 15 conduct for tonight's meeting. I would like 16 to let everyone know, remind you to please 17 turn off all cell phones and pagers. And 18 also that coming before the Board the 19 individuals will have five minutes to 20 address the Board and groups speaking, 21 someone speaking on behalf of a group will 22 have ten minutes. 23 We do have an agenda on our hands 24 here. Are there any changes that anyone
5 1 would like to propose? 2 MS. WORKING: Mr. Chair, I would like 3 to bring your attention to a letter in your 4 hearing file submitted by the Applicant for 5 the Petitioner in case number: 08-026, 6 number five on your agenda. He is unable to 7 make it or find someone to stand in his 8 place this evening. He would like to be 9 postponed to the July 8th agenda. 10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I don't have any 11 issues with that change. Anyone else? Then 12 I'll entertain a motion. 13 MEMBER BAUER: So moved. 14 MEMBER IBE: Second. 15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: All in favor say 16 aye? 17 BOARD MEMBERS: Aye. 18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We have an 19 agenda. 20 In our packets we did receive the May 21 13th, 2008 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes. 22 Are there any changes or a motion to approve 23 as submitted? 24 Member Shroyer?
6 1 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you, Mr. Chair. 2 I have a couple of changes. The first one 3 is on page 9, line one, I am not the 4 chairperson. I do not want to be the 5 chairperson. 6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: The pay is so 7 much better. 8 MEMBER SHROYER: Please correct the 9 minutes to reflect that properly. And the 10 second one is on page 69, line 6. Where it 11 says Hertsfield Royal (ph), it's supposed to 12 be Birchler Arroyo. That's all the changes 13 that I have. 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Are there any 15 other changes or a motion to approve as 16 amended? 17 MS. WORKING: Mr. Chair, what was the 18 line on that page 69? 19 MEMBER SHROYER: I'm not the Chair. 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Line 6. I will 21 refer you to line six. 22 MS. WORKING: I've got it. Thank you. 23 MEMBER SHROYER: I'll move to approve 24 the minutes as amended.
7 1 MEMBER BAUER: Second. 2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Shroyer 3 made a Motion, and Member Bauer seconded the 4 Motion. All in favor say aye? 5 BOARD MEMBERS: Aye. 6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any opposed? 7 The minutes have been approved. 8 The Zoning Board of Appeals is a 9 Hearing Board empowered by the Novi City 10 Charter to hear appeals seeking variances 11 from the applications of the Novi Zoning 12 Ordinance. It does take a vote of at least 13 four members to approve a variance request 14 and a vote of the majority present to deny a 15 variance. 16 We do have six Board Members -- six 17 members present when we normally have seven, 18 so a full Board is not present tonight. 19 Since four votes are normally required, I'll 20 open it up to any Petitioners who wish to 21 table their request until the next meeting 22 or when a full Board is present. 23 So, once again, we only have six, 24 normally we have seven, so there is one less
8 1 chance to get that additional vote that you 2 may need. So, I want to open it up in case 3 anyone would like to have their case tabled. 4 Any decisions made tonight will be final, 5 though. 6 Seeing none, I will close that 7 opportunity and move to the public remarks 8 section of the meeting and ask anyone to 9 come forward who wishes to address the Board 10 on any manner or case that is not on the 11 agenda tonight. Is there anyone in the 12 audience that wishes to do that? Seeing 13 none, we will close the public remarks and 14 move along to our first case. 15 16 Case number: 07-094 filed by 17 Jeffrey Wainwright of Paradise Park located 18 at 45799 Grand River Avenue. Board Members, 19 you will remember that this was postponed 20 from the January 2008 meeting. 21 Petitioner is requesting one sign 22 variation to allow the display of multiple 23 event notices at a rate of three seconds per 24 notice for the existing illuminated ground
9 1 sign located at said address. The property 2 is zoned I-1 and is located south of Grand 3 River, west of Taft Road. 4 If you would like to come forward. 5 Thank you. You were sworn in last time and 6 that still stands, so I wouldn't expect 7 anything but the truth, so if you want to 8 proceed with your case. 9 MR. WAINWRIGHT: Thank you very much. 10 I appreciate the chance to come back before 11 you and answer any additional questions that 12 might come forward today. 13 The electronic system is not working 14 so I won't put you through a presentation. 15 Although, I had a brief one ready that we 16 could, just as a reminder of what the key 17 issues are. But I think in general, the 18 sign that we are referring to at Paradise 19 Park is relatively small in structure 20 compared to other digital signs in the area. 21 Especially the changing copy part of the 22 sign is quite small. The primary motivation 23 for needing to have the sign updated more 24 quickly is that Paradise Park is a
10 1 multi-function, multi-activity event 2 facility. 3 It's very common that we would have 4 anywhere from three to 15 events going on 5 simultaneously within Paradise Park. The 6 sign helps facilitate the awareness of 7 those, the announcement of what is going on 8 in the park. We don't use the sign for 9 extemporary type advertising. We just 10 simply indicate if we are open, closed, what 11 features we're operating and what activities 12 are going on in the park at that time. 13 As an example, it's very common that 14 we would have -- I gave you an example of a 15 weekend where we had a lot of interesting 16 activities going on that kind of help build 17 the image of Novi. Last year on one day we 18 had the diabetes, the Juvenile Diabetes 19 Foundation was having their fundraiser for 20 the year at Paradise Park. That was a very 21 moving event. And at the same time the 22 Easter Seals Foundation was having an event 23 there too. And at the same time that that 24 was going on we probably had seven or eight
11 1 birthday parties going on. It's very common 2 at Paradise Park to have multi-function, 3 multi-venue activities going on 4 simultaneously. That is the primary driver 5 that facilitates why we need to have the 6 sign updated a little more quickly than what 7 is currently allowed. 8 We had presented a presentation when 9 we last met demonstrating what a sign look 10 like with a one second per copy change 11 update rate, and that's what's being used on 12 the other two signs that are in similar 13 businesses. One at the high school. They 14 are obviously a multi-function facility. 15 The other one being at Rock Financial 16 Showplace. Their signs are huge and they 17 update at a rapid rate of one second per 18 message, and we are not requesting that. 19 We had requested three seconds and 20 that was based on some studies that were 21 done by the California Transportation Board, 22 also the Federal Transportation Authority 23 has also done some studies on it. Their 24 indication was that three seconds or slower
12 1 does not create a traffic impediment. Does 2 not create a distraction. So, we did some 3 studies. We did some testing and we found 4 three seconds seem to be a reasonable 5 number. But I think that if you look at the 6 dialogue that took place at that meeting, 7 there was a lot of discussion, well, does it 8 need to be three seconds? Could it be 15 9 seconds or could it be something other than 10 that? And I think the answer wasn't certain 11 at that time because we didn't know. And we 12 did go back and we did evaluate that and we 13 ran some tests on it. And, no, three 14 seconds is not a magical number. We don't 15 specifically need three seconds, but we do 16 need to update it at slightly faster than 17 what is currently allowed which is one 18 update per minute if I am correct. And that 19 is a new Ordinance that was passed by City 20 Council in May. 21 So, we would entertain any suggestions 22 or recommendations that would come from the 23 Zoning Board. We are certainly not experts 24 in the sign business, but we want the sign
13 1 to work for us and to help facilitate our 2 business so that we can be the best we can 3 be for the community. 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you very 5 much for your comments. 6 Is there anyone in the audience that 7 wishes to make a comment on this case? 8 Seeing none, we will close the public 9 remarks section in this case and ask if 10 there is correspondence from our Secretary. 11 MEMBER KRIEGER: In case number: 12 07-094, 38 notices were mailed and there 13 were zero approvals and one objection. 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: And I believe 15 that was the one that was read into the 16 record in the January meeting, so I don't 17 know if it's necessary to read it again. 18 But thank you for the update. 19 Does the Building Department wish to 20 make any comments? 21 MR. BOULARD: No comments beyond the 22 staff report. 23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Anyone else? 24 MS. KUDLA: Just, again, to reiterate
14 1 what the Applicant indicated, which is that 2 the Ordinance was amended on May 12th, 2008, 3 effective May 27th, to permit changeable 4 signs to change once per minute. It was a 5 policy that was extensively discussed by 6 City Council and the Ordinance Review 7 Committee. I did bring the portion of the 8 agenda packet that had these discussions in 9 them if anyone was interested in reading 10 them into the record or having more 11 information in that regard. It was recently 12 passed, and issues such as traffic safety 13 were considered at great length by both City 14 Council and the Committee. 15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you for 16 letting us know that those are available to 17 us and if any questions arise we will 18 definitely ask you for that. 19 At this time I will turn it over for 20 the Board to make comments and a Motion if 21 appropriate. 22 MEMBER GHANNAM: I have some questions 23 if you don't mind. 24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Absolutely.
15 1 MEMBER GHANNAM: Sir, my name is David 2 Ghannam. I wasn't here in January when you 3 made your original proposal so I have got 4 some questions. The current sign that you 5 have does it have a scrolling type 6 advertisement? 7 MR. WAINWRIGHT: No, it does not have 8 a scrolling advertisement. It's a fixed 9 message sign that can be updated at one time 10 with the entire message changing 11 simultaneously. 12 MEMBER GHANNAM: The one per minute? 13 MR. WAINWRIGHT: Once per minute. 14 MEMBER GHANNAM: And that's what it 15 does right now? 16 MR. WAINWRIGHT: That's what it does 17 right now. 18 MEMBER GHANNAM: I see that's part of 19 the picture, so I just wanted to make sure. 20 I guess the question becomes from my 21 perspective, what is the practical 22 difficulty that your business can justify 23 that we accept you from the Ordinance that 24 the City Council has passed?
16 1 MR. WAINWRIGHT: I think for us the 2 driving issue is, I think the same as anyone 3 else that's in a multi-function, multi-venue 4 facility that's open for public business 5 that it's important that people understand 6 that there are multiple things going on in 7 the park. Not just the people who are using 8 the facility at that particular time or 9 renting the facility for that purpose, but 10 for others to recognize, oh, geez, Paradise 11 Park is doing Juvenile Diabetes Foundation, 12 the Novi Track Team is there. Orchard Lake 13 Church is there. They can see those 14 activities and it creates an image that puts 15 us in a good favorable marketing position. 16 That people create an awareness that, wow, 17 they are doing that. 18 At the rates that we are talking about 19 updating the sign in a traditional drive by, 20 if you were driving by the park you might 21 capture two messages, probably not even two, 22 you might get one. We are looking at a 23 populus issue of the total number of people 24 driving by and the appropriate amount of
17 1 information that we can safely, effectively 2 and tastefully impart that lets people know 3 what's going on in the park. 4 MEMBER GHANNAM: When the business 5 advertise its events don't they advertise 6 we're having this event, birthday party, 7 whatever at Paradise Park? They don't 8 expect the patrons to see it on the sign and 9 know to be directed there, I guess. 10 MR. WAINWRIGHT: Well, yes, that is 11 correct. Certainly for a small event like a 12 birthday party, you know, for Tim's birthday 13 party for ten people we don't put that on 14 the sign. But for larger events which happen 15 daily, usually at common times, it is 16 important that we do that and we do do that. 17 We do, yes, we currently do that. 18 MEMBER GHANNAM: Thank you. I don't 19 have any other questions. 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, 21 Member Ghannam. Any other Board Members? 22 Member Ibe? 23 MEMBER IBE: Thank you. Sir, I know 24 the last time you were here we had quite an
18 1 interesting conversation regarding the 2 economic impact that this has had on your 3 business. However, in light of the 4 amendment to the Ordinance, is there any way 5 that you can conform to the Ordinance and 6 still accomplish what you are trying to do 7 with your business? 8 MR. WAINWRIGHT: I think that's an 9 important question because obviously we had 10 to carefully consider that. We had dialogue 11 with the people that were doing the study 12 for the City on the change to the Ordinance. 13 We supported the general Ordinance at one 14 copy change per minute. Most businesses 15 that have a changeable copy sign are not 16 multi-function, multi-venue businesses. 17 They are single purpose businesses. I think 18 the ones that do have that, the economic 19 need is reasonable, it's realistic. Would 20 it take you out of business? No. Would it 21 give you a competitive position that's 22 strong? Yes. And that's important. 23 So, we had to very carefully evaluate 24 was it reasonable to come back and say, gee,
19 1 we still want to do this. It's really 2 important that we are at three seconds. I 3 think that's why at the front end I was 4 trying to mitigate the position that three 5 seconds isn't so important, but to be able 6 to impart the information still tastefully 7 but in an appropriately quick rate that is 8 somewhat faster than once per minute does 9 have economic value to us. There is no 10 question. 11 MEMBER IBE: Thank you, Mr. Chair. 12 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, 13 Member Ibe. 14 Member Shroyer? 15 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you, Mr. Chair. 16 A couple of questions to the City, if I may. 17 First of all, the high school is not under 18 our purview, we have no say whatsoever in 19 what's done on any school property. 20 MS. KUDLA: That's correct. 21 MEMBER SHROYER: This state is unique 22 in that, by the way. 23 Under Rock Financial, now that the 24 Ordinance has changed, they are permitted to
20 1 operate under the guideline that they have 2 been operating on forever unless the 3 business changes; is that correct? Or 4 unless they change their sign? Or do they 5 need to fall under the current ordinance 6 now? 7 MS. KUDLA: I don't know which 8 district Rock Financial is in. I don't have 9 any information. 10 MR. AMOLSCH: The uses of the 11 entertainment center. 12 MS. KUDLA: I would have to look into 13 it what the specific Zoning Ordinance 14 provisions are for the Expo Center. 15 MEMBER SHROYER: We don't know whether 16 they received the variance initially? 17 MR. AMOLSCH: Yes, they did. 18 MEMBER SHROYER: They did receive a 19 variance initially? 20 MR. AMOLSCH: Yes. 21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Point of 22 clarification. I know they received a size 23 variance, but I don't remember approving 24 anything having to do with the copy.
21 1 MR. AMOLSCH: It wasn't discussed at 2 the meeting. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: So, we approved 4 them to a certain number of seconds? 5 MR. AMOLSCH: No, it was not 6 discussed. 7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Just the size of 8 the sign? 9 MR. AMOLSCH: Just the size. 10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We didn't have 11 to do it then, that's fine. I just wanted 12 you to be clear on that. 13 MEMBER SHROYER: That's very 14 interesting. It sounds like they may have 15 to fall under the current Ordinance. But we 16 don't know that for sure this evening. 17 I have additional questions, but I 18 believe Mr. Bauer has a statement, so I will 19 yield the floor to Mr. Bauer. 20 MEMBER BAUER: Isn't the big sign for 21 the Expo a different classification as far 22 as zoning is concerned? 23 MR. AMOLSCH: No, it's zoned Expo. 24 MEMBER BAUER: Pardon?
