REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NOVI

MONDAY, APRIL 10, 1995 AT 8:00 p.m. EST

COUNCIL CHAMBERS - NOVI CIVIC CENTER - 45175 W. TEN MILE ROAD

The meeting was called to order at 8:00 p.m. with Mayor McLallen presiding.

Council pledged allegiance to the flag.

ROLL CALL: Council Members Crawford (present), Mason (present), Mitzel (present), Pope (present), Schmid (present), Toth (present) and Mayor McLallen (present)

Present (7) Absent (0)

-ooo-

ALSO PRESENT: Edward S. Kriewall - City Manager

David Fried - City Attorney

Brandon Rogers - Planning Consultant

Tony Nowicki - Department of Public Service

Rod Arroyo - Traffic Consultant

Haim Schlick - Department of Public Services

Linda Lemke - Landscape Architect

Geraldine Stipp - City Clerk

-ooo-

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Mayor McLallen added Item #13, Request for executive session immediately following the meeting for discussion of pending litigation.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Toth

Seconded by Councilman Crawford

That the agenda be approved as amended.

Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried unanimously

Mayor McLallen introduced the proclamation declaring the week of April 10 to April 16 Community Development Block Grant week.

WHEREAS, the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)

Program, has operated since 1975 to provide local govern-

ments with the resources required to meet the needs of

persons of low and moderate income, and CDBG funds are

used by thousands of neighborhood based non-profit

organizations throughout the nation to address pressing

neighborhood and human service needs; and

WHEREAS, the Community Development Block Grant program

has had a significant impact on our local economies through

job creation and retention, physical redevelopment and

improved local tax bases; and

WHEREAS, The City of Novi and other local governments have

clearly demonstrated the capacity to administer and customize

the CDBG program to identify and resolve pressing local

problems, such as affordable housing neighborhood and human

service needs, job creation and retention and physical

redevelopment; and

WHEREAS, Novi's involvement in the Community Development Block

Grant Program since its inception has included construction of recreation facilities at Lakeshore Park, the Decker Road Safety Path, completion of emergency and minor home repairs

for eligible residents, Senior Citizen transportation and the

purchase of a new Senior Citizen Van.

NOW, THEREFORE, as Mayor of Novi, I hereby proclaim the week

of April 10-16, 1995 as Community Development Week in Novi

and throughout the United States, and urge all citizens to

join us in recognizing the Community Development Program and

the importance it serves to our community and our country.

Mayor McLallen introduced County Commissioner Kay Schmid to speak on the Smart Transportation issue. She said if there was a desire for Council action it would be added to the agenda.

Commissioner Schmid was present to address any questions the Council might have. She reminded Council of the packet she had sent each of them. She said Wayne County received the information two weeks before Oakland County did and she felt that was by design. She said they wanted Wayne County to have the opt out provisions, which had a different time line than the regular act. Commissioner Schmid advised Council they had 45 days under Act 204 to opt out and put it on the ballot. She said to do it under Act 196, and there was no opt out option on SMART, the window was 60 days. She said they could not have put it on the ballot on May 23. She said the only community, she felt, that was to opt out was Detroit. She said they had to opt out; they had their own system.

Commissioner Schmid said SMART was governed by the Regional Transportation Coordinating Committee, RTTC. She said that was no more than the "big four", Detroit Mayor Archer, Wayne County Executive, McNamara, Brooks Patterson, Oakland County Executive, and the Chairman of the Macomb County Board of Commissioners, Mark Steinburg. She said that everything this coordinating council did had to be done by unanimous consent. She said in the 5 or 6 years that they have been in existence they had done that 3 times. She said one was to incorporate, two was to break down who got what money. She said under the formula they agreed to D-DOT and the City of Detroit got 65% of the funds and SMART got 35%. She said the third one that they agreed on was putting this on a millage.

Commissioner Schmid said that she had never been opposed to mass transit. She said she grew up in the City of Detroit and rode the DSR since she was a child. She said she knew that it helped many people. She said that was not her problem here. She said her problem was that SMART cannot manage their money. She said they were failing and were $20 Million in debt and going down. She said they couldn't seem to get their act together to make the system work and be financially acceptable.

Commissioner Schmid said D-DOT was basically the same way. She said another thing this was about was merging the two systems. She said D-DOT gets twice as much money as SMART because they get 65% of the funds and the City of Detroit from their General Fund, every year dump in $30 to $35 Million.

Commissioner Schmid said the suburban system, SMART, was looking for money from the suburbs to subsidize the system. She said as Council saw in their packet, she rode the system and line haul does not work. The buses are big and they are empty and they are running up and down the streets all day long.

Commissioner Schmid said Council had the option of whether to opt out or not as explained in their packets. She said they tried very hard to protect Council in their Articles of Incorporation and if compared to the Wayne County Articles of Incorporation Council would have seen that very clearly. She said they had threatened if Council didn't stay in the system and hold the election they would take away our municipal credit. She said the City gets $25,400 of municipal credits out of the gas tax, passed through SMART to Council. She said for us to keep that they want us to spend a third of the mill in our City which would raise $455,000. She said that it did not seem to her a very good investment but it was Council's choice. She said the vote was very close on the Board and she voted against going ahead with the system and she lost 13 to 12. She said now she was bringing it to Council for their decision.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Pope

Seconded by Councilman Toth

That the SMART Bus Issue be moved to Item #8 for possible action.

DISCUSSION

Councilman Pope said he would like to offer a Resolution to remove this City from the Authority. He said a representative from SMART was present, Mr. Wirgau, Chairman or former Chairman of the Board who may want to make a presentation.

Councilman Mitzel said under the Articles of Incorporation from the Oakland County Public Transportation Authority SMART may be contracted by them to run the system but the Authority has the option of contracting with someone else. He asked if this was correct.

Commissioner Schmid said basically SMART's view was that they are to be nothing but the Authority that was allowed to tax you. She said if they had their druthers all they would have us do is have the Authority sign an interlocal agreement and pass all the money from the State and Federal governments to them to do with as they please.

Councilman Mitzel said from the Articles of Incorporation it sounded like the Authorities in order to contract with SMART, SMART would have to provide certified performance audits, financial audits and must not withhold any pass through monies from communities that opt out, etc.

Commissioner Schmid said the Oakland County Board of Commissioners amended their Resolution to include those things to protect the taxpayer.

Councilman Schmid asked if it was true that the law suggested that the money must come back to the cities.

Commissioner Schmid said under Act 51 which gives the municipal credits through SMART that is the law. She said as Council had read in the legal opinions, a lawsuit cost $70 to file and that can be decided. She said that was why they worked very hard within the Incorporation to protect you from them taking that away. She said they thought they did a good job and that the law was on their side but nothing is guaranteed.

Councilman Schmid asked why they are now going to a property tax, which had never been done before. He said this had been supported by the State through a gas tax.

Commissioner Schmid said basically as a local community the only option taxes we have is the property tax. She said they had just been lowered under Proposal A and changed the funding on that. She said the State had the authority to redo a gas tax or a formula and take care of the funding. She understood that they could do that through the Governor and the State Legislature. She would like to see this used on that kind of tax rather than on property taxes because she had never yet seen a property tax SEV go down. Commissioner Schmid said it was like a built in increase every year for those things that are funded with a property tax.

Councilman Schmid said if Novi opts out of the election and for some reason this passes in the other cities then Novi would be opted out of the busing, is that correct.

Commissioner Schmid said she thought it would end the line haul service that we now have in Novi. She said the line haul service goes from 7 Mile and Grand River to Twelve Oaks Mall.

Councilman Schmid asked what was the average number of passengers on the bus.

Commissioner Schmid said there were 3 from here and 4 or 5 from Farmington Hills.

Councilman Schmid asked what the average from Novi was.

Commissioner Schmid said according to the SMART line haul report she highlighted in green anything that had 9 passengers and under. She said it was full of green lines and their observations were that there wasn't anyone riding any of the busses, not just in Novi but in the rest of the line haul system going to Royal Oak.

Councilman Schmid asked how big the busses were.