22 1 MR. AMOLSCH: I believe it's zoned 2 Expo, but the sign was approved by the Board 3 as it was. It was indicated it was going to 4 be a digital display at the time it went to 5 the Board, but that was part of their plan 6 as it was presented to the Board. 7 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you. 8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: More questions, 9 Member Shroyer? 10 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes, sir. Thank you. 11 When we first met or I shouldn't say when we 12 first met, we have known each other for a 13 while, but the property we were looking at 14 one change every 15 minutes, correct? 15 MR. WAINWRIGHT: That's correct. 16 MEMBER SHROYER: At that time I stated 17 that I thought that was way out of line. I 18 still think that's way out of line 19 obviously, and I am really glad to see that 20 the City took an in depth look at it. I'm 21 not sure what the proper time is. As you 22 know we all looked for expert advice and 23 what a standard of operation is, et cetera, 24 and nothing came forward in our packets or
23 1 in the information being provided. 2 At this time it's my opinion that 3 since the City put a lot of time in 4 developing and revising this Ordinance, that 5 we owe it time to see how well the one 6 minute time frame works. They may come back 7 eventually and change it, they may not. 8 Your business may come back in the future 9 and say, you know, we tried the one minute 10 and it just doesn't fly, please give us 11 another consideration. Or it may be 12 approved this evening. I don't know where 13 that's going to stand, but my thoughts right 14 now are I would sure like to see us try the 15 one minute time frame and see if it does 16 make a difference, and at least give it an 17 opportunity to see if the changes in the 18 sign Ordinance works. That's my only 19 comment. 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, 21 Member Shroyer. 22 MS. KUDLA: Member Shroyer, through 23 the Chair, it doesn't appear that the Expo 24 Center has any different requirement for
24 1 changeable signs. 2 MEMBER SHROYER: I didn't believe it 3 did. 4 MS. WORKING: Hopefully, Members of 5 the Board, you brought with you your copy of 6 the sign Ordinance that was recently 7 amended. You will notice on page six it 8 defines Expo, what signs are allowed. One 9 of them being business sign ground sign. 10 Moving forward to page 12 under 11 changeable copy signs at the bottom of the 12 page, a changeable copy sign as defined in 13 this Ordinance are permitted subject to the 14 following limitation, such sign shall be a 15 business ground sign only. Which I believe 16 is what was permitted and granted a variance 17 in area, height and setback regulation for 18 the Rock Financial Center. 19 So, it would appear based on the 20 language the way it's written now and the 21 fact that it is an entertainment venue, that 22 their ground sign is a changeable copy sign 23 as defined by the Ordinance. 24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Which means they
25 1 should conform with the one minute that is 2 now passed? 3 MS. KUDLA: Correct. 4 MS. WORKING: That's a legal question. 5 MS. KUDLA: That changeable copy sign 6 is defined in the Ordinance as the 7 following. 8 MEMBER SHROYER: Of course we are not 9 here to decide the fate of Rock Financial, 10 we are here to discuss the Paradise Park. 11 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: True, but I 12 think it plays such an interesting role 13 considering that it's right across from 14 there. We have Miracle Software. 15 Oftentimes we need to be looking at the 16 general condition of the property and where 17 it sits within the City. So, I think it's 18 pertinent to ask these questions. 19 MEMBER SHROYER: It's relevant, 20 absolutely. I just didn't want our audience 21 to feel that now we're trying to make 22 decisions on another case. 23 MS. KUDLA: It's relevant to what's 24 going on in the surrounding area. Section
26 1 28.1 of the Sign Ordinance defines a 2 changeable copy sign as means of sign design 3 so the copy can be changed either manually 4 or electronically while the surface of the 5 sign remains unchanged. The images and 6 messages displayed electronically on the 7 sign must be static and transitioned for one 8 static display to another and must be 9 instantaneous without any special effects. 10 A sign on which the message changes more 11 than one time per minute for a maximum of 60 12 times per hour shall be considered an 13 animated sign. 14 Time and temperature displays and fuel 15 price displays shall be considered 16 changeable copy signs rather than animated 17 signs regardless of the number of changes to 18 be made. 19 So, it would be permitted as a 20 changeable copy sign at once per minute the 21 same as in this case. 22 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Okay. Any other 23 questions, Member Shroyer? 24 MEMBER SHROYER: No, sir, that's all I
27 1 have. Thank you. 2 CHAIRPERSON KRIEGER: Member Krieger? 3 MEMBER KRIEGER: I would agree that to 4 maintain the safety I would agree with the 5 traffic request one per minute. However, in 6 the future if they came, they would need, if 7 this is not working for them to come back. 8 That it also -- it does as you go by, show 9 that different events are going on which is 10 good. But also the flip side the traffic 11 distraction. That's it. 12 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, 13 Member Krieger. It looks like we have gone 14 through the Board Members. I will make a 15 couple of comments as well. 16 I think you guys do a great job. I 17 think your business does great things, 18 provides entertainment, clean fun as well as 19 all the wonderful activities that people 20 that you have there, I think it's a great 21 addition to the city. Obviously it's 22 businesses like yours that we want to 23 continue to bring to our city. 24 This is an interesting case for me
28 1 because it's one where while I can see how 2 you would want this and see how it would be 3 beneficial, I am not sure and I don't 4 believe that you have passed the threshold 5 of a practical difficulty at this time. As 6 has been mentioned, I think trying out the 7 one minute for a while and then if you feel 8 that you do meet the test of a practical 9 difficulty to come back, that might be 10 appropriate. But, unfortunately, I don't 11 think that that threshold has been passed. 12 And this Board while we may see the 13 need or the want of it, we can't be up here 14 changing Ordinance, especially one that was 15 reviewed by City Council and they say this 16 is the way we want things. We don't get to 17 say that. We have to decide on that 18 threshold. And so, unfortunately, I believe 19 that once again, the threshold hasn't been 20 met for a practical difficulty and I would 21 be forced at this time to deny this request. 22 MS. WAINWRIGHT: May I address the 23 Board? 24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: If you would
29 1 like. Were you sworn in in January? 2 MS. WAINWRIGHT: No. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: If you would 4 like to be sworn in by our Secretary and 5 make a few comments, I will definitely allow 6 that. 7 MEMBER KRIEGER: In case number: 8 07-094 that you swear or affirm for the 9 truth in this case? 10 MS. WAINWRIGHT: Yes. I am Teresa 11 Wainwright, Jeffrey's partner. My 12 assessment on this is for traffic safety. 13 We have had issues such as when Easters 14 Seals was there and the Juvenile Diabetes. 15 They come from all around Michigan, all 16 parts of Michigan that aren't familiar with 17 the Novi area. They can't see that their 18 event is actually taking place until they 19 have passed the facility and then we have 20 them going into our neighbors parking lot, 21 cutting over the lawn or doing U-turns and 22 being ticketed in front of the park. So, 23 there are traffic issues that I feel that 24 make it far worse by not having the update.
30 1 I see it as more of a safety issue when they 2 are coming from these great distances and 3 don't know the area and then end up ticketed 4 in our great city for missing it and seeing 5 it as an after sight in their rearview 6 mirror. That's just my two cents on that 7 issue. 8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We appreciate 9 that. Obviously traffic consideration is 10 something that I am sure each Board Member 11 has to look into it. Thank you for that. 12 Member Shroyer? 13 MEMBER SHROYER: I have another 14 question for our attorney. If we do decide 15 to go with the current Ordinance 16 requirement, are we looking at approving 17 this with the reduced variance, taking it 18 down to a variance that is already there? 19 Or would it be a denial and then it would 20 just default out and then he would be able 21 to go to the one minute application? 22 MS. KUDLA: That's correct. If he 23 changed it you wouldn't be changing the 24 current Ordinance, it would just be a denial
31 1 and it would default to the current 2 Ordinance. 3 MEMBER SHROYER: In that case if you 4 would like I can make a Motion. 5 I move that we deny the variance in 6 Case Number: 07-094 sought by Paradise Park 7 because the Petitioner has not established a 8 practical difficulty, the establishment that 9 compliance with the strict letter of 10 restrictions of the Ordinance would 11 unreasonably prevent the use of the property 12 be unnecessarily burdensome because Paradise 13 Park can change messages under the revised 14 Sign Ordinance up to once per minute. 15 The Petitioner has not established that 16 even with a grant of the variance, the 17 spirit of the Ordinance will be observed, 18 public safety secured and substantial 19 justice done because this request is not 20 unique from other area vendors. And even 21 though it was stated, I have to state that 22 the Petitioner has not established -- I am 23 going to say this right -- that the proposed 24 use improvement will not be a detriment to
32 1 the public safety due to the posted speed 2 limit because drivers traveling at that rate 3 of speed trying to read a changing sign may 4 find it distracting taking their eyes off 5 the road and causing any safety concern. 6 MEMBER BAUER: I'll second that. 7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is a 8 Motion by Member Shroyer and a second by 9 Member Bauer. Any other comments? 10 Seeing none, Ms. Working, would you 11 please call the vote. 12 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer? 13 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 14 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer? 15 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 16 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer? 17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye. 18 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam? 19 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes. 20 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe? 21 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 22 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger? 23 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 24 MS. WORKING: Motion to deny passes
33 1 6-0. 2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: At this time the 3 variance has been denied. 4 MR. WAINWRIGHT: Thank you, I 5 understand. 6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you very 7 much. 8 9 At this time we will call Case Number: 10 08-019 filed by RMJ Development for 25280 11 Seeley Road. As the Board Members will 12 remember this was tabled from the May 13th, 13 2008 meeting. Donny Coach representing RMJ 14 Development is requesting a variance to 15 continue the non-conforming use for outdoor 16 storage for building materials, contractor's 17 equipment and supplies and to park RMJ 18 Development vehicles on the property at said 19 address. The property is also zoned I-1 and 20 located north of Grand River Avenue and east 21 of Seeley Road. 22 Is the Petitioner here today? RMJ 23 Development? All right. At this time I 24 will go ahead and move that and we will
34 1 revisit it at the end of the meeting. 2 3 We'll call Case Number: 08-022 4 filed by Linda Cornillie for 1601 East Lake 5 Road. Petitioner is requesting one four 6 foot side yard setback variance and one five 7 percent rear yard lot coverage variance for 8 the construction of a new 528 square foot 9 detached garage to be located at that said 10 address. The property is zoned R-4 and 11 located north of Thirteen Mile Road and west 12 of Novi Road. 13 Let me just take one minute to let 14 anyone who may be watching on the internet 15 or at home. Unfortunately we are having 16 some technical difficulties so there won't 17 be any overhead. Instead it will just have 18 to be verbalized and we'll proceed with your 19 case at this time. 20 And I will remind you as well that you 21 were sworn in at the last meeting and that 22 still stands. 23 MS. CORNILLIE: So, you would like for 24 me to review what I am asking for right now?
35 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: If you would 2 like to review, remind us of what's before 3 us and if you would like to add any 4 additions, deletions, et cetera, please 5 refer to that at that time. Remember we did 6 receive the full packet. Most of us were 7 here, I think all of us were here last 8 month. Just a summary of a few things and 9 if you can make sure that you can speak into 10 the microphone as well. 11 MS. CORNILLIE: I have on an hearing 12 aide, so I can't get to close to it because 13 I want to be able to hear you. 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Okay. 15 MS. CORNILLIE: If for some reason I 16 do not hear, you Mark is going to speak up 17 for me to try and help me. Okay? 18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Absolutely. 19 MS. CORNILLIE: Because last time I 20 had difficulty and I don't think I was 21 communicating with you. 22 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: And if we need 23 to speak up lease let me know. 24 MS. CORNILLIE: Okay. Thank you very
36 1 much. After the last meeting, the very next 2 day I submitted a new request for a 20 by 24 3 garage and it would be four feet off of the 4 neighbor next to me property and a variance 5 of three percent lot coverage. I think 6 that's what everybody received. At this 7 time I would just like to state that I don't 8 feel as though, I looked around quite a bit. 9 I don't feel as though I am asking for 10 anything that other people that I have seen 11 have. And that -- I am going to have to 12 take this out. I'm sorry. 13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: That's no 14 problem. 15 MS. CORNILLIE: For me I feel as 16 though it's for safety reasons. I cannot 17 handle the winters. I have a disability 18 with my back. Cleaning off the car and I'm 19 just asking the City to consider the request 20 that I made last time if they would, please. 21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Okay. Is there 22 anyone in the audience that wishes to make a 23 comment on this case? Please come forward. 24 And if the other people who want to make
37 1 comments, please come to this side of the 2 room so we can keep the meeting moving 3 along. 4 If you would raise your hand and each 5 time be sworn in by our Secretary and give 6 your name and address and then proceed with 7 whatever comments. 8 MEMBER KRIEGER: Do you swear or 9 affirm in Case Number: 08-022 filed by 10 Linda Cornillie -- did I say that right? 11 For 1601 East Lake Road to tell the truth or 12 affirm in this case? 13 MS. JARVIS: Yes, I do. My name is 14 Bonnie Jarvis and I am at 1611 East Lake 15 Drive. Just on the opposite corner of Linda 16 and I have been in that location for 30 17 years now and there is not a house in that 18 area that hasn't had to have a variance to 19 enhance their property. So, I am just 20 asking if you would reconsider giving her 21 her variance. 22 We had one and every neighbor of ours 23 has had to have one and the neighborhood is 24 much better for it. So, I am just asking
38 1 for that. Thank you. 2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you. 3 MEMBER KRIEGER: Do you swear or 4 affirm in Case Number: 08-022 filed by 5 Linda Cornillie for 1601 East Lake Road do 6 you swear or affirm in this case to tell the 7 truth? 8 MS. FERMAN (ph): Yes. My name is 9 Barbara Ferman. I live at 101 Lashbrook. 10 I'm on the side street right next to where 11 Ms. Cornillie lives. I am really the 12 neighbor who's going to be most impacted by 13 her garage besides her next door neighbor 14 because it faces my house. I don't have an 15 issue with it. Linda has done nothing but 16 maintained her property. I have lived in my 17 house a little over four years now. Since I 18 have lived there Linda has done nothing more 19 than maintain and even improve her house. I 20 think this would improve our property values 21 for our neighborhood. I don't have an issue 22 with it and I would urge you to allow her 23 variance. 24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you very
39 1 much. 2 MEMBER KRIEGER: In Case Number: 3 08-022 filed by Linda Cornillie for 1601 4 East Lake Road do you swear or affirm to 5 tell the truth in this case? 6 MR. DILLON: Yes. I live on 1605 East 7 Lake Drive two houses down from Linda. What 8 I would like to say is just a couple of 9 comments. Thank you for hearing me. First 10 off -- I'm sorry, I lost my track already. 11 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: No problem. 12 MR. DILLON: First off I think the 13 most important thing for the City to know is 14 that generally speaking when a car is put 15 inside a garage it makes the whole 16 neighborhood and the City look nicer. It 17 helps prevent blight, so if you can do that 18 I think that would help. 19 The other thing I wanted to point out 20 is Linda's immediate neighbor to the left of 21 her and Linda's immediate neighbor to the 22 right of her both have what she is asking 23 for which is a two car garage. 24 With that said, I have no issues with
40 1 it at all. I think it will increase our 2 property values and us being on the lake 3 lots it's impossible to get any building 4 done without getting a setback variance or a 5 lot coverage variance. It just needs to be 6 done. Thank you. 7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you very 8 much. I'm sorry, sir, can you state your 9 name and address for us. 10 MR. DILLON: Robert Dillon, 1605 East 11 Lake Drive. 12 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Sorry about 13 that. I didn't catch that. 14 MEMBER KRIEGER: In Case Number: 15 08-022 filed by Linda Cornillie for 1601 16 East Lake Road, do you swear or affirm to 17 tell the truth in this case? 18 MR. JARVIS: Yes, I do. 19 MEMBER KRIEGER: Thank you. 20 MR. JARVIS: I'm Mike Jarvis. I live 21 at 1611 East Lake Drive. I have been there 22 30 years and you people granted me a 23 variance 25 or 20 years ago to do the same 24 thing and I have got a bigger variance. I
41 1 have the size lot as Linda. It's made my 2 life a lot easier having a garage, and Linda 3 being single, she needs a garage. That's 4 all I have to say. And it's very reasonable 5 use of the land too. 6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you for 7 your comments and coming today. 8 MEMBER KRIEGER: In Case Number: 9 08-022 filed by Linda Cornillie for 1601 10 East Lake Road do you swear or affirm to 11 tell the truth in this case? 12 MR. DENNON (ph): Yes. 13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: If the little 14 guy is going to speak we should probably 15 have him sworn in. Just kidding. 16 MR. DENNON: My name is William Dennon 17 and I am at 102 Lashbrook. And actually 18 this little guy was here three years ago for 19 a variance, similar situation. Already 20 mentioned, it's really the norm of what's 21 required in the area. You guys are familiar 22 with the city. I actually did provide 23 written comments for last month. 24 I was a bit bummed to see that it was
42 1 tabled to this month. I had full hope and 2 expectation for Linda that it was going to 3 be approved, so I guess I found it important 4 enough to stop back and just reconfirm my 5 statement I made last time. I am totally 6 for it. Thank you. 7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you very 8 much. Anyone else in the audience that 9 wishes to make a comment? 10 Seeing none, we'll close the public 11 comment section and ask the Board Secretary 12 to see if there was any new correspondence. 13 MEMBER KRIEGER: In Case Number: 14 08-022, 64 notices were mailed. Two 15 approvals. Zero objections. No changes. 16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I will turn it 17 over to the City. 18 MS. KUDLA: We have nothing 19 additional. 20 MR. BOULARD: The concern that remains 21 from the last meeting is that the vehicles 22 backing out of the garage will have a 23 limited amount of space before they are 24 actually out of the right-of-way.
43 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I will turn it 2 over to the Board for discussion. Member 3 Ibe? 4 MEMBER IBE: Thank you, Mr. Chair. My 5 question is for the City actually. I have 6 heard five individuals, I will say probably 7 three individuals, because I believe there 8 are couples among those here, the Jarvis and 9 Dillon. I am sure they are spouse related. 10 Would that be correct? 11 MR. DILLON: No, I'm single. 12 MS. JARVIS: Just one couple. 13 MEMBER IBE: Just one couple, all 14 right. Now, these individuals have come 15 here to tell us that they have had variances 16 granted in light of the City Ordinance. You 17 know, tell me as if I am a six-year-old and 18 I don't understand anything. Is it a 19 practice that we defer or we ignore the 20 Ordinance and grant variances when, in fact, 21 the Ordinance calls for something else? 22 What is the policy of the City in being 23 consistent with enforcing the Ordinance that 24 is enacted when it comes to issues like
44 1 this? 2 MS. KUDLA: The policy would be for 3 each variance, you look at each case 4 individually and look at the factors in the 5 same case and consider whether a practical 6 difficulty is created because of the 7 dimensional issues with the lot. 8 MEMBER IBE: Second follow-up 9 question. Do you know of any case of a 10 denied variance in the past in this area? 11 MS. KUDLA: I personally don't know of 12 every case that's come through the ZBA, no. 13 MEMBER IBE: Would anyone have that 14 answer? 15 MS. WORKING: In the two years that I 16 have served the Board the only denial that I 17 can think of was not in this area, and it 18 was a setback request as well. 19 MEMBER IBE: Similar to what she is 20 presenting? 21 MS. WORKING: It was for a new build, 22 new construction. 23 MEMBER IBE: For a new construction? 24 MS. WORKING: Correct. A whole home
45 1 with a garage and it was not in this area of 2 the lake. It was around the lake, but it 3 was not in this area. 4 MEMBER IBE: So, in other words we 5 have a precedent in this issue regarding 6 existing properties being granted variances; 7 is that correct? 8 MS. WORKING: The Board has been 9 generous to review the safety concerns and 10 the option of whether or not there is a way 11 to compromise the variances that would, the 12 depth of the variances. I think Ms. 13 Cornillie came to you last month asking for 14 a four foot variance and now she has now 15 compromised to a two foot variance. That 16 has happened very frequently not only since 17 I have been serving the Board, but for years 18 going back when I do research for you to 19 give it to you. I have seen that quite a 20 bit. 21 Those lots are very narrow, very 22 difficult to meet the ordinance as written 23 and were not grandfathered in as such and I 24 think that's why you will see so many of
46 1 these requests before you. You have seen a 2 boom in building and a lot of cases come to 3 you with similar requests. 4 MEMBER BAUER: Almost every lot is 30 5 feet wide. If you put in a 24 foot garage 6 by the Ordinance you can't do it. So, it 7 goes all the way back to when the plotting 8 of the whole area all around Walled Lake, 9 and people don't have basements. They have 10 a lot of boat things. They have got to have 11 something to put in to cover up and we have 12 been, yes, we have been -- I won't say 13 gracious because that's a word I don't like 14 to use. 15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We have done our 16 job. 17 MEMBER BAUER: We have tried to 18 accommodate them. 19 MEMBER IBE: Mr. Chair, if you don't 20 mind, just one more comment real quickly. 21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Take your time. 22 MEMBER IBE: How long have you lived 23 at this address? 24 MS. CORNILLIE: Twenty-six years.