Commissioner Schmid said they were 45 to 60 feet, carried about 60 passengers, and there were 256 line haul busses. She said there were also a 102 para-transit busses and they contract service for another 61 para-transit busses. She said SMART expends 74.7% or 75% of their money on the line haul system. She said they expend 17% on para-transit, 4.3% on municipal credits and 4% for other forms of transportation.

Matt Wirgau said he was Chairman of the Board of SMART and involved in SMART as one of the representatives from Oakland County as a volunteer since 1991. He said prior to that he served in the Reagan administration and was the under secretary for public transit. He said one of the main issues that they felt in Washington was that the issue of funding transit operations should be funded locally. He said they felt the cost of public transit was rising as much as 3 and 4 times the cost of inflation. He said the Federal government's budget was $2.4 Billion per year for public transit. Mr. Wirgau said they felt that it was appropriate for the Federal Government to have an interest in the service. They should provide capital for vehicles and help provide the technology that is available but the funding of it should be done locally. He said one of the problems that had occurred in this region, that started back in the 70's as the Federal government's subsidy to public transit was reduced, was that there needed to be a local source of revenue. The City of Detroit over the last 20 years has put in as much as $35 to $40 Million from its General Fund to support DDOT the Detroit system. Mr. Wirgau said SEMTA attempted to get public funding locally and was always unsuccessful. He said throughout that time they would say they were out of money and needed some help. He said what happened over a course of time was that SMART, which became their successor agency in 1989, was in the same situation. He said most public transit agencies in America are funded from four sources of revenue.

1. Money from the Federal Government

2. Money from the State Government

3. Federal money from the nickel gas tax

4. Local source of revenue

Mr. Wirgau said there was a high of per capita of $123.00 out of San Francisco down to a low in the City of Detroit of $11.00. He said the issue then before public transit was how do you take a look at having two systems in a region where you should have one. He said in his opinion they are both very inefficient and they needed to take a look at privatization and at reducing their costs.

He said the first thing they did when he went on the Board was look at privatization and passed the first grant to contract out some of the services in Oakland County on the one that goes to the Oakland Mall. They also look at doing a lot of different things that this agency had not done which was to come up with a one fare anywhere fare with a money back guarantee. He said this was an attempt to get focused on customer service and try to increase ridership.

Mr. Wirgau said in 1992 they were faced with a similar situation. He was elected as Chairman of the Board and they were out of money and they voted to shut the system down unless they were able to come up with some major cost reductions. Those reductions began in 1992 and they felt that periodically throughout this effort they could go to the State Legislature and help put a package together that could be passed. SMART in it own right created under Act 204 does not have the authority to levy a tax, that's part of the Act that created SMART. The RTTC did not vote to support this as Commissioner Schmid said. He said it was not true it was totally done by SMART. He said he could assure Council that he would not be able to get Dennis Archer's vote on it because he wanted 4/5th of a mill Therefore, they would not be able to get this through the RTCC.

Mr. Wirgau said the issue then was what should SMART do and how do they get to the point where they could have a local source of revenue. SMART was running about a $4 Million deficit for the last 4 years. He said they decided in 1992 not to shut it down. He said there was a $5 Million deficit. He said the funny thing about public transit was the way the funding came from the State and Federal governments. He said State government gives money based 40% of what was spent and the Federal government gives money based on how many riders there are. So to cut $5 Million in service we would lose fare boxes, lose State and Federal money and would then have to have a $3 Million deficit left. He said in order to get $5 Million in service cuts they would have to cut $12 Million. Therefore in effect we would have to shut down the service. He said cutting $12 Million out of the service all there would be left would be the major arterials running up and down Woodward, Jefferson, and Grand River and all that would be left would be the main system. He said there's no feeder system. He said SEMTA already cut the feeder system out in the 70's. They would not be able to provide the necessary service to Novi and the areas of the northern part of Oakland County. The issue then became not to have a transit system in name only; let's at some point bring about the issue of bringing the Detroit System and the SMART system and come up with a local dedicated source of revenue.