47 1 MEMBER IBE: In all those years you 2 never thought about having a garage? 3 MS. CORNILLIE: I am a single woman. 4 My main goal was to pay my home off and then 5 to make it better and I have had to do 6 things in steps as I could afford them. And 7 now I am getting older and I really feel 8 that I need this. I have had four back 9 surgeries. The last one it really was 10 terrible for me and I know that I cannot 11 handle the snow, cleaning the car and this 12 is why I am struggling right now to do this, 13 but this is something that is very necessary 14 for me. I can't move a barbecue grill 15 around. I can't put a lawn mower. I don't 16 have any place to put anything. This is to 17 me very important. 18 MEMBER IBE: Remind me perhaps the 19 last time you were here, did you mention 20 that you have -- the reason that you were 21 trying to position the garage the way you 22 did was because you had to park a boat? 23 MS. CORNILLIE: I could not get a car 24 into it that way because there is a back
48 1 porch that I have to step off onto. So, to 2 remove that would be -- then I would have no 3 area for a porch area and I would be 4 stepping from my house down. 5 MEMBER IBE: Thank you very much. 6 MS. CORNILLIE: Excuse me. In fact, I 7 just recently put that on to better the 8 home, so it cost me quite a bit to do that. 9 MEMBER IBE: Thank you very much. 10 Thank you, Mr. Chair. 11 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you. I 12 will go ahead and put my comments. Just 13 echoing the comments of Member Bauer. These 14 lots have been the most difficult probably 15 for me since I have been on the Board. For 16 a while there maybe because of the economy, 17 maybe two, three, four years ago we got 18 probably two, three of these a week because 19 people were making a lot of additions back 20 then. And I notice some of the comments 21 that were made that, you know, it was kind 22 of saddening to hear that this wasn't 23 approved last time. But I think Ms. Working 24 really commented that the Board really tries
49 1 hard to make sure that all the neighbors are 2 informed of what is taking place. If they 3 are all on board. 4 For me I always want to make sure that 5 the least amount of variance that is 6 required is actually used. When you are 7 going above and beyond what the Ordinance 8 allows we want to make sure you are going 9 above and beyond by the most minimal amount 10 but still getting what you need. In this 11 case I believe that the Petitioner needs a 12 garage and she needs to be able to build one 13 and the Ordinance would not allow her to do 14 so without a variance. I am in support of 15 the revised variance. 16 As far as public safety, yes, when we 17 were sitting here last month talking about 18 the concern of the limited area between the 19 garage and the road, that does strike a 20 concern, but as far as keeping the 21 neighborhoods nice, I would rather see a 22 boat or a jet ski or a car or whatever it 23 is, barbecue grill inside of a garage. 24 That's what's going bring the values of all
50 1 the neighboring homes as well as the rest 2 the city up, and that's what we need to be 3 focusing on in my eyes. So, I believe that 4 you have worked hard to make sure that this 5 is the least amount of variance that you can 6 live with, and I think you have done your 7 job in that respect. I think that a 8 practical difficulty does arise from this 9 case and I would be willing to support the 10 Petitioner. 11 So, I hope that clarified it a little 12 more for you, Member Ibe. 13 MEMBER IBE: Thank you. 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Krieger? 15 MEMBER KRIEGER: I agree that the 16 Petitioner went back and worked hard to find 17 something that would be agreeable to all and 18 still accomplish what she is looking for. 19 And the minimum requirements, if she had 20 tried to do an addition as Chris Fox said to 21 the house it would be more variances, so 22 this is less variances. So, I would be able 23 to support because she has proved her 24 practical difficulty. Thank you.
51 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Ghannam? 2 MEMBER GHANNAM: Ma'am, I don't think 3 there is any question you have met the 4 burden that you need to to build the garage. 5 The only question I have was for the City 6 and that a comment was made about ingress 7 and egress in terms of parking in the 8 garage. What is the status of that? Is 9 there any input from the Fire Department or 10 anything of that nature? 11 MR. BOULARD: The concern is that in 12 backing out of the garage with only 10 feet 13 in change between the front of the garage 14 and the edge of the right-of-way, that 15 someone backing the vehicle actually has to 16 back into the traffic. Or if they pull up 17 and close the garage door or pull the car 18 out to get a mower out or something or back 19 up a jet ski, that the vehicle would be out 20 in the right-of-way. That's a concern. I 21 have not had discussions with the Fire 22 Department regarding this issue. 23 MEMBER GHANNAM: In Michigan you need 24 a garage, it's actually a burden if you
52 1 don't have one, and given the nature of the 2 size of your lot in that neighborhood. 3 MS. CORNILLIE: Can you just speak up? 4 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes, I'm sorry. I do 5 believe you do need a garage. I think it's 6 important in Michigan given the weather 7 conditions and especially the size and the 8 nature of your lot in that particular 9 neighborhood. It's important that you have 10 one and I think you did a nice job in 11 revising this and trying to minimize the 12 variances requested. 13 MS. CORNILLIE: Thank you. 14 MEMBER GHANNAM: So, I am in support 15 of it. 16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, 17 Member Ghannam. 18 Member Shroyer? 19 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you, Mr. Chair. 20 One question, and it goes back to my 21 comments the last time we met about the 22 length of the driveway and not knowing how 23 big a car is. By the way, a full size GM car 24 is 17 feet and three inches.
53 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Meaning they 2 need to be averaged down a bit to make them 3 look smaller, Tim. 4 MEMBER SHROYER: They get better gas. 5 Did you have an intent to have an 6 electric garage door opener? 7 MS. CORNILLIE: Yes, absolutely. 8 MEMBER SHROYER: I think that would 9 ease some of the concern that I would have 10 about the right-of-way and backing out and 11 pulling in because if you had to park in the 12 street or partway in the driveway and part 13 in the street and go and open your garage 14 door, et cetera, it might be difficult, so 15 that eases the main concern I have. 16 Looking at reasons that we can grant a 17 variance, the setback obviously does have an 18 unreasonable prevention in there. I think 19 would provide substantial justice to a 20 Petitioner. There are unique circumstances 21 to the property. The light and air doesn't 22 have any applicability. The property values 23 will not diminish within the surrounding 24 area. It will improve the surrounding area.
54 1 And I think it really does meet the Zoning 2 Ordinance's spirit because the whole reason 3 the ZBA is here is to look at unique 4 circumstances that don't fall within the 5 exact guidelines of the Ordinances of the 6 City. So, I am in full support of this 7 variance request. 8 MS. CORNILLIE: May I -- 9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I think we're 10 pretty set. I think we need to move along 11 with this case. 12 And if there are no other comments, 13 then I will go ahead and make a Motion that 14 in Case Number: 08-022 filed by Linda 15 Cornillie of 1601 East Lake Road that we 16 grant the Petitioner's request as requested 17 on the June 10th, 2008 meeting. And the 18 fact that the Petitioner has established a 19 practical difficulty given that the setback 20 would unreasonably prevent the use of the 21 property given the odd configuration and the 22 small lot sizes. The variance will provide 23 substantial justice to this Petitioner as 24 well as surrounding property owners. And
55 1 the fact that it will clean up the area 2 insuring that any storage items will be 3 stored inside as opposed to outside. And 4 that as Tim said, the spirit of the Zoning 5 Ordinance will be observed. That's all I am 6 going to go with at this time. 7 MEMBER BAUER: Second. 8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Motion by -- 9 Yes? 10 MR. BOULARD: Could I just clarify 11 that your Motion is for the latest revised 12 plan? 13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Correct, the 14 Petitioner's June 10th, 2008 request. 15 MR. BOULARD: Thank you. 16 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is a 18 Motion by myself and a second by Member 19 Bauer, and will you please -- I'm sorry. 20 Are there any other comments? Seeing none, 21 please call the roll. 22 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer? 23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye. 24 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer?
56 1 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 2 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam? 3 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes. 4 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe? 5 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 6 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger? 7 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 8 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer? 9 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 10 MS. WORKING: Motion to grant variance 11 passes 6-0. 12 MS. CORNILLIE: Thank you very much. 13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Your Motion is 14 granted. 15 MS. CORNILLIE: Thank you. 16 MS. WORKING: Linda, you will have to 17 revise your building permit application that 18 you submitted with us. 19 MS. CORNILLIE: Okay, I will have that 20 tomorrow for you. Thank you very much. 21 MS. WORKING: You will have to wait 22 five days, though, before you can do 23 anything on the property. 24 MS. CORNILLIE: I understand that. I
57 1 have been already told that. Thank you so 2 much. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Good luck to 4 everybody. 5 6 Moving right along we'll call 7 Case Number: 08-025 filed by Robert Bednas 8 of Etkin White Novi LLC for Hilton Garden 9 Inn located 27355 Cabaret Drive. 10 Is the Petitioner here? Please come 11 forward. 12 The Petitioner is requesting one 165 13 square foot wall sign variance for the 14 placement of a 230 square foot wall sign for 15 the east elevation of the Hilton Garden Inn. 16 The Applicant is also requesting an 17 additional 230 square foot wall sign 18 variance for the west elevation of the 19 building above and beyond the maximum of two 20 signs allowed by City Ordinance. This 21 business has an approved ground sign on 22 Cabaret Drive. The property is zoned OST 23 and is located north of Fountain Walk Avenue 24 and south of Twelve Mile.
58 1 If you can please raise your hand and 2 be sworn in. 3 MEMBER KRIEGER: In Case Number: 4 08-025 filed by Robert Bednas of Etkin White 5 Novi LLC for Hilton Garden Inn located at 6 27355 Cabaret Drive, do you swear or affirm 7 to tell the truth in this case? 8 MR. BEDNAS: I do. 9 MEMBER KRIEGER: Thank you. 10 MR. BEDNAS: My name is Robert Bednas. 11 I am with Etkin Equities, 29100 Northwestern 12 Highway in Southfield, the Appellants in 13 this case. First, although, it's not within 14 our domain, or my domain, I would like to 15 apologize for Sunday's weather. We did have 16 mockup banners installed on the property. 17 When we checked yesterday morning, not only 18 were they no longer hanging from the 19 building, but they were nowhere to be found. 20 So, I'm not exactly sure where they are. 21 MEMBER SHROYER: There is one in my 22 backyard. 23 MR. BEDNAS: The only thing I would 24 like to do is maybe just restate what we
59 1 think are some of the key points in our 2 appeal. The sign that we're asking for at 3 the front of the building which is the east 4 elevation on Cabaret Drive, the sign itself 5 is a required sign by Hilton. The size, of 6 course, is subject to the appeal tonight, 7 but the size that we proposed is a size that 8 is also recommended by Hilton for a four 9 story or five story property. 10 The second sign on the west elevation 11 facing I-96 is also strongly recommended by 12 the brand when there is second roadway -- 13 visibility from the second roadway 14 available. That sign of necessity if you 15 find it within your power to grant that 16 variance, almost has to be that size in 17 order to get the visibility that was shown. 18 I think in the photographs that we have 19 submitted or the mockups that we submitted, 20 it's pretty evident that in order to be 21 legible from 96 the sign has to be that 230 22 square foot sign. 23 This second sign is 24 very similar to the one that's on the
60 1 (unintelligible) building on the site to the 2 west of our property that faces the freeway. 3 The second point is there are a number of 4 other hotels in the city that enjoy the 5 benefit of having two building signs and are 6 a larger size than allowed by Ordinance 7 including our neighbors nearby, the 8 Residence Inn and also the Crowne Plaza. 9 The second building sign we also feel 10 will help assist the traveling public that's 11 coming from the west or the east and 12 somewhat give them some orientation as to 13 where the site is physically located in 14 relation to the interchange at Novi Road and 15 I-96. 16 Then, finally, we don't think these 17 variances will negatively affect any 18 neighbor or detract from the essential 19 character of the neighborhood. 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Is there anyone 21 in the audience that wishes to make a 22 comment on this case? Seeing none, I will 23 close the public remarks section and ask the 24 Board Secretary to read any correspondence.
61 1 MEMBER KRIEGER: In Case Number: 2 08-025, 10 notices were mailed. Zero 3 approvals and zero objections. 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: All right. 5 Thank you. I will ask the City Staff for 6 any comments. 7 MS. WORKING: Mr. Chair, I just wanted 8 to point out to Members of the Board in your 9 case file folder before you this evening, 10 that submitted photographs showing the 11 mockup sign was in place and what the size 12 that the Ordinance requires. 13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any other 14 comments? 15 MR. BOULARD: I just wanted to clarify 16 that this facility is allowed two signs 17 under the Ordinance. One of those there is 18 an approved permit for a ground sign 19 already, which would be one of those signs. 20 And the wall sign should the Applicant 21 choose to install it would be limited to, 22 would be limited in area to 130 square feet 23 minus the 65 foot variance they are asking 24 for. The variance request is for a larger
62 1 sign for the one remaining allowed wall 2 sign. In addition, another larger wall sign 3 beyond the two that are beyond these signs 4 they are allowed by the Ordinance. I am not 5 sure if I actually helped or confused it. 6 Reference was made to an adjacent 7 Residence Inn. There is a Residence Inn 8 adjacent nearby the property where a 9 variance was granted for that property in 10 the past should the Board be inclined to 11 consider a variance, that might provide some 12 guidance. 13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Just some 14 clarification. I'm sorry, you did kind of 15 throw me off with that first comment. We 16 are still looking at two signs east and west 17 and they are both 230 square feet which is 18 an addition to the ground signs they already 19 have? 20 MR. BOULARD: You are right, I'm 21 sorry, I did confuse the issue. The 22 Ordinance would allow two signs. There is 23 an approved permit for a ground sign. 24 MR. AMOLSCH: The Ordinance will allow
63 1 an OST building with single business, multi 2 story, you have a choice of two wall signs 3 or a wall sign and a ground sign. We have 4 approved and permitted has not been an issue 5 for the ground sign if it meets all the 6 Ordinances and they have indicated that's 7 what they are going to put up. So, the issue 8 here is the additional wall sign and the 9 square footage of the east wall sign. 10 MR. BOULARD: I apologize, I misspoke. 11 The one sign -- Alan, can you help? What is 12 the discrepancy on the second sign? 13 MR. AMOLSCH: The second sign is 14 limited to 65 square feet in area if a 15 ground sign is permitted and placed on the 16 parcel. So, they need a square variance for 17 that sign permanent sign and an additional 18 variance for the wall sign on the west 19 elevation. 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Got you. So, 21 the one sign on -- it's just the size, but 22 the other sign is -- 23 MR. AMOLSCH: It's a permitted size, 24 but it needed another sign.
64 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Needed another 2 sign and the size. 3 MR. AMOLSCH: Additional sign and a 4 square foot in variance. 5 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Is everyone on 6 board with that? 7 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We know what we 9 are chit-chatting about? I will open it up 10 for Board discussion. 11 Member Shroyer? 12 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you, Mr. Chair. 13 The one main question I have and it's more 14 of a clarification. The mockup sign that 15 was there when I drove by before Sunday 16 there were two signs. The larger one is the 17 one that you are requesting at 230 square 18 foot? 19 MR. BEDNAS: Correct. 20 MEMBER SHROYER: The smaller one is 21 the size that the City would permit? 22 MR. BEDNAS: That's correct. 23 MEMBER SHROYER: That's way too small. 24 That was a good move on your part to show
65 1 us. 2 MR. BEDNAS: Well, actually it's in 3 the instruction somewhere. I picked up on 4 it. 5 MS. WORKING: In your file folder this 6 evening when you arrived at the meeting 7 there is a picture of what you saw because 8 Mr. Bednas was concerned that not everyone 9 had a chance to make a site visit before it 10 blew down. 11 MEMBER SHROYER: We don't require them 12 to put up the sign -- 13 MS. WORKING: No, we do not. He went 14 above and beyond, that's correct -- 15 MEMBER SHROYER: So, that's why I am 16 saying that. A picture is worth a thousand 17 words. 18 MR. BEDNAS: I thought I saw it 19 somewhere that it was required. That's why 20 we did it. 21 MEMBER SHROYER: Now, the question I 22 have, though, Mr. Amolsch, that 65 square 23 feet was the smaller sign? 24 MR. AMOLSCH: Yes.
66 1 MEMBER SHROYER: So, the Residence Inn 2 has 130 foot, so it's roughly twice the size 3 of that? 4 MR. AMOLSCH: That's correct. 5 MEMBER SHROYER: But substantially 6 smaller than the one that is being 7 requested? 8 MR. AMOLSCH: Yes. 9 MEMBER SHROYER: Now I think I got it 10 all. I am not opposed at all to having the 11 two signs. It doesn't matter to me whether 12 it's a monument sign and a wall sign or two 13 wall signs. I see the difficulty in the 14 eastbound traffic on 696 being able to see 15 anything smaller than the very large sign. 16 So, I guess what I am trying to say here is, 17 I am not going to be in favor of three 18 signs. If you would choose to go with two 19 wall signs, then the discussion is how big 20 are they? 21 MR. BEDNAS: If I can respond to that. 22 I think if we solely had our druthers on 23 this, we would opt for the two building 24 signs. Unfortunately, Hilton has pretty
67 1 specific standards for the property for the 2 Garden Inn. And one of their requirements 3 is this ground entrance monument sign if you 4 want to call it that. 5 And, so, since we have to concede that 6 one sign, with obviously the second sign 7 that we need to have this one at the front 8 of the building, so the one on the west 9 facing I-96 would be the third sign or third 10 choice. 11 MEMBER SHROYER: And Hilton requires 12 the one on the front side as well as the 13 monument sign? 14 MR. BEDNAS: Correct. 15 MEMBER SHROYER: Well, Novi has some 16 strict requirements too that we need to look 17 at. That's what we are charged with. 18 Now, I think where I am leaning at 19 this point, Mr. Chair, is since they have 20 indicated which signs they prefer and the 21 sequence that they prefer it, the monument 22 sign obviously has already been approved. 23 The frontage sign, I don't think the 65 24 square foot is large enough to give adequate
68 1 advertisement and location identification 2 for the building. However, I think the 3 requested sign size is too large. I would 4 be in favor of anything up to but not to 5 exceed the 130 square foot size of the 6 adjacent hotel property. 7 That's all I have, Mr. Chair. Thank 8 you. 9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, 10 Member Shroyer. I like when we are on 11 board, Member Shroyer. 12 To be quite honest, even if the I-96 13 sign was one of the preferred ones, I don't 14 think I can support that. I don't think 15 that the spirit and the intent of the 16 Ordinance in Novi is to have a building so 17 far from the highway, have a sign on that 18 side, no matter what size it needs to be so 19 that people can see it. It's not a building 20 that has frontage right on I-96. So, you 21 know, my house is two miles away. If I had 22 a large enough sign I could say Justin's 23 house, but unfortunately that's not where I 24 think the intent of the Ordinance is going.
69 1 Given that the ground sign and the 2 sign in the front on the east elevation are 3 the ones that are preferred, I see the need 4 for two signs. And they are allowed to have 5 two signs, but as you said, the one is too 6 small and I don't think I can support 7 anything over 130 square feet either. So, I 8 see where two of us are at right now. 9 Other Board Members? Member Ghannam? 10 MEMBER GHANNAM: As they are 11 suggesting, is there any difficulty that you 12 think of if your sign is limited to 130 13 square foot? 14 MR. BEDNAS: The only one that I can 15 -- because for a smaller lower height 16 buildings, Hilton does have smaller signs 17 available. And I can see where this is 18 going, but the next size down is, in fact, 19 nominally 130 square feet, but it's 130.13 20 square feet. So, if there is going be a 21 Motion made. 22 MEMBER GHANNAM: Your point is well 23 taken. 24 MR. BEDNAS: That's the only thing we
70 1 would be asking. We can certainly live with 2 that. 3 MEMBER GHANNAM: What would be your 4 practical difficulty if we were to consider 5 the sign that faces this I-96 because it's 6 so far, why would you think you would meet 7 that practical difficulty standard? 8 MR. BEDNAS: Hilton Garden Inn is one 9 of the immerging brands within the Hilton 10 family. It's a very, very nice product. It 11 has a full service restaurant, three meals a 12 day. And the problem with the Garden Inn is 13 that they take a little longer to stabilize 14 their income as opposed to some of the more 15 common brands like a Hampton or a Court Yard 16 who normally stabilize within three or four 17 months, the Garden Inn takes almost a year. 18 The only hardship would be that there would 19 be less awareness from the traveling public 20 that way. 21 MEMBER GHANNAM: I understand more 22 advertising is better, but given the fact 23 that Novi does limit that by Ordinance, you 24 are suggesting that it's just a matter that
71 1 you would like to advertise more. I don't 2 have any more questions. Thank you. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any other 4 comments? 5 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Bauer? 7 MEMBER BAUER: I agree with everybody. 8 I think 130.1 whatever, would be sufficient. 9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Absolutely. 10 MEMBER BAUER: On what side, the 11 expressway side? 12 MR. BEDNAS: No, it would be on the 13 Cabaret Drive side. 14 MEMBER SHROYER: East elevation. 15 MEMBER BAUER: East elevation. 16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: It looks like we 17 kind of have a gathering of where we are 18 going. Does any Board Member care to make a 19 Motion? 20 Okay, I would move that in Case 21 Number: 08-025 filed by Robert Bednas for 22 Hilton Garden Inn that we grant the 23 Petitioner's request for a wall sign on the 24 east elevation not to exceed 130 -- well,
72 1 131 square feet. Give you a little room 2 there to work with. Given that the 3 Petitioner has established that the setback 4 of the building from the road Cabaret Drive 5 unreasonably prevents the use of the 6 property, would not be able to be seen, as 7 well as the size of the building and the 8 size of the property cites the necessity for 9 a larger sign. Petitioner 10 has also established that no increase of 11 fire danger or public safety, and that the 12 spirit of the Ordinance will be observed and 13 that property values will not diminish 14 within the surrounding area. We will leave 15 it at that and I will open it up for a 16 denial Motion. 17 MEMBER BAUER: Second. 18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There a motion 19 by the Chairperson and a second by Member 20 Bauer. 21 Any other comments? Seeing none, Ms. 22 Working, will you please call the roll. 23 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer? 24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye.
73 1 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer? 2 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 3 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam? 4 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes. 5 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe? 6 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 7 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger? 8 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 9 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer? 10 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 11 MS. WORKING: Motion to grant variance 12 for east evaluation wall sign at 131 square 13 feet passes 6-0. 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Okay, no one 15 else want to make a second Motion? Seeing 16 none, I will move that in Case Number: 17 08-025 filed by Robert Bednas for Hilton 18 Garden Inn, that we deny the Petitioner's 19 request for a sign on the west elevation 20 because practical difficulty was not 21 established given that the variance will -- 22 the sign would not be able to be seen most 23 likely from 96 or that it would need to be 24 too big in order to do so. And that denying
74 1 this variance does not unreasonably prevent 2 the use of the property, especially 3 considering the east elevation was approved 4 by the Board, and that it could have 5 potential property value impacts, and the 6 spirit of the Zoning Ordinance would not be 7 observed by the west elevation sign. 8 MEMBER GHANNAM: I second that. 9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is a 10 Motion by Member Fischer and a second by 11 Member Ghannam. 12 Member Shroyer, you have a comment? 13 MEMBER SHROYER: Instead of saying too 14 big, would the Chair be open to changing the 15 verbiage to substantially larger than the 16 Ordinance allows? 17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Absolutely. 18 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you. 19 MEMBER GHANNAM: I'll second that. 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: The Motioner and 21 Seconder agrees. 22 Any further comments? Seeing none, 23 please call the roll. 24 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer?
75 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye. 2 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam? 3 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes. 4 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe? 5 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 6 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger? 7 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 8 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer? 9 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 10 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer? 11 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 12 MS. WORKING: Motion to deny second 13 wall sign request on east elevation passes 14 6-0. 15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I hope that is 16 something you can live with and good luck to 17 you guys. 18 MR. BEDNAS: Yes, it is. Thank you 19 for your consideration. 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you. 21 22 I will go ahead and move along to 23 Case Number: 08-027 filed by Donna Skelcy 24 of 301 Duana. Is the Petitioner here today?
76 1 MS. SKELCY: Yes. 2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: The Petitioner 3 is requesting a variance from the strict 4 requirement of the Zoning Ordinance which 5 prohibits fences on all lots of record in 6 all residential districts from extending 7 into the front yard setback to allow for a 8 14 foot 3 inch long fence in the front yard. 9 Property is zone R-4 and is located south of 10 South Lake Drive and west of Old Novi Road. 11 Can you please raise your hand and be 12 sworn in by our Secretary. 13 MEMBER KRIEGER: Do you swear or 14 affirm in Case Number: 08-027 filed by 15 Donna Skelcy for 301 Duana Street do you 16 swear or affirm to tell the truth in this 17 case? 18 MS. SKELCY: I do. 19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: State your name 20 and address and proceed, please. 21 MS. SKELCY: Donna Skelcy. I reside 22 at 301 Duana in Novi. 23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Go ahead with 24 your case.
77 1 MS. SKELCY: Okay. Thank you. I 2 wanted to give you a brief history. I know 3 that it's contained in the documents, so 4 I'll keep it short. I was looking for a 5 house. I moved here from Chicago in 6 November and was looking for a house and saw 7 this house and took a look at it. At the 8 time I looked at it there was a rusty old RV 9 on the property, and I met with the builder 10 before I did my offer, and we went over the 11 property lines. Because I think you might 12 all be aware that the house is right by 13 Shawood Lake and that public access road. 14 So, I wanted to make sure I understood the 15 boundaries of the property. When we walked 16 it he explained to me that my neighbor was 17 two feet over encroaching on the property 18 with his RV because it was so wide and it 19 was right next to his house. 20 I had a concern about the RV the way 21 it looked in terms of property values to 22 begin with, and I certainly didn't want 23 anyone encroaching on the property because I 24 know that if you do it for so many years
78 1 then you can create an entitlement to it. 2 As a result, I bargained with the builder to 3 install a fence there to create a boundary 4 line. When he called the City he asked if 5 he needed a permit. He didn't ask the right 6 question and say are there any prohibitions 7 with regard to fencing. He was not aware of 8 the fact that you could not have a fence 9 beyond the front property line. 10 I also had intended as part of the 11 landscaping because when I bought it there 12 was absolutely no landscaping to the left. 13 When we had the nice weather I have been 14 able to get out there and work on it. I had 15 the intention of bringing that fence where 16 it ends currently into the front like a 17 country cottage kind of look. And then 18 after I found out about this violation I 19 said, okay, I guess I won't be doing that. 20 It's not on the proposed landscape design 21 that I provided to you. 22 So, that's why it ends basically where 23 it ends currently. I feel that the fence 24 helps increase the property value. I plan
79 1 to do landscaping as you can see from my 2 design by the fence. I have started 3 landscaping. I enjoy landscaping as a 4 hobby. I like to do the heavy work myself. 5 In fact, the white fencing, if you see the 6 recent picture, I built that myself in two 7 days all around the porch. So, anyway, I do 8 like to do this myself. I feel that if I 9 take the fence down, the property may be 10 encroached again by the next door neighbor. 11 There is a boat there now. And, you know, I 12 have a fear that if the fence comes down 13 then the boat is going to start to encroach 14 on the property. 15 So, I think it sets a good boundary 16 between the two of us. We're friendly with 17 each other. And I already have snowmobilers 18 coming off Shawood Lake in the winter. I 19 just noticed because I just moved in in 20 November, driving their snowmobiles across 21 my property. 22 I will have to do a little landscaping 23 there. Now, I could give consideration in 24 putting landscaping where the fence is but
80 1 then I would want to put bushes, because if 2 I perineals those are easy to trample over 3 and I fear like a bush, which I would want 4 in the alternative, I would have to trim 5 that, get on his property to trim it. It 6 may overgrow over onto his property and I 7 certainly don't want to encroach on his 8 property either. 9 So, that's my story about my fence. 10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Is there anyone 11 in the audience that wishes to make a 12 comment on this case? Seeing none, I will 13 ask the Board Secretary to please go ahead 14 and read any correspondence. 15 MEMBER KRIEGER: In Case Number: 16 08-027, 16 notices were mailed. Zero 17 approvals. Two objections. 18 The first one is from Donnell 19 Keranovick (ph), 303 Duana Street June 9. 20 "I agree with the Ordinance with regard to 21 prohibiting fences in the front yard. I do 22 not believe there is a hardship that would 23 warrant the variance. Please uphold the 24 Ordinance as it stands. I am the next door
81 1 neighbor where we share the property line 2 that the fence in question lies." 3 The second one is Henry Gruzwalski 4 (ph), 311 Madison, Clawson, Michigan, May 5 23, 2008. "The fence was there long before 6 Ms. Donna Skelcy moved in the house. City 7 of Novi Code Section 25151 A reads: Unless 8 an existing house already extends into the 9 minimum front yard, in which case the fence 10 may extend to the front of the house. The 11 fence is even with existing front of the 12 house according to code. Sincerely Mr. 13 Henry Gruzwalski." That's it. 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you for 15 that. Any comments from the City? 16 MR. BOULARD: Just one comment. I 17 think that there is for the sake of 18 simplicity there are three options. One 19 would be to approve the variance as 20 requested. Two, would be to deny the 21 variance as requested. There is also in 22 Ordinance Section 2515 Section 1A, Subpart 23 2, there is some language which reads: The 24 requirements of this subpart that does not
82 1 allow fences or that prohibit fences, the 2 requirement of this subpart shall not apply 3 to decorative fencing. And then the code 4 gives an example, i.e., split rail of no 5 more than 20 feet in length or four feet in 6 height when erected as part of an approved 7 landscaping plan. The Petitioner has 8 provided landscaping plan as you know in the 9 staff report. 10 We did have the City landscape 11 architect look at that. There are no 12 minimum requirements for landscaping, but 13 what the Petitioner has proposed is more 14 than typical. And so, I guess, I just in my 15 mind the options in addition to approval or 16 denial of the variance would be 17 determination that what's proposed meets the 18 exception language in the Ordinance which 19 would then not require a variance 20 necessarily. 21 Would I be correct in stating that? 22 MS. KUDLA: You would be. It would be 23 an interpretation. It would be interpreting 24 it as an exception.
83 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: As part of an 2 interpretation goes, if I can ask the City 3 Attorney, what kind of binding or future 4 effect does that have? Because each case we 5 look at is on its own individual merits, 6 each piece of property, each individual case 7 before us. Now if every single neighbor on 8 the street all of a sudden hears about this 9 interpretation, we have everyone in the 10 whole Walled Lake area with front yard 11 fences, that could be an issue. So, what 12 kind of an effect would our decision with an 13 interpretation have in the future? 14 MS. KUDLA: I think looking at the 15 facts in this case what you would be looking 16 at is whether what would be different is the 17 style of fence and whether you consider it 18 decorative or not. Or whether it's 19 purpose -- 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: But if we decide 21 that it's decorative -- 22 MS. KUDLA: It could. 23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Will people come 24 back before us or be forced to come back
84 1 before us and say we have the same exact 2 landscape plan, the same exact fence? 3 MS. KUDLA: Yes, they could. 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Would they have 5 to come before us again or could they just 6 go ahead and do it? 7 MS. KUDLA: They would have to come 8 before you. 9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: It would be hard 10 in my eyes to change that interpretation 11 with each piece of property. So, that 12 scares me. I will just throw that out 13 there, and I will open it up for the Board 14 for discussion. 15 MS. WORKING: You don't think a six 16 foot stockade fence (unintelligible)? 17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Huh? 18 MS. WORKING: You don't think the six 19 foot stockade fence -- 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I'm either 21 looking at the four foot high. 22 Member Shroyer? 23 MEMBER SHROYER: A couple of 24 questions. When I came out to view the
85 1 property I was trying to visualize how far 2 in front of the house the fence extends. Do 3 you know the exact footage? 4 MS. SKELCY: I did measure from the 5 front porch, not the stairs. 6 MEMBER SHROYER: From the end of the 7 front porch? 8 MS. SKELCY: From the end of the front 9 porch. I wasn't certain if that encompassed 10 as part of the front of the house. It's 13 11 feet beyond that front porch. 12 MEMBER SHROYER: I wanted to ask the 13 City. Does an attached front porch 14 constitute part of the house? The end of 15 the porch would be the frontage? 16 MS. WORKING: Through the Chair, the 17 determination is from the front footprint of 18 the house which does not include the front 19 porch and -- 20 MEMBER SHROYER: Even though the 21 porch -- 22 MS. WORKING: Inspector Fox went out 23 to the property and measured 14 feet, three 24 inches.
86 1 MS. SKELCY: Not 31 inches like the 2 Hilton sign. 3 MEMBER SHROYER: I would have thought 4 that a covered porch with the roof tied into 5 the existing house would have been 6 considered part of the house. 7 The next question would be the 8 neighbor's property, how far beyond the 9 front of his or her house does the fence 10 extend approximately? 11 MS. SKELCY: Do you have the photos? 12 If I could look at the photo. May I 13 approach? 14 MEMBER SHROYER: Sure. When I looked 15 at it it appeared to be maybe only one fence 16 section. 17 MS. SKELCY: I think it might be 18 actually one and a half. I think it might 19 be one and a half. 20 MEMBER SHROYER: The fence sections 21 are eight feet? 22 MS. SKELCY: Yes, and they are only 23 one four foot high which is similar to the 24 decorative fencing exception. They are not
87 1 higher than that. I kind of also feel that 2 they fit in with that, especially once I do 3 the landscaping. I think that will add to 4 the decorative fencing look. And really I 5 had hoped to do a fence across the front 6 because I think that's really kind of cute, 7 but obviously not now. You know what I 8 mean? This isn't across the front of the 9 house, it's just on the side. I am again 10 trying to improve the property, make it look 11 great. Make the neighborhood look good. 12 If you drove by you probably saw some 13 of the landscaping, and this is going to be 14 an ongoing project as plants go on sale. 15 You know, and I can't buy it all at one time 16 all the plants and flowers and trees and 17 everything I want to do. 18 MEMBER SHROYER: I understand. The 19 concern I have is a little bit about setting 20 precedent-type activities. I do consider if 21 it is, since you have submitted a 22 landscaping plan, that it could be construed 23 as decorative fencing. I am not sure it 24 needs to go out quite that far. Maybe one
88 1 section could be removed. And then maybe a 2 more emphatic landscaping activity be 3 provided in that section. I know you don't 4 want to trim shrubbery. But there is some 5 shrubs that are slow growing and there are 6 other shrubs that don't need trim actually. 7 Then there is also something like a spruce, 8 a slow growing spruce. 9 MS. SKELCY: I agree with you that 10 that is certainly an option. 11 MEMBER SHROYER: I am trying to think 12 of different ways. 13 MS. SKELCY: Again, my only concern is 14 that width that the trees and plants will 15 get. I just want to make sure that I keep 16 that property line established. Especially 17 since as I pointed out, he was asked to 18 remove it. He removed it. And then he 19 brought it back. To me it's like a respect 20 issue with regard to property line. There 21 seems to be a disrespect, and that's a 22 concern I have. 23 MEMBER SHROYER: We can't get involved 24 with anything involving a dispute between
89 1 neighbors or anything like that. 2 MS. SKELCY: And I don't want a 3 dispute. 4 MEMBER SHROYER: But we understand 5 your reasoning behind that. So, that's 6 fine. 7 MS. SKELCY: Okay. 8 MEMBER SHROYER: I was trying to get a 9 better understanding as to how far 14 feet 10 is substantial. Looking at the landscaping 11 plans they do look nice. Some of the 12 proposed vegetation is good. I don't think 13 that vegetation is going to prevent 14 snowmobilers from coming through. 15 MS. SKELCY: That's on the other side. 16 That's on the south side of the house. 17 MEMBER SHROYER: Those are all the 18 questions I have, Mr. Chair. Thank you. 19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you. Did 20 you say the builder installed the fence or 21 did a fence company? 22 MS. SKELCY: I did. Before I closed. 23 It was part of the sales agreement. 24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: So they put it
90 1 in, they didn't hire a fence company to do 2 that? 3 MS. SKELCY: He has his own guys I 4 guess that did it. 5 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Ibe? 6 MEMBER IBE: Thank you, Mr. Chair. 7 Ma'am, I am sure you can certainly 8 appreciate the comments made by Member 9 Shroyer here regarding the issues concerning 10 what the neighborhood might look like if we 11 open up a floodgate once you put up this 12 decorative fence. I am sure you are trying 13 to improve your property, and I am sure that 14 intent is well taken. However, the spirit 15 and true intent of the Ordinance is to 16 maintain certain decorum for neighborhood so 17 that we don't have individuals with 18 subjective ideas coming up with different 19 fences. I mean, that's part of the fact 20 that, yes, you may have made a strong 21 argument concerning your fence falling under 22 that exception, but it is a subjective what 23 is beautiful, what is considered decorative 24 I think is subjective. What is decorative
91 1 to you may not be decorative to your 2 neighbor. 3 Is it possible that you can accomplish 4 what you are trying to do by either moving 5 that fence back to what the Ordinance calls 6 and then maybe use, you know, some kind of 7 shrub that will not require a lot of 8 trimming to still accomplish your goal? Is 9 that something that you would be willing to 10 do? 11 MS. SKELCY: I would be willing to 12 take one piece down, but my fear is that he 13 will have enough room once I take it back to 14 the house to fit the mobile RV driving thing 15 back onto the property which is an eye sore 16 and encroaching on my property. So that 17 is -- I would be willing to do one piece as 18 suggested by Mr. Shroyer, but to do more 19 than that I think would be a problem. And 20 if you don't want to say that it falls 21 within the exception, then I guess I would 22 ask for a variance. I mean, it's a nice 23 looking fence. If you look at the quote 24 unquote, decorative fence on his property,
92 1 it needs to be painted. It looks pretty 2 bad, and this is a very nice vinyl fence. 3 So, aesthetics aside, I think there is a 4 substantial need for me to maintain that 5 based on past history with the encroachment 6 on the property line. 7 MEMBER IBE: I think your statement 8 just made my point in terms of what is 9 decorative to you may not be decorative to 10 your neighbor. I think you pretty much made 11 my case. 12 MS. SKELCY: Well, I don't know why he 13 hasn't had to have a variance for his fence 14 or gotten a violation for that fence on his 15 property. 16 MEMBER IBE: It appears looking at 17 this picture you are going have to take out 18 with count the property line, you are going 19 to have to take down more than one. It 20 seems like you would have to take down maybe 21 three. 22 MS. SKELCY: Which would, as I said I 23 fear if I take down three, he will be able 24 to move that. It's there during the hunting
93 1 season apparently and that thing will be 2 back and bringing down the property value. 3 It looks awful. I wish I could have a 4 picture of it, but once the fence went up he 5 couldn't fit it in there any longer. 6 MEMBER IBE: I must tell you, ma'am, 7 with the Ordinance, while I empathize with 8 what you are going through, however, the 9 Ordinance as written requires almost a 10 strict interpretation if you were to ask me. 11 If I am asked to cast a vote tonight, it 12 probably wouldn't be what you are looking 13 for because I think the true intent of the 14 Ordinance is what I think needs to be 15 enforced here. 16 Thank you, Mr. Chair. 17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, 18 Member Ibe. 19 Member Krieger? 20 MEMBER KRIEGER: If you could restate 21 when the fence went up? When the RV was 22 present, not present and then present again? 23 And then if that fence where it stands on 24 the property line is it towards your
94 1 property or is it right on the line? 2 MS. SKELCY: Sure. The first question 3 is about the RV. When I looked at the house 4 at the very first the RV was there and I 5 considered not buying it because of the RV. 6 And I met at the house a couple of times. I 7 met with the builder who went over the 8 property line. At that time he indicated 9 that it was two feet onto the property that 10 would eventually become my property because 11 it's so wide. So I thought, well, he is 12 going to have to move it if I buy this 13 house. So, the builder also told me that 14 when he first bought the house to build the 15 house he tore one down and built a brand new 16 one. That it was there and he asked the guy 17 to move it and he moved it. Then he brought 18 it back. 19 At the time I was looking in November 20 is when it was back which is around hunting 21 season. So, the builder had experienced him 22 encroaching on the property two times. And 23 I thought to be a good neighbor, I didn't 24 want to have to constantly confront him,
95 1 that I would put this fence up and that that 2 would create clear boundary lines. The 3 property fence is on my property. It is not 4 encroaching onto his property whatsoever. 5 In fact, it may be a couple inches over onto 6 my property. 7 MEMBER KRIEGER: So, when you moved in 8 the fence was there? 9 MS. SKELCY: As I negotiated with the 10 builder, I said his RV is on the property. 11 He goes, "Well, I'll go over and tell him he 12 has got to move it." I said thought, oh, 13 great, I am going to create problems with my 14 neighbor before I even step in the front 15 door, which I don't want to do. I want to be 16 a good neighbor. So, I came up with the 17 idea, well, why don't we put a fence there 18 and then he can't stick that thing there. 19 So, I negotiated with him through my realtor 20 to have him install the fence before 21 closing. That was part of the written 22 purchase agreement. 23 MEMBER KRIEGER: So, that fence is 24 cemented in or how is that put into the
96 1 ground? 2 MS. SKELCY: I don't know. I didn't 3 do it. I wasn't there. I hadn't moved here 4 yet. 5 MEMBER KRIEGER: So, to consider 6 taking out a panel would require evaluating 7 what's underneath? 8 MS. SKELCY: Yeah, and I am not 9 certain. 10 MEMBER KRIEGER: Considering -- I 11 would be persuaded to be consider that as a 12 decorative fence regarding a number of 13 panels and excavating one if necessary as 14 the previous speaker made. I am still 15 thinking about architect. Putting in the 16 landscaping I agree is another option. But 17 that's where I am at right now. 18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, 19 Member Krieger. 20 MEMBER GHANNAM: I have got a few 21 questions. 22 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Ghannam? 23 MEMBER GHANNAM: Actually I have got a 24 question for our attorney. If we agree this
97 1 a decorative fence, this fence would be in 2 compliance? 3 MS. KUDLA: Yes, this would be an 4 exception. 5 MEMBER GHANNAM: It could be an 6 exception to the rule? 7 MS. KUDLA: Yes. 8 MEMBER GHANNAM: So, we wouldn't need 9 to grant any type of variance? 10 MS. KUDLA: There wouldn't be a 11 variance. 12 MEMBER GHANNAM: You are saying for 13 future reference if the City denies or takes 14 issue with a fence like this being built on 15 a property that people would have to come in 16 and get a type of ruling? 17 MS. KUDLA: It would have to be each 18 time. 19 MEMBER GHANNAM: They would have to 20 get some type of ruling that it is 21 decorative? 22 MS. KUDLA: Correct. 23 MEMBER GHANNAM: Or not? 24 MS. KUDLA: Yes.
98 1 MEMBER GHANNAM: So, if we agree that 2 it is decorative then we would move to grant 3 a variance and it is in compliance? 4 MS. KUDLA: Correct. 5 MEMBER GHANNAM: Did you understand 6 that, ma'am? 7 MS. SKELCY: I did. 8 MS. WORKING: May I ask a question 9 through the Chair to the City Attorney? 10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Let Member 11 Ghannam finish and then if you want to grab 12 my attention. 13 MS. WORKING: Thank you. 14 MEMBER GHANNAM: The white fence is 15 more toward your neighbor's fence, toward 16 the lake part of the property, that's six 17 foot high, correct? 18 MS. SKELCY: Yes, that's the panel 19 fence. 20 MEMBER GHANNAM: That was put in by 21 your builder? 22 MS. SKELCY: Yes. I did the design. 23 I said let's do two of these and then low 24 pick it because that would look cute.
99 1 MEMBER GHANNAM: I understand that. 2 And what is the -- it's not real clear -- 3 well, I take it back, it is from the other 4 photograph. There is separation between 5 each of these particular holes in your 6 fence, is that accurate? 7 MS. SKELCY: May I approach so I could 8 see? 9 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes. I am looking at 10 this photograph right here. 11 MS. SKELCY: That's a post. 12 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: If you want to 13 take one of them, but we need to have you 14 speaking into the microphone. 15 MS. SKELCY: I'm sorry. That's a 16 post. 17 MEMBER GHANNAM: I understand. I'm 18 talking about between the two major posts 19 there is each a panel or column, whatever 20 you call it. 21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: It is a picket 22 fence. 23 MS. SKELCY: It's a picket fence. 24 MEMBER GHANNAM: The intent is not
100 1 necessarily privacy, but some type of 2 barrier? 3 MS. SKELCY: No. Well, it helps to 4 separate the property line as a barrier, I 5 have to say that. 6 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yeah, I understand 7 that. But it's not like a fence where you 8 are putting it in the back of your property 9 to secure a pool so children -- 10 MS. SKELCY: No. 11 MEMBER GHANNAM: I understand that 12 now. 13 MS. SKELCY: And I had hoped to come 14 out from that last post across the front and 15 put landscaping in front, but, again, no. 16 MEMBER GHANNAM: If for some reason 17 this Zoning Board disagrees that it is 18 decorative and it does not come within the 19 exception to the rule, your main purpose for 20 having this fence there is for separation 21 of, from preventing your neighbor from 22 putting his boat or RV, whatever on your 23 property? 24 MS. SKELCY: Correct.
101 1 MEMBER GHANNAM: And actually on the 2 other side, it looks like from the other 3 photograph that you submitted, on the other 4 side of your neighbor's property it's not 5 really a grassed in area, is it? 6 MS. SKELCY: No. 7 MEMBER GHANNAM: Whereas yours is? 8 MS. SKELCY: Yes. 9 MEMBER GHANNAM: I see. It looks like 10 he even parks his vehicles right in front of 11 his house. 12 MS. SKELCY: He does every single day. 13 And then the boat is between my fence and 14 his house now. 15 MEMBER GHANNAM: And that's not really 16 something that you want to stare at either? 17 MS. SKELCY: Not really. 18 MEMBER GHANNAM: I don't have any 19 other questions. Thank you. 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Shroyer? 21 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you, Mr. Chair. 22 After hearing everyone speak or several 23 people speak, I should say, even though I 24 agree that it is, it can fall within the
102 1 interpretation of decorative, I am afraid if 2 we go that route, we are going to see the 3 same requests follow all the way down the 4 street and perhaps everywhere else within 5 that whole section. And I do agree with 6 Member Ibe, that if we follow the guidelines 7 that we are supposed to follow that it does 8 not fall within the variance request type 9 activity. What I would recommend and I know 10 we're not, this isn't a Motion, we're not 11 voting on anything right now. What I would 12 recommend is the possibility of having the 13 fence removed because of the violation at 14 this point, but working with the City 15 landscape professionals to see what other 16 options might be available to separate the 17 property that falls within our Ordinances. 18 And the City is very good about assisting 19 residents with helps and concerns because we 20 want to keep everybody happy. 21 And I totally understand your dilemma. 22 And it really is a dilemma which is the 23 probably the best way to phrase it because 24 you are caught in the middle. But if we
103 1 were to have a vote right now I don't think 2 I could be in favor of granting a variance. 3 I don't really think that I could fully 4 support the interpretation that this would 5 be decorative simply because of all the 6 other potential applications within that 7 area. 8 Thank you, Mr. Chair. 9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, 10 Member Shroyer. Ms. Working, I'm sorry I 11 skipped over you. 12 MS. WORKING: That's fine, Mr. Chair. 13 After consulting with the City Attorney, I 14 just would like to point out to the Board 15 that if Members are considering the 16 possibility of an interpretation, that this 17 case was noticed for a variance under a 18 specific section of the Ordinance having to 19 do with fences extending into a front yard, 20 and we would have to re-notice this case as 21 an interpretation made by the Board rather 22 than a variance to the Ordinance. 23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you. 24 MEMBER GHANNAM: Could this be put on
104 1 for the next hearing? 2 MS. WORKING: Absolutely. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Other Board 4 Members? 5 MEMBER IBE: Just a quick comment. 6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Yes, please. 7 MEMBER IBE: Perhaps the City Attorney 8 as well. If this is going to be put back on 9 for the next agenda, is it possible that you 10 can look whether or not we have had any 11 issues dealing with the exception to this 12 rule and see what the City Ordinance, if 13 there is any precedent as to the definition 14 of decorative? I think that's very 15 important. 16 MS. KUDLA: I think that would require 17 searching variance and zoning files. I 18 don't know how to do that. That would be 19 something you would have ask the City for. 20 MS. WORKING: The zoning part what I 21 can do is case separation if the Board has 22 asked for that specific information. I 23 think also what we could do to assist you is 24 consult with David Besky who is our
105 1 landscape architect what his knowledge is in 2 terms of decorative fencing, possibly what 3 he recommends when he does work with 4 required landscape plan approval. He knows 5 residential areas are not required for any 6 kind of landscape approval. So, I don't 7 know if the definition of decorative would 8 be different or not in that case, but it's 9 certainly something that we could look into. 10 MEMBER IBE: Thank you. 11 MEMBER GHANNAM: Actually I have got a 12 suggestion and I would like to make it into 13 a Motion. Actually I would like to move 14 that we table this particular petition for 15 the following reasons: 16 Number one, I think the way the 17 presentation as well as some of the 18 information submitted by the Applicant does 19 argue that this is a decorative structure 20 and it's not intended to -- it is an 21 exception to the rule, although it may have 22 been characterized as a variance request. 23 So, number one, table it so there can be an 24 interpretation of whether this particular
106 1 fencing as it is right now is decorative or 2 not. And if in the alternative if it's not 3 decorative and it needs a vote on a 4 variance, then we can do that at that time. 5 In the meantime similar to what he is 6 suggesting, I would like to know, number 7 one, is there any prior history or precedent 8 regarding decorative and does it require any 9 intent? And the reason why is because I am 10 thinking if they have a fence and they are 11 trying to enclose their particular property, 12 the intent is to -- that may be one intent. 13 This may be another type of intent. Is that 14 important to our decision? So, I would like 15 to make a Motion in that regard. 16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Now, is your 17 Motion stating, and this is something that I 18 was going to suggest if this is where you 19 are going, that the Notice carry, we're 20 going to look at an interpretation and if 21 not an interpretation, then we are going to 22 look at a variance requirement similar to 23 what we did with the Novi Expo Center case? 24 So that we can make sure that we make a
107 1 decision at the next meeting as opposed to 2 deciding we don't want to do an 3 interpretation and bringing her back again? 4 That's what I would suggest. 5 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes. That's exactly 6 what I stated. And the reason why is 7 because she does argue and I see in her 8 papers that she is indicating that it is an 9 exception to the rule and is decorative. I 10 think it's a very valid argument. So, I 11 would like to characterize the next meeting, 12 July 8th, right? 13 MS. WORKING: Correct. 14 MEMBER GHANNAM: We make that decision 15 is it decorative? Is it not? And if it is 16 not then we can take a vote on a variance. 17 MS. SKELCY: July 8th, that's the week 18 after the holiday. 19 MS. WORKING: 4th of July, right. 20 MEMBER GHANNAM: The following 21 Tuesday. 22 MS. SKELCY: I am available. 23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: That's a big 24 part of it.
108 1 MS. WORKING: I appreciate you 2 pointing that out that you wanted the both 3 of them delineated in the notice. That will 4 make a big difference. 5 MEMBER KRIEGER: I'll second the 6 Motion. 7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is a 8 Motion by Member Ghannam and a second by 9 Member Krieger. 10 Any other comments regarding the 11 motion? Member Shroyer? 12 MEMBER SHROYER: I will support the 13 Motion, but I also would still encourage the 14 Applicant to talk to the City landscaping 15 experts. The reason for that is because 16 there is some pretty neat things that can be 17 done with landscaping even to the point of 18 landscaping timbers, decorative rock. I 19 don't even know what they are called, but 20 the stones that build up, retaining walls, 21 that could possibly, and I don't know the 22 City Ordinance in that regard, but that 23 could possibly separate that area and maybe 24 even allow you to bring a section of the
109 1 fence over in front of your house to 2 incorporate as the decorative side that you 3 were referring to. So, somebody at the 4 City, one of the experts, like I said, might 5 be able to make a recommendation that may 6 even be more to your liking than getting a 7 variance request or interpretation for this. 8 MS. SKELCY: I will follow your 9 suggestion before July 8th. 10 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you. That's 11 all I have. 12 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any other 13 comments? Seeing none, Ms. Working, will 14 you please call the roll. 15 MS. WORKING: Absolutely. Member 16 Ghannam? 17 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes. 18 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger? 19 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 20 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer? 21 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 22 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer? 23 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 24 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer?
110 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye. 2 MS. WORKING: And Member Ibe? 3 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 4 MS. WORKING: Motion to table to 5 re-notice for an interpretation and in 6 addition, a variance request if the 7 interpretation is turned down or -- 8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: If it's not 9 determined to be a decorative fence. 10 MS. WORKING: That's -- 11 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Like I said, 12 refer back to the Expo case. I think that's 13 exactly what we are looking for. 14 MS. WORKING: I thank you for that. 15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We have like 16 three different -- 17 MS. WORKING: Passes 6-0. 18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: If that does not 19 turn out to work out, let us know and then 20 we can always look at a different meeting 21 date. 22 MS. SKELCY: Thank you for your time 23 tonight. 24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you.
111 1 Can I also ask the City Attorney 2 just a further explanation if you have any 3 or any precedent that was set in this state 4 regarding interpretations and the procedure 5 that would have to take forth. Once, again, 6 one of my big things is if we make an 7 interpretation that if someone comes back 8 with the same exact fence, same exact 9 landscaping plan, what kind of recourse 10 would this Board have to say no to them at 11 that point? Interpreting difference because 12 one was installed and one wasn't, I have 13 that concern. 14 MS. KUDLA: Okay. 15 MS. WORKING: Might I also point out 16 for the Board that for your homework, if you 17 will, for next time, that under the 18 Ordinance in Section 3104 Jurisdiction. 19 There a section having to do with exceptions 20 and special approvals that may be, obviously 21 we'll get smart for you to provide you with 22 information, but you might want to read 23 ahead and come up with your own, you know, 24 interpretation for lack of a better word, of
112 1 what that Ordinance is saying. That section 2 of the Ordinance is 3104C. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: At this time we 4 have been going for over an hour an a half, 5 I usually would like to try to stop when 6 that happens. We don't have too many more, 7 so let's just take a quick break, five 8 minutes and then we'll be back. Thanks. 9 (A recess was held.) 10 11 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: It's been a 12 little over five minutes so let's go ahead 13 and get started again and call Case Number: 14 08-028 filed by Dominick Comer of 156 15 Pickford. The Petitioner is requesting a 16 use variance to allow a commercial landscape 17 utility trailer to be parked in his 18 residential interior side yard setback 19 located at 156 Pickford. The property is 20 zoned R-4 and located east of West Park 21 Drive and north of South Lake Court. 22 Would you raise your hand and be sworn 23 in by our Secretary. 24 MEMBER KRIEGER: In Case Number:
113 1 08-028 filed by Dominick Comer of 156 2 Pickford, do you swear or affirm to tell the 3 truth in this case? 4 MR. COMER: Yes. 5 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: State your name 6 and address and go ahead and proceed with 7 your case. 8 MR. COMER: I'm Dominick Comer, 156 9 Pickford Street. 10 My main concern is I own a small 11 landscape company. I have a big trailer to 12 haul my equipment around in. I have a small 13 lot at my house. At this time I can't 14 afford to have a building to leave my 15 trailer at. It's a growing company. It 16 just started a couple of years ago. And all 17 I'm asking for is -- I got ticketed by the 18 City because it was too close to my house to 19 begin with. But showing you the pictures, I 20 don't really have any other room to put it. 21 It can be set back behind my house, behind 22 the front of my house, but to the side any 23 further it can't go. All I am asking for is 24 to be able to do my business.
114 1 It doesn't take away from the area 2 that I live. Next door I have a wrecker, 3 which is no problem. It's not a big high 4 class subdivision. It's just a working 5 neighborhood and all I am trying to do is do 6 my work and be able to keep the house here. 7 That's all. 8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Is there anyone 9 in the audience that wishes to make a 10 comment on this case? Seeing none, I will 11 ask the Board Secretary to go ahead and read 12 any correspondence. 13 MEMBER KRIEGER: In Case Number: 14 08-028, 53 notices were mailed. Three 15 approvals. Zero objections. 16 First one is Keith Robinson on 1980 17 South Lake Court. "My name is Keith 18 Robinson. I live on 1980 South Lake Court. 19 I received this notice on May 22. Having 20 known Dominick Comer for about three years, 21 I have come to appreciate the positive 22 influence he has had on the neighborhood. 23 He has a responsible and successful business 24 and poses no negative influence on the
115 1 neighborhood. I personally have no problem 2 with this variance." 3 The next one is from Michael and Donna 4 Witherspoon on 143 Penhill. "To whom it may 5 concern. My family has no problem with 6 Dominick parking his trailer in his 7 driveway. He is a very good neighbor and I 8 would hate to see him get a ticket for 9 parking his trailer on his property. Thank 10 you. If you have any questions please call. 11 And then they put their phone number." 12 The next one is James and Nancy 13 Skinner, 144 Pickford Street. "Dominick's 14 landscape trailer does not affect anything 15 in this neighborhood. It does not block our 16 view to traffic and he does not park it 17 anywhere but in his driveway. He should 18 have his variance. Let him make a living 19 without the City's interference." That's 20 it. 21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, Madam 22 Secretary. 23 Anyone from the City that would like 24 to comment on the case?
116 1 MR. AMOLSCH: No comment. 2 MR. BOULARD: Nothing more than the 3 notes that were provided. 4 MS. KUDLA: I have nothing additional. 5 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: You were putting 6 the microphone on. 7 (Interposing)(Unintelligible). 8 CHAIRPERSON: All right, I'll open it 9 up for Board discussion. Member Ghannam? 10 MEMBER GHANNAM: Sir, I understand you 11 are trying to do your business and basically 12 you work out of your house, right? 13 MR. COMER: Yeah, that's pretty much 14 it. 15 MEMBER GHANNAM: I can appreciate 16 that, especially in these times. But the 17 standards of the Zoning Board in this 18 particular case -- this actually would be a 19 use variance; is that correct? 20 MS. KUDLA: Correct. 21 MEMBER GHANNAM: You have to establish 22 unnecessary hardship as defined in our rules 23 and so forth. I guess my question is, other 24 than the fact that you need to conduct
117 1 business and you don't have anywhere else to 2 park it, what other unnecessary hardship 3 type factors do you want us to consider? 4 MR. COMER: Truthfully, I don't know 5 really much of an answer to that. What I 6 told you is what I know. Hardship wise is 7 if I can't park my trailer there and it 8 comes down to me having to rent a building 9 because this is my work, then my only choice 10 is to rent a building, but the possibility 11 of me being able to rent the building and 12 pay my house payment at the same time is 13 probably not going to work, therefore, my 14 house would go into foreclosure and I would 15 have to move into a smaller apartment or 16 something in order to pay for the building 17 for my business to be able to be ran. So, I 18 can't support my family. 19 MEMBER GHANNAM: Are you the only 20 employee of this business? 21 MR. COMER: No, I have employees. 22 MEMBER GHANNAM: How many? 23 MR. COMER: Two. 24 MEMBER GHANNAM: Are they in and out
118 1 of your house during the day? 2 MR. COMER: No. I usually pick them 3 up on my way to jobs. 4 MEMBER GHANNAM: So, you attach this 5 trailer to a truck, I presume? 6 MR. COMER: Yes. 7 MEMBER GHANNAM: You haul it around 8 and pick up your employees and do you 9 business? 10 MR. COMER: Yes. People don't park at 11 my house. It's nothing like that. It's 12 more or less, it comes there at night and 13 leaves in the morning. It's there overnight 14 and I just, I use it every day. It's not 15 sitting there. It's not being stored there. 16 MEMBER GHANNAM: On the weekends are 17 you conducting business or is it parked 18 there the entire weekend? 19 MR. COMER: I usually work the 20 weekends too. It's what I have to do. I 21 can't say that there is not a weekend out of 22 the year that it doesn't maybe stay there 23 for the weekend if I don't have enough work 24 or for any reason like that, but.
119 1 MEMBER GHANNAM: This is the only 2 logical place on your property to park this 3 vehicle? 4 MR. COMER: It's the only possible 5 place for it to be parked. 6 MEMBER GHANNAM: I don't have any 7 other questions. 8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Other Board 9 Members? This is similar to one of the first 10 cases we saw today. It's a very touch case 11 for me in the fact that, once again, not 12 being the arm of the city that makes the 13 Ordinance, we basically have to look at each 14 case and the elements of the hardship that 15 Member Ghannam was speaking of, I will 16 actually read them here. The property 17 cannot be reasonably used for the purposes 18 permitted in the Zoning District which is 19 very hard to prove in my eyes. You have 20 your house there in itself. The plight of 21 the property owners due to unique 22 circumstances particular to his or her 23 property and not the general neighborhood 24 conditions. The third condition is that the
120 1 use variance will not alter the essential 2 character of the area. And D, that the 3 proponent's problem is not self created. 4 I think that you have met certain 5 aspects of this, but unfortunately if I 6 remember correctly, you must meet every 7 element of unnecessary hardship in order for 8 the Zoning Board to approve a case. 9 MS. KUDLA: Not every element. 10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Like I said, I 11 feel like some are met, so we could have 12 that up for debate. But once, again, what a 13 very difficult, one of the more difficult 14 that we have had in recent time. So, 15 basically from my understanding, no 16 commercial vehicle can be parked on a lot in 17 a residential area. Is that my -- 18 MS. KUDLA: That's correct. 19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Does anyone from 20 the City or maybe this would be for Cindy 21 Uglow, what do small business owners do in 22 normal other circumstances? Do we have any 23 examples? They don't all rent buildings to 24 place a trailer?
121 1 MS. KUDLA: I think that most of them 2 don't do their business out of their home. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We have a lot 4 small business owners in Novi. 5 MS. KUDLA: But do they all have 6 equipment? 7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I know of 8 several landscape companies and whatnot. 9 This isn't the only one. 10 MS. KUDLA: Right. 11 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Do we know of 12 any other? Yes or no? 13 MS. KUDLA: Not personally, no. 14 MR. AMOLSCH: Generally lots of times 15 these come in as complaints or sometimes 16 they are patrol items. That's what we do. 17 Utilities trailers are not permitted to be 18 in a residential zoning district. It's 19 supposed to be in commercial. 20 MR. BOULARD: If I may. There is a 21 provision in the Ordinance that does allow a 22 commercial vehicle to be parked in a 23 residentially zoned property or on a 24 residentially zoned property if all the
122 1 following are met: The vehicle used is the 2 principal means of transport for a resident 3 in the conduct of his employment or 4 profession or is the sole means of motor 5 vehicle transportation. 6 Two, the vehicle is not a dump truck, 7 stake truck, flatbed truck or semi tractor. 8 And, three, the vehicle does not exceed 9 5,000 pounds empty weight as defined by 10 (unintelligible). In this particular case 11 the trailer obviously is not a motor 12 vehicle. There would be questions regarding 13 the truck, but I don't think that's the 14 issue here. 15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: And what's, if 16 you know offhand, the residential RVs and 17 whatnot, what's the Ordinance on those? 18 MR. AMOLSCH: There is a different 19 standard being held to. Commercial vehicles 20 can be parked anywhere on the property for a 21 72 hour period for loading and unloading. 22 Commercial vehicles exceeding six feet in 23 height have to be stored or parked in the 24 rear yard only. Anything less than six feet
123 1 in height can be stored in a non-required 2 side yard or in the rear yard. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: That's for 4 commercial vehicles in areas where they are 5 permitted? 6 MR. AMOLSCH: Recreational. There is 7 a difference between recreational and 8 commercial vehicles. 9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Is that for 10 recreational vehicles for personal use on a 11 residential piece of property? 12 MR. AMOLSCH: They would have to be 13 owned by the -- where they are parked has to 14 be, the owner has to be the property owner 15 so we don't have people storing their 16 vehicles on other people's property. 17 MEMBER GHANNAM: This is not even a 18 vehicle, though, as he suggested. It's a 19 trailer. 20 MR. AMOLSCH: Right, it's a trailer. 21 The Chairman asked about recreational 22 vehicles. There is a different standard for 23 that. 24 MS. KUDLA: Through the Chair, if I
124 1 could just make a -- 2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Yes. 3 MS. KUDLA: I am looking at the most 4 recent Ordinance amendment that just passed, 5 and the undue hardship standard does say all 6 now. I believe it used to say some not all 7 before. 8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Is there any way 9 for the Zoning Board to look at a temporary 10 relief? What means of temporary relief 11 would we have? 12 MS. KUDLA: A time limitation on a 13 variance. 14 MEMBER GHANNAM: In order for him to 15 get other appropriate means for him to store 16 the trailer. 17 MS. KUDLA: A condition for timing. 18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: So, it would 19 still be the use variance but with the time 20 limit? 21 MS. KUDLA: Yes. 22 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Okay. 23 MEMBER GHANNAM: I'm sorry, I have one 24 more question. If we granted a variance how
125 1 long would that be good for? 2 MS. KUDLA: If you are going to 3 condition it without putting a condition on 4 it, forever. 5 MEMBER GHANNAM: Okay. 6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Other Board 7 Members? 8 Member Ibe? 9 MEMBER IBE: Perhaps, if you want to 10 clarify some more information about if we 11 were going to grant the condition. What 12 condition were you going to impose because 13 it might play a role in how I view the case? 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: My question was 15 basically, does this Board have any relief 16 to do a temporary permit, a temporary use 17 variance? I guess, whatever you would call 18 it, and say a year or so, and say you have a 19 year to now hopefully build up the business 20 and be able to find somewhere to park it 21 other than this lot. 22 MEMBER IBE: Real quickly. To the 23 City, do we have -- or maybe the attorney as 24 well, do we have any exception that is
126 1 similar to what has been suggested that we 2 have done in the past for someone in a 3 situation of Mr. Dominick here with 4 financial hardship with a small business, 5 have we had any kind of an exception? 6 MS. KUDLA: Not that I'm aware of. 7 MEMBER IBE: Not that you are aware 8 of. See, one of the things -- 9 MS. KUDLA: Actually one of the -- if 10 you are looking at the standards for a use 11 variance. One of the standards is not due 12 to the Applicant's personal or economic 13 hardship. 14 MEMBER IBE: That was going to be my 15 next point. I think we have had cases today 16 that are very consistent with almost what 17 this gentleman has presented, and I think we 18 are treading on a very dangerous slippery 19 slope here when we are moving closer to 20 opening up floodgates, creating exceptions 21 that will become the norm. I can see this 22 happening because you only need, and I'm 23 sure, I feel your pain, sir, and I feel that 24 the economic situation is terrible and if
127 1 there is a way to create relief, I am sure 2 that everyone would come forward and offer 3 one to you. However, we do have an 4 Ordinance, we do have a rule. If we cannot 5 simply enforce the rule and create little 6 exceptions, I think there are for every Mr. 7 Dominick there is 1001 more out there in the 8 City of Novi that could come forward with an 9 exception that we can also grant. 10 We don't want to go this route of 11 creating exceptions to the rule that all of 12 a sudden become the norm. Unless you can 13 prove to me that there is some kind of 14 precedent, I would not be inclined despite 15 how I feel, the empathy I feel for their 16 Petitioner, to go along with any kind of 17 temporary relief. 18 Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 19 MS. KUDLA: There wouldn't be any 20 precedent in favor in this circumstance 21 given that the specific factor to be under 22 the Ordinance is that the need for the 23 requested variance is due to unique 24 circumstances or physical conditions of the
128 1 property involved such as narrowness, 2 shallowness, shape, water, topography or 3 other similar or physical condition and is 4 not due to the Applicant's personal or 5 economic hardship. That's part of the, 6 specifically part of the standard. 7 MEMBER IBE: Thank you. Thank you, 8 Mr. Chair. 9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you. And 10 I agree and I echo a lot with those 11 comments, but I have to balance that as well 12 with promoting small businesses. In the 13 City of Novi I think these are the kind of 14 people that we do want in our city and 15 anything that we can do to help them out is 16 truly great. But I agree, and that's why I 17 asked the question about meeting all of the 18 requirements, which like I said, I don't 19 believe he has. 20 Member Shroyer? 21 MEMBER SHROYER: Yeah, it is difficult 22 in everything that everybody is saying. I 23 did have a couple of questions. One is, you 24 had indicated something about the
129 1 possibility of parking in the rear yard. 2 MR. COMER: I didn't say anything 3 about being in the rear yard. 4 MEMBER SHROYER: Or maybe you said you 5 couldn't park in the rear yard. 6 MR. COMER: I can't. My garage is at 7 the end of my driveway. 8 MEMBER SHROYER: I didn't see any way 9 that you could. 10 MR. COMER: It's a 24 foot trailer. 11 MEMBER SHROYER: You said it's a new 12 business. When did you begin? 13 MR. COMER: I started it last spring. 14 MEMBER SHROYER: With it being a 15 landscape business what do you do during the 16 winter months? 17 MR. COMER: I plow snow. 18 MEMBER SHROYER: You do plow snow. 19 So, it is year round? 20 MR. COMER: Yes. 21 MEMBER SHROYER: It's not just 22 landscaping? 23 MR. COMER: No. 24 MEMBER SHROYER: Do you use the
130 1 trailer for anything when you are plowing 2 snow? 3 MR. COMER: No, sir. 4 MEMBER SHROYER: So, it's sits in the 5 driveway all winter? 6 MR. COMER: It did last year, yes. 7 What my main plan is hopefully by this 8 winter I can afford it. Right now is the 9 beginning of the season. Who is to say what 10 this season is going to do for me. As of 11 right now business is booming. I am working 12 seven days a week. Hopefully, I mean, we're 13 taking on as much work as we can. I am 14 doing everything that I can working day and 15 night to try and make sure. 16 I don't want the trailer in my 17 driveway as much as nobody else does. I 18 don't believe that I had any complaints. 19 But, I mean I would love to be able to have 20 my business grow to where I can have my own 21 shop to work on my stuff so that I could 22 have the room. I just financially and I 23 know that's not even an issue right now, 24 that can't help me out whatsoever. I can't
131 1 afford it yet. But maybe when the bills do 2 come in and they do start paying me, that's 3 my plan. 4 MEMBER SHROYER: Sure. Our hands are 5 pretty much tied because of the 6 requirements. But I was curious too about 7 the temporary relief to give this gentleman 8 an opportunity to try to get his business 9 going. In today's economic times it's tough 10 on everybody. People are losing jobs right 11 and left. 12 Here we have got a gentleman that is 13 trying to make a go of it, and I think we 14 owe it to him and anybody else that comes in 15 front of us with hard times to leave no 16 stone unturned, to try to figure out any way 17 we can look at something even if it is on a 18 temporary basis. 19 I would not be in favor of granting a 20 variance from here to eternity. 21 MR. COMER: No, absolutely. 22 MEMBER SHROYER: But I would be open 23 to the possibility of giving you a year or 24 even perhaps two to try to get established
132 1 and move forward with that, but it is 2 difficult. Please understand whatever 3 decision is made this evening, as Member Ibe 4 said, we feel your pain. 5 So, that's all I have, Mr. Chair. 6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, 7 Member Shroyer. 8 Member Bauer? 9 MEMBER BAUER: Can you park it in a 10 gas station where you get your gas? 11 MR. COMER: I wish. 12 MEMBER BAUER: Hum? 13 MR. COMER: Can I park it at a gas 14 station? 15 MEMBER BAUER: By a gas station? 16 MR. COMER: No. Not that I know of. 17 I haven't tried it. I never even thought of 18 it. I can't imagine. It's a pretty big 19 trailer. It's hard for me to get into the 20 gas stations with my truck to get gas while 21 I have my trailer attached. 22 MS. KUDLA: This is a question to the 23 Applicant through the question. 24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Are you done,
133 1 Mr. Member Bauer? 2 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 3 MS. KUDLA: Do you have a garage or 4 could you build a garage there that it would 5 fit in? 6 MR. COMER: Nothing that it could fit 7 in. If I could afford to build a garage in 8 the front of my house all the way to the 9 back of my yard I probably could fit it in 10 there, but it would have to have a 10 foot, 11 maybe a 11 foot door and that would kind of 12 look really funny for the neighborhood. 13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: It looks like he 14 would need a side yard setback too. 15 (Interposing)(Unintelligible). 16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Krieger? 17 MEMBER KRIEGER: Because of our 18 economic conditions, I also agree that some 19 kind of temporary relief that I would be in 20 favor of, but the only concern would be is 21 if there is any flammable materials in the 22 trailer, that they wouldn't be there because 23 the house is right next door to it. That's 24 it.
134 1 MR. COMER: Can I add something to 2 that? 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any other 4 comments? Go ahead. 5 MR. COMER: If there is any flammable 6 materials like gasoline for the mowers, if 7 it's not in the trailer it would end up in 8 the my garage which is about five feet 9 behind the trailer if it makes any 10 difference. 11 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yep. 12 MR. COMER: All right. 13 MEMBER GHANNAM: One suggestion, sir, 14 along the lines of what they are commenting 15 on. If some temporary relief was granted do 16 you think up until wintertime this year 17 would be sufficient for you to find some 18 other location? 19 MR. COMER: That was my plan to begin 20 with hopefully. If not for this winter, I 21 wouldn't store it there, I would come up 22 with whatever I could. I can get an outside 23 storage somewhere for it for the winter. As 24 of this time during this season where I am
135 1 up in the morning using it every morning and 2 hauling it away and bringing it back every 3 night, a self storage wouldn't really be 4 feasible for me. But in the wintertime if I 5 can't have my own building at that point I 6 do plan on at least renting an outside 7 storage so the trailer can stay there. 8 MEMBER GHANNAM: All I am suggesting 9 is some type of temporary relief in order to 10 get some other means. In other words, if 11 you were given three months, five months, 12 whatever it may be, after that point in time 13 you could no longer park it there whether it 14 be this winter, next summer or anything 15 beyond that. Do you understand that? 16 MR. COMER: Yes. 17 MEMBER GHANNAM: Do you think up until 18 approximate wintertime would be sufficient 19 for you to find some other means to store 20 it? 21 MR. COMER: Yeah, I hope so. I was 22 hoping for maybe like he said, maybe a year 23 just so, just so the business can get going. 24 I can't tell you what this year is going to
136 1 do. If it comes to this winter and I am in 2 the same situation, I mean, then that's just 3 something that I am going to have to deal 4 with on my own. Right now I'm just asking 5 for a little bit of help if possible. 6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I see up until 7 the winter. Like I said, I think we need to 8 do our best to provide great people in the 9 city like this trying to start their 10 business in Novi. Maybe he'll keep the 11 business in the future in Novi once he sees 12 the great working relationship he can have 13 with the city. And, you know, I don't want 14 to see it too long. I am a little hesitant 15 with one year, but I think up until winter I 16 would be in support. 17 MEMBER GHANNAM: How about I do this. 18 Maybe I can make a Motion if it's 19 appropriate at this time. 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Absolutely. 21 MEMBER GHANNAM: I'll go ahead and 22 move that we grant the variance in Case 23 Number: 08-028 filed by Dominick Comer of 24 156 Pickford for the temporary allowance of
137 1 the Petitioner to use the property to store 2 the trailer that's identified in the 3 photographs as submitted by the Petitioner 4 because the Petitioner has established 5 unnecessary hardship in that there are 6 unique circumstances of the property that 7 prevents the Petitioner from using it as 8 intended. 9 And because of at least from the 10 Petitioner's testimony, it will not alter 11 the essential care for the area because he 12 has kept it there for some time. But, 13 again, I would limit that and I will put a 14 limitation of December 31st, 2008. And I 15 will limit my comments to that. 16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Might I suggest 17 to insure that it is in the side yard as 18 shown on the picture to make sure that it is 19 does not creep forward into the front yard? 20 MEMBER GHANNAM: I will accept that 21 limitation and, again, with the specific 22 trailer that you are showing us according to 23 these photographs. In other words, if he 24 purchases a new one or exchanges it, it's
138 1 got to be the specific trailer and as shown 2 in this photograph so it doesn't protrude 3 from the front elevation of the home. 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is a 5 Motion on the table, and I will second the 6 Motion. Member Ghannam is the Motion maker. 7 Member Krieger? 8 MEMBER KRIEGER: Can you add a 9 friendly addition with the recommendation of 10 the Building Department or the Fire 11 Department what should be done with the 12 gasoline? 13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Are there any 14 comments regarding flammables if it's 15 preferred in the trailer to be taken to the 16 garage each night? 17 MR. BOULARD: There are limitations or 18 exempt amounts of flammable liquids that 19 would be allowed in a residence or trailer 20 to be perfectly honest. It may well be that 21 the more, the greater amount would be 22 allowed in the trailer than the garage. I 23 guess my thought would be perhaps that we 24 defer to the fire marshal and that the
139 1 Applicant contact the fire marshal for 2 determination as to the best place. 3 MEMBER GHANNAM: I will just state 4 that he has got to comply with current 5 Ordinances and laws whatever they may be. 6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I agree as well. 7 Any other comments? 8 Ms. Working, would you please call the 9 roll. 10 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam? 11 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes. 12 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer? 13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye. 14 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe? 15 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 16 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger? 17 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 18 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer? 19 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 20 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer? 21 MEMBER BAUER: No. 22 MS. WORKING: Motion to grant a 23 temporary variance passes 5-1. 24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: You have through
140 1 December 31st. Hopefully things will pick 2 up for you. 3 MR. COMER: Thank you very much. 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: You will be able 5 to move it along. 6 7 That brings us to case number: 08-029 8 filed by Mr. Chawney for Villagewood 9 Condominiums located at Haggerty Road and 10 Katar Lane. The Petitioner doesn't appear 11 to be here today. 12 MS. WORKING: Mr. Chair, may I look at 13 the file. I too noticed that the Petitioner 14 wasn't here. I wanted to double check that 15 the notice to inform him to appear for the 16 meeting didn't get kicked back. 17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: But either way 18 we'll move it along to case number -- we'll 19 revisit that at the end of the meeting. 20 21 We will move along to Case 22 Number: 08-031 filed by Mark Johnson of 23 Cornell Sign Company for Allstate 24 Billiards-Patio-Hot Tubs located at 26159
141 1 Novi Road. Petitioner is requesting three 2 wall sign variances for the said address. 3 Applicant is requesting three 4 illuminated 60 square foot wall signs 5 measuring 10 by 6 to be placed on the north, 6 south and east elevations of the tower of 7 the business property. The property is 8 zoned TC and is located west of Novi Road 9 and north of Grand River Avenue. 10 If you can raise your hand and be 11 sworn in by our Secretary. 12 MEMBER KRIEGER: In Case Number: 13 08-031 filed by Mark Johnson of Cornell Sign 14 Company for Allstate Billiards located at 15 26159 Novi Road, do you swear or affirm to 16 tell the truth in this case? 17 MR. JOHNSON: Yes. 18 MEMBER KRIEGER: Thank you. 19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: State your name 20 and address and proceed with your case. 21 MR. JOHNSON: Mark R. Johnson of 22 Cornell Sign Company, 9641 Northwest Court, 23 Clarkston, Michigan. 24 The Allstate property originally this
142 1 business was located in Novi Town Center for 2 many years and three years ago relocated 3 across the street (unintelligible). 4 Basically being done because at the time 5 Mervin's was going through their closure and 6 they happened to be in that part of the Town 7 Center, so it was adversely affecting the 8 business. 9 When he originally went into the 10 building, because I have handled this 11 signage for many years, he unfortunately was 12 under the mistaken impression that he would 13 be allowed both a freestanding sign and wall 14 signage because the previous tenant, 15 Wonderland Music had both. In fact, though, 16 Wonderland Music had a wall sign and had 17 talked to the property owner directly to the 18 south into naming a shopping center that has 19 a common easement into the Wonderland Music 20 Plaza. And that's why he ended up with that 21 type of situation. We determined at the 22 time that a wall sign alone, one wall sign 23 facing one direction would not suffice for 24 advertises purposes and exposure, so we had
143 1 thought that the best way to go would be 2 with a confirming ground sign which was put 3 in in '04, late of '04. 4 That sign is a 4 by 8, 32 square feet 5 and six feet to the top of the sign. The 6 problem has become that when there is any 7 traffic as in that intersection, quite often 8 there is, especially during the holidays, 9 the sign is totally blocked. It is not seen 10 as you head northbound and the photos in the 11 package show that. I tried to take as many 12 photos as I could from actual travel lanes. 13 Actually almost got hit that day. That's 14 why there is a little footnote on one of 15 them, I think that says, for the safety of 16 the photographer, the shots had to be kind 17 of moved over a little bit. 18 But basically what he is trying to get 19 is he is trying to get sufficient exposure 20 because of the fact that while he does have 21 many items that aren't higher end or more 22 expense in major purchase, he is the type of 23 store that is more or less a destination 24 store and in some cases and in other cases
144 1 is a matter of someone telling someone that 2 they bought their table or they bought their 3 hot tub from this place down in Novi, that 4 sort of thing. He sells out of that store 5 to places in Fenton, Linden, Fowlerville, 6 all over from a very large distance and he 7 has people coming to him that constantly are 8 saying they can't find him. 9 That situation was made a little worse 10 when after he moved out of the Town Center 11 when Mervin's was gone, someone else moved 12 into the Mervin's space which was the In and 13 Out store, thankfully they didn't last long 14 because they actually were competitor of 15 his, so he was losing business that, you 16 know, somebody would come in and actually, 17 whether they have to do something with 18 maintenance or something or re-felting a 19 pool table, and say, yeah, I sent my 20 brother-in-law down here, but he ended up 21 buying next door. You know, that sort of 22 thing. 23 So, we started looking at it and 24 decided that the tower is the natural
145 1 location for the sign. It has great 2 exposure in all directions. Quite frankly, 3 the signs that we are asking for total are 6 4 by 10, but the building itself because its 5 perpendicular with the road, actually if it 6 were in a multi-tenant building like the 7 center on the other side of the parking lot, 8 it would have easily anywhere from six to 9 eight spaces in it. 10 Also quite frankly in looking at it 11 once we got the banners up and in place and 12 I am glad to say that they stayed because 13 the last time I was before this Board I 14 think my sign over on Beck Road blew away 15 and ended up everywhere. 16 We also determined that quite frankly 17 that the 6 by 10 up there is a little large. 18 We don't need it to be that large. I mean, 19 it's the one benefit of putting a mock-up up 20 there, you realize that, first of all, we 21 need to take it in to 8 feet which would put 22 it between the two window sections because 23 we do not necessarily need that length. 24 So, that's basically what I have to
146 1 say and I am here to answer any questions 2 that you might have. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: It doesn't 4 appear anybody is in the audience to make 5 any comments and I will ask the Board 6 Secretary to read any correspondence. 7 MEMBER KRIEGER: In Case Number: 8 08-031, 43 notices were mailed. Zero 9 approvals. Zero objections. 10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Turn it over to 11 the City to comment? 12 MR. AMOLSCH: No comment. 13 MS. KUDLA: No comment. 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Then I'll open 15 it up for the Board for discussion. 16 Member Shroyer? 17 MEMBER SHROYER: I suppose I can start 18 again. This was interesting for many 19 reasons. First of all, I need to address 20 some questions in this direction. The tree 21 that's out front that's blocking the view 22 from the south, is that a required landscape 23 item? 24 MR. AMOLSCH: You need to consult with
147 1 site planning to answer that question. 2 MEMBER SHROYER: Okay, then I 3 apologize for not asking the city to check 4 into something like that. 5 MR. AMOLSCH: Probably if it was there 6 it would be required. 7 MS. WORKING: That would be in the 8 right-of-way, wouldn't it? 9 MR. AMOLSCH: It's not -- 10 MEMBER SHROYER: It's a decorative 11 craft or something like that? 12 MS. WORKING: I can check with David 13 Beshey (ph). 14 MEMBER SHROYER: That's just one item 15 that was of concern if it's required, if 16 it's not, then that is one simple possible 17 solution for a possible vision. 18 Secondly, was there any site 19 complaints or variances granted to the 20 previous tenant? 21 MR. AMOLSCH: No, as the Petitioner 22 stated they had just a wall sign which met 23 Ordinance and they utilized the Wonderland 24 Music property and renamed the center.
148 1 MEMBER SHROYER: And it's still 2 Wonderland? 3 MR. AMOLSCH: Yes, it is. 4 MEMBER SHROYER: Initially without 5 hearing all the other Board comments, my 6 first thought with this is that I don't have 7 a problem at all with replacing the monument 8 sign with a wall sign, I'm not in favor of 9 three wall signs. And I'm not in favor of 10 obviously the 60 square foot, so my initial 11 thought, and it may change as I hear 12 comments from other Board members, but it 13 would be that if a wall sign that met City 14 Ordinances wants to be replacing a monument 15 sign I would be in full support of that. 16 That's all I have, Mr. Chair. 17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you. 18 Other Board Members? Member Krieger? 19 MEMBER KRIEGER: On just primary as I 20 drove by, I found that the -- if you have 21 one on the south side and one on the north 22 side, that it would be sufficient versus the 23 east side. It kind of takes away from the 24 aesthetics a little bit and probably
149 1 wouldn't be as necessary. That's my first 2 impression. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you. 4 Member Ghannam? 5 MEMBER GHANNAM: Just for the City. 6 There is one monument sign currently. I 7 guess the question would be, is that all 8 this particular Petitioner is allowed one 9 sign? 10 MR. AMOLSCH: Right, either a wall 11 sign or a ground sign. 12 MEMBER GHANNAM: So, he would need 13 three variances if he wants three signs. A 14 variance for each sign for not only the 15 number of signs, but the size? 16 MR. AMOLSCH: Actually four. I guess, 17 it's three variances. 18 MEMBER GHANNAM: Three variances for 19 the sign and three additional variances for 20 the size of the signs according to his note? 21 MR. AMOLSCH: No, size -- 22 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: The size won't 23 matter because of the fact that we are 24 approving the sign as a new additional sign
150 1 above and beyond to begin with. So there is 2 no real Ordinance that I am aware of that 3 specifies the size. 4 MR. AMOLSCH: Actually there is. I 5 don't know if Mark ever did the computation, 6 but the City Ordinance on a wall sign on a 7 single business on its own parcel of land is 8 allowed one square foot sign for every three 9 feet of setback as measured from centerline 10 in this case Novi Road. 11 Mark, did you ever do that? 12 MR. JOHNSON: No, no, but I know that 13 the building, the monument sign itself is 14 like at 66 feet or almost 70 feet. 15 MR. AMOLSCH: It almost goes pretty 16 close to the road. Did Chris ever do that? 17 MS. WORKING: I was going to say that 18 in your materials that you were given to 19 you, City Staff estimates the allowable 20 square footage may be approximately 29 21 square feet, but that the Petitioner didn't 22 supply the setback information for us to do 23 an accurate calculation on that. As the 24 Petitioner stated, it's kind of dangerous
151 1 out there to be moving in and out of that 2 area. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: That's why you 4 send Chris. 5 MR. JOHNSON: Can I get his name to 6 contact him? 7 MEMBER GHANNAM: So, the requested 8 variance would be double. He is requesting 9 60 square foot, but he is allowed 10 approximately 29, is that accurate? Does 11 that make sense approximately? 12 MS. WORKING: Twenty-nine square feet 13 approximately. 14 MEMBER GHANNAM: Give or take. 15 MS. WORKING: But the variance before 16 you tonight are just three wall signs 17 variances because they have an approved 18 ground sign on the property, so they would 19 just be additional signs. 20 MEMBER GHANNAM: Right, I understand. 21 So, I guess, with that in mind, sir, 22 what would be your basis for establishing an 23 unnecessary hardship? 24 MR. JOHNSON: Well, basically the fact
152 1 the way the building lays with the hill to 2 the north on Novi Road and with the traffic 3 pattern -- 4 MEMBER GHANNAM: I'm sorry, I 5 misspoke, it's practical difficulty. I knew 6 guys would -- 7 MS. WORKING: You heard us. 8 MEMBER GHANNAM: What is your basis 9 for establishing a practical difficulty? 10 MR. JOHNSON: Basically because of the 11 drop in the road, the existing monument sign 12 is in such a position that as you are 13 heading southbound, you only see it when you 14 get right up on top of it. And the same 15 thing as your are heading northbound if 16 there is any amount of traffic whatsoever 17 itself is blocked. 18 The tree, I know and this is 19 secondhand, so I don't know how accurate it 20 is. But the store manager told me that he 21 had talked to somebody at the City and they 22 told him that he couldn't cut down the tree, 23 so I don't know if that was just a standard 24 reaction of you don't want people going
153 1 around cutting trees. Which very well I 2 could see happening. Realistically why we 3 came in doing for the three signs was under 4 the idea that something would have to give, 5 and what I mean by that is, if in order to 6 get the three signs we needed to remove the 7 monument sign, that's very satisfactory to 8 us. We are just trying to get him exposure 9 from the directions in which you can go 10 there and from the idea that there is 11 somebody that is going there that isn't 12 necessarily just going to the mall, they are 13 looking for him in this very otherwise busy 14 retail area. 15 MEMBER GHANNAM: It appears from the 16 photographs that you supplied when you are 17 driving which would be south on Novi Road 18 you can see the monument sign. There 19 shouldn't be any obstruction to that, is 20 that accurate? It's just going northbound? 21 MR. JOHNSON: Right. Well, the 22 northbound is blocked. Even the southbound, 23 I would say you would have to be pretty 24 close or up on it and that's why we were
154 1 looking at the fact that if necessary to do 2 the signs on the tower if we needed to 3 remove the monument sign, that would be very 4 satisfactory to us because we realize that 5 we are trying to do overkill. We are kind 6 of meeting our needs with two different 7 things versus just with one. 8 Or for that matter if it were a 9 matter of approving just two wall signs upon 10 the tower, one to the north and one to the 11 south so that they could be seen from a 12 greater distance so that the business could 13 be located and things, and then leaving the 14 ground sign that would be satisfactory as 15 well. Then, of course, like I stated at the 16 beginning, we realized once we got the 17 banners up there, even the retailer, the 18 business owner who unfortunately because of 19 some personal issues couldn't be here 20 tonight, but even he said, "Well, they kind 21 of look kind of a big, don't they?" I never 22 have a customer say that. They always when 23 they get up there say, it looks so big down 24 here, why is it so small?
155 1 MEMBER GHANNAM: From my personal 2 perspective I am in favor of granting a 3 variance. I guess the question would be of 4 what size and of what nature. I would be in 5 support of two signs whether it be a 6 monument sign and a wall sign or two wall 7 signs at your discretion. But in terms of 8 the size also, that's important. Because 9 you are entitled to approximately 29 or 30, 10 the range of 60 would be double that. And 11 the question would be, again, what is a 12 practical difficulty? I understand this is a 13 busy area. I understand you don't want 14 traffic issues and so forth, but I think 15 personally probably two signs on the 16 building would probably better suit your 17 needs. But, you know, that's what I am kind 18 of leaning towards at this point. 19 MR. JOHNSON: The formula, Alan, is 20 one for three, is that from the center line? 21 MR. AMOLSCH: Yes, one square foot of 22 sign for every three feet of setback from 23 the center line. 24 MR. JOHNSON: I would think that your
156 1 29 is a very conservative figure. May I 2 grab a file because I think I have the 3 original file and I know how many feet that 4 is off of for the ground sign. I think you 5 would be actually closer to about 40. I 6 unfortunately don't have a scale, but in 7 looking where the existing ground sign is 8 set back, and then the distance back to the 9 building itself and I believe at one point 10 my designer started doing those 11 calculations, but I understood the way the 12 Ordinance read that we didn't necessarily 13 need to give that because if you approve a 14 wall sign with an existing monument sign, 15 the size is determined by the approval of 16 the wall sign itself, so, he didn't 17 necessarily do all the formulas, but I would 18 have a feeling that you would be much closer 19 to 40 feet. 20 MEMBER GHANNAM: Wouldn't 21 approximately 30 feet give you about 90 foot 22 from the center line? 23 MR. JOHNSON: Um-hum. 24 MEMBER GHANNAM: It would be 120 feet.
157 1 Do you have any specific calculations where 2 the center line is from your building? Or 3 are you just estimating? 4 MR. JOHNSON: I am just estimating. 5 But I know that our existing sign is set 6 back almost 70 feet and the sign itself is 7 eight feet long. So, we're 80 feet there 8 and I know for a fact I am a good 30 feet in 9 front of that building, 25 or 30 feet in 10 front of that building to the rear edge of 11 my sign. 12 MEMBER GHANNAM: I don't have any 13 other questions. Thank you. 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I guess, let me 15 say when I first saw this case I was quite 16 surprised that three signs were being 17 requested and even to bring this in front of 18 us was just very surprising. As stated in 19 one of our records, there is not another 20 place in the City of Novi, especially when 21 only one thoroughfare is being addressed. 22 There is so many signs. To see three I was 23 quite surprised and almost disappointed, to 24 be quite honest.
158 1 I think that we as a Board have seen 2 several cases tonight and in the past where 3 people say, okay, there is a traffic concern 4 because people might have to turn around. 5 And, yes, in certain situations when you are 6 talking about a Rock Financial Show Place 7 there is going to be tons of people and 8 whatnot, yeah, that might be the case. But 9 the Zoning Board isn't here to make sure 10 that every single person who can't find a 11 business there is a blinking light that 12 says, hey, come here, this is what you're 13 looking for. And to even think about having 14 four signs for this business is very 15 upsetting to me. Very upsetting to me. You 16 know, I see that there is ground sign and I 17 think that addresses the majority of the 18 identity needs in this situation. 19 I think that we don't even know what's 20 going on with this tree, yeah, that blocks a 21 little bit, but I think that the business 22 and some of the customers it's incumbent 23 upon them to find out where the business is 24 before they are going. That would be my
159 1 personal opinion. I do not see a practical 2 difficulty for the three signs. Certainly 3 for the three signs. 4 I might consider one small sign, but 5 nothing even remotely close to above and 6 beyond that. Like I said, this drawing and 7 what was proposed to us concerns me greatly, 8 to be quite honest. Thank you. 9 Any other Board Members? Member Ibe? 10 MEMBER IBE: I just want to re-echo 11 what Chairman Fischer has said. I think 12 three signs for lack of a better word I 13 think it's outrageous. 14 MR. JOHNSON: Well, keep in mind as 15 stated, we realize that that would be in 16 lieu of the ground sign, and with this 17 situation either we -- I mean, in other 18 words you have to go in asking for the high 19 end realizing that it matters what you are 20 giving up along the way and things of that 21 nature. It certainly wasn't to offend the 22 Board. 23 MEMBER IBE: No, no. It's not that we 24 are taking offense at it. It's just I think
160 1 you are going too far in terms of the 2 request that has been made and that is being 3 asked of this Board to consider. 4 I am inclined to agree with the City 5 recommendation and that perhaps the sign I 6 think makes more sense if you were to ask me 7 is the one on the east elevation. I know 8 where this business is located and I know 9 exactly that building. I have been there. 10 I have been to that particular store. I 11 didn't need to -- I didn't drive past it. I 12 knew where I was going. Like Chairman 13 Fischer said, you pretty much know where you 14 are going before you leave your house. Most 15 people do, I assume, but there are some that 16 just go driving down the street looking for 17 a business. Well, unfortunately, you are 18 going to miss certain things if you do that. 19 But I think the one facing the east 20 would probably be your best bet because you 21 can see it coming from Grand River going, I 22 believe going -- 23 MR. JOHNSON: North. 24 MEMBER IBE: Going north, right. You
161 1 can see it that way. You can see it from 2 both sides. You can actually see the sign 3 if it's on the east tower. But I will -- if 4 you went with this vote today, you probably 5 will not, speaking for myself, you probably 6 would not get my vote unless you are willing 7 to make the amendments to have something for 8 the east only and remove the present sign 9 that you have right now. Because you are 10 only allowed one sign. You can't have more 11 than one. So, you have got to pick the one 12 that best solves your client's interest. 13 MR. JOHNSON: Right, I understand 14 that. But, sir, if you are saying you are 15 for one side on the east elevation and 16 remove the monument, quite frankly, I don't 17 need a variance for that. Do I, Alan? 18 MR. AMOLSCH: As long as you comply 19 with square footage regulation. 20 MR. JOHNSON: Right. 21 MEMBER IBE: That's correct. So, you 22 have a decision to make. I know it's a 23 difficult one, but if you wish to speak to 24 the owner and let him know exactly how this
162 1 Board feels about their request, it is 2 something that you can decide. 3 If you were to ask for a vote right 4 now I would not be in favor of anything at 5 all, with all due respect. Thank you, Mr. 6 Chair. 7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I think the 8 biggest issue that I have too is that this 9 should not be about coming in with, you 10 know, the best case scenario and asking for 11 the world and then hoping that it comes down 12 to reality. We expect reality to be brought 13 to us first and then a compromise. I don't 14 think with how many options that has been 15 presented that this Board is even prepared 16 to start doing the normal negotiations back 17 and forth, well, maybe this will look good, 18 maybe this will look good. I am not sure 19 that the sign company and the business did 20 their homework as far as presenting a case 21 to us. So, I would be willing to table this 22 or quite frankly deny it as it was 23 requested. 24 Member Ghannam?
163 1 MEMBER GHANNAM: Just I guess one last 2 suggestion. Do you have any modifications 3 you want to make to this application at this 4 point? Or would you like a decision? Or 5 would you like it tabled? 6 MR. JOHNSON: A tabling would be fine. 7 As I said, the package that we came in with 8 we honestly felt that since the designs only 9 showed the tower, that the size of the signs 10 would be comparable on the building and in 11 retrospect by looking at the banners we 12 realize that the signs are too large. But 13 at the same time if we were to go to, for 14 instance, to amend it to allow for a wall 15 sign on the north and south elevation of 16 less size and the deletion of the east sign, 17 that would be fine too. I mean, we even 18 looked at taking it down proportionately 19 which would take it down to a 5 by 8 which 20 would be about just under a 5 by 8 which 21 would put it right at about 40 square feet. 22 Even if that meant the removal of the ground 23 sign so that in essence our tower becomes 24 our sign because obviously you are not going
164 1 to be able to see the north sign and the 2 south sign at the same time. 3 MEMBER GHANNAM: Part of the reason 4 why I asked is because our City has 5 determined that you are entitled to 6 approximately 29 square feet based on the 7 distance of the center line of Novi Road and 8 so forth. You are unsure. You don't have 9 any better estimate than they do. You say, 10 well, it may be 40. We don't know that. 11 Certainly you are entitled to take the 12 ground sign up, put one wall sign that would 13 be in compliance with City Ordinance and you 14 don't need a variance. 15 I guess my question is, would you 16 rather speak it over with who you represent 17 before you make modifications because I will 18 be happy to make a Motion to table this so 19 you can come back with a proposal that is 20 more reasonable. You have heard the 21 comments from all the Members, I would be in 22 favor of having two signs. Again, the 23 question of the size would also be an issue. 24 I need to know from you what your position
165 1 is, how the big the signs are according to 2 our Ordinances, and if you want a deviation 3 from that. I would need to know all that. 4 If you want that time I would be happy to 5 make a Motion to table this. 6 MR. JOHNSON: That would be great. 7 MEMBER GHANNAM: Well, then, 8 consistent with that I will go ahead and 9 make a Motion at this time to table this 10 matter to make a determination, number one, 11 what size sign you are entitled to. I would 12 request that you come in with your 13 calculations from the center line as 14 required by the Ordinance as to how large of 15 a sign you are entitled, number one. 16 Number two, specify which signs 17 you want and which locations whether it be 18 two wall signs or a monument sign and a wall 19 sign, however combination you want. If you 20 want all four you tell us and we'll make a 21 decision. 22 MEMBER IBE: I'll second that. 23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is a 24 Motion by Member Ghannam and second by
166 1 Member Ibe. 2 Can you please call the roll? 3 MEMBER SHROYER: Further discussion. 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Yes, Member 5 Shroyer? 6 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you. Just to 7 provide additional field back to the 8 Applicant to discuss as I mentioned when I 9 first started, I wanted to hear what 10 everybody else had to say. I am still 11 leaning toward one sign and the primary 12 reason for that is there is no other store 13 in that shopping center that has more than 14 one sign. So, that is one thing to be 15 thinking about and looking at. 16 I am, however, open to the possibility 17 of a larger sign than the one that would be 18 permitted by City Ordinance. I agree that 19 the 10 by 6 is too big, but I may be, in 20 fact, I probably would be more open to 21 something as you even mentioned before, 5 by 22 8 or even 6 by 8 as a sign, but that's where 23 I am coming from and if you have the 24 feedback from everybody here, it would give
167 1 you a better understanding as what to 2 discuss with your people. 3 Thank you, Mr. Chair. 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you. 5 Please call the roll. 6 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam? 7 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes. 8 MS. WORKING: This is a Motion to 9 table. 10 Member Ibe? 11 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 12 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger? 13 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 14 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer? 15 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 16 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer? 17 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 18 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer? 19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye. 20 MS. WORKING: Motion to table passes 21 6-0. 22 MR. BOULARD: If I could make one 23 comment. When you go to do the calculation 24 and measure from the center line, just be
168 1 aware that the center line of the pavement 2 may not be the center line of the property. 3 MR. JOHNSON: Alan, isn't there also a 4 calculation based on the footage of the 5 building of the space itself or is that -- 6 MR. AMOLSCH: Lineal frontage on 7 multi-tenant building. Single business has 8 to be the one and three formula. 9 MR. JOHNSON: Okay. I knew there was 10 something like five and a quarter. 11 MR. AMOLSCH: That's on multi-tenants. 12 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: So, at this time 13 you have been tabled and we look forward to 14 seeing what comes out of the discussion with 15 the Applicant. And just let us know when 16 the next appropriate meeting will be. 17 MR. JOHNSON: August. 18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We still have 19 two cases on the agenda. One for the Seeley 20 Road case and one for Villagewood 21 Condominiums. Is there anything from 22 Villagewood? 23 MS. WORKING: Villagewood, the 24 Building Official and I did a double check
169 1 of all 84 notices that were returned to the 2 City and not one of them was the proper 3 notice to the Applicant, so I will then 4 assume that the Applicant was properly 5 notified, aware of the hearing and should 6 have appeared. 7 The Seeley Road case, I talked to the 8 Applicant on Friday and we discussed at 9 length the time of the hearing, the date of 10 the hearing and I expected him to be here 11 and it surprised me that he wasn't. He did 12 intimate to me when he called me on Friday 13 that he was still in negotiations with the 14 real estate company to purchase the 15 property. Apparently they were concerned 16 that it was taking so long, so he had to 17 explain to them that the variance wasn't 18 granted the first month and that he was 19 going back before the Board, so I am 20 concerned that he didn't show. I do not 21 know why. 22 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: The Board in its 23 current rules has the ability to deny cases 24 for people who don't show up. It has been a
170 1 practice going back and forth of tabling and 2 denying and tabling and denying. But what 3 does the Board like to do? Keeping in mind 4 that we have how many cases on the agenda? 5 Five for next month and then we tabled 6 another couple tonight and now we are going 7 to table a couple more. We just went from 8 having a nice five case meeting to probably 9 10, 11 cases. 10 So, I don't take lightly when people 11 don't show up, but obviously emergencies 12 arise as well. So, it's a tough call for 13 me. 14 MS. WORKING: And that I don't know. 15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Right. Board 16 Members? 17 MEMBER SHROYER: I'm open. 18 MEMBER BAUER: Send him a 19 notification. 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: You want to 21 table it then? 22 MEMBER BAUER: Table the two cases. 23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is a 24 Motion by Member Bauer to table the two
171 1 cases that did not come up. Is there a 2 second to his Motion? 3 MEMBER SHROYER: I'll support it. 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Second by Member 5 Shroyer. 6 Any other comments or discussion? 7 Please call the roll. 8 MS. WORKING: In ZBA Case: 08-019 9 Motion to table and re-notify the Applicant 10 to appear to the July 8th, hearing. 11 Member Bauer? 12 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 13 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer? 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye. 15 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam? 16 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes. 17 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe? 18 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 19 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger? 20 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 21 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer? 22 MEMBER SHROYER: Point of 23 clarification. You said applicant. Did you 24 mean applicants?
172 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: She is doing one 2 at a time. 3 MS. WORKING: This would be one 4 Applicant from 08-019, that is correct. 5 MEMBER SHROYER: Then I vote yes. 6 MS. WORKING: Motion to table passes 7 6-0. In ZBA Case: 08-029, Motion 8 to table and re-notify the Applicant to 9 appear at the July 8th, Zoning Board of 10 Appeals meeting. 11 Member Bauer? 12 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 13 MS. WORKING: Member Fischer? 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye. 15 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer, I 16 apologize. 17 Member Ghannam? 18 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes. 19 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe? 20 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 21 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger? 22 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 23 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer? 24 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes.
173 1 MS. WORKING: Motion passions 6-0. 2 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We'll move on to 4 Other Matters. 5 MS. KUDLA: Rules of procedure update. 6 I did do an opinion on the authority of the 7 alternate member and what we would recommend 8 that he or she is permitted to do. Tom is 9 reviewing my opinion right now, so I don't 10 have it ready for today. I except that he 11 will have coming to a conclusion on whether 12 or not he agrees with my opinion and I will 13 be able to either revise it and give it to 14 you or give it to you by then. 15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Okay. I would 16 put it up for the past Chair and Vice-Chair 17 to kind of review and look over this 18 process. And given Mav Sanghvi's absence at 19 this point, Tim, if you could go ahead and 20 kind of chair a subcommittee should it be 21 necessary if we maybe want to review those, 22 if you could start thinking about who you 23 might think would be appropriate to be on 24 this as past Chair, I'll put you in command
174 1 to follow this process through. 2 MEMBER SHROYER: I'll be more than 3 happy to. Do they have to be ZBA members? 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Yes. City of 5 Novi ZBA Members. 6 (Interposing)(Unintelligible). 7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We appreciate 8 that. And number two? 9 MS. WORKING: Members of the Board, I 10 wanted to bring to your attention in your 11 packets you received this month the updated 12 and codified Sign Ordinance as well as the 13 Temporary Special Exception and Temporary 14 Special Land Use Ordinance which also 15 includes the ZBA requirements for 16 notification. Those would replace the 17 existing Ordinances that you have had 18 previously been given so when you are 19 considering your cases and packet 20 information please refer to the ones that 21 are dated and signed May 27th, 2008. 22 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Seeing no other 23 business on the agenda, I will wait for a 24 Motion to adjourn.
175 1 MEMBER BAUER: So moved. 2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: So moved by 3 Member Bauer. Seconded by Member Ibe. 4 All in favor say aye? 5 BOARD MEMBERS: Aye. 6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We are hereby 7 adjourned. 8 (The meeting was adjourned at 9 10:02 p.m.) 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
176 C E R T I F I C A T E
I, Mona L. Talton, do hereby certify that I have recorded stenographically the proceedings had and testimony taken in the above-entitled matter at the time and place hereinbefore set forth, and I do further certify that the foregoing transcript, consisting of (145) typewritten pages, is a true and correct transcript of my said stenographic notes.
_____________________________ Mona L. Talton, Certified Shorthand Reporter June 20, 2008
|