He said over the last two years it had become very clear that merging with the Detroit system would not be in the best interest of the suburbs. He said if we went to 4/5ths of a mill it would take $12 Million of Oakland County tax dollars to subsidize the City of Detroit and he hadn't found many people in Oakland County interested in doing that. They decided to push the envelope for as long as they could. He said they met with Pat Nowak, governor Engler's representative of MDOT and told him they were out of money and they said to wait until they got through the election and then they would come in and put together a package of local taxes that would help us levy, go around Act 204 and in the meantime they would give an $11 Million loan to keep it going through the end of the year. Mr. Wirgau said after the election it became clear in Lansing that there was no support to do that and they were told that this was a local issue. He said he wished it could have been on the ballot in November because had the message from Lansing been different we would not be in the fix we are in today. He said they extended it as far as possible and got the Federal money that came in at the first of the year and it kept them going until the end of May. He said by the middle of May they would be out of money and today they finalized an agreement with all of the unions and all of the SMART employees and they will be out of money by May 12. He said they have agreed to work without pay until the end of the month so we can get to June 6 in Oakland County.

Mr. Wirgau said the issue becomes what options does SMART have. He said the last option that Brooks Patterson wanted to hear was to go to a local property tax. He said it was not as though the SMART Board had nothing else to do and woke up one morning and said let's enter into this cause we are bored. He said they are here today because right now there are no other options. He said if they went to user fees or other types of highway taxes, he was sure Councilman Pope would know from serving in Lansing, that 90% of everything they'd raise goes to highways. In order for them to raise $15.00 in per capita they'd have to raise $150.00 in taxes.

Mr. Wirgau said the issue before Council was that SMART was currently out of money, mostly because of cuts that had occurred in State funding but also from Federal funding. He said frankly the State and the Fed's had been pretty good to transit agencies in southeast Michigan and the issue was no local source of revenue. Between 1992 and 1994 the budget was cut from $4.8 Million to $4.3 Million, the employees took a three year wage freeze, there were many cuts in workers compensation, contracted services, office space, mechanics and spare parts. At the same time SMART was reducing expenses by $1.6 Million the State reduced its contribution by $3 Million, cutting SMART from $25 to $22 Million and the Federal government also cut it. He said in their budget projections as they look at the 1/3 he thought Newt Gingrich would be successful and they would probably eliminate the Federal subsidy. He said they got $7.5 Million from the Federal government and they have reduced that figure and are looking at cutting that in half next year and then eventually not having any Federal operating assistance.

He said SMART was not in trouble because ridership was down; it had in fact increased for 20 straight months and was up 20% from two years ago. He said it makes SMART the only transit agency in the U.S. with a significant increase in ridership. He said some of the new initiatives like money back guarantee, guaranteed get a job get a ride program and jobs express program and taking a look at other types of things where we would come into the communities and work with people to try to come up with a community based system. He said in Oakland County we are arguing on the SMART Board to have more of a community based system. He thought that one of the problems had been that there had not been enough dialogue between the SMART System and the elected local officials in the local communities such as Novi to hear exactly what type of service would best fit the needs of the community. He thought that as Council took a look at going forward that if this community decided to

become a part of it then the dollars flowing from Oakland County would stay in Oakland County in service. He said they had a certain level of service that they hope to provide. He said Detroit was the only major metropolitan area in the U. S. without a dedicated local source of revenue for public transit. He said 47 other communities in the State of Michigan, including Jackson, Lansing, Traverse City, Flint and Holland all have some sort of a local source of revenue. He said Monroe County had 1/3rd of a mill and they renewed it last week. He said they had a news conference and all the unions were there and Channel 50 and he asked June West, Director of Public Relations where the other TV stations were and she said "if the unions were going to shut us down they would be here." He found this very frustrating and during the last few years it had been very difficult to get their message out.

He said there was no alternative to the June 6 election, SMART was completely out of cash and the unions have been advised that the payroll won't be met on the 12th and they have agreed to work through that. As far as the consequences of the shut down, he thought it was important to at least be aware of them. He said if SMART shuts down some 20,000 seniors and handicapped riders who use SMART Para-transit and other affiliated agencies each week would be left without alternative forms of transportation. There are 806 full time employees that would obviously be out of work. More importantly take a look at the senior citizens, handicapped plus the 31,000 riders that ride our line haul service. We are very concerned about them.

Mr. Wirgau said the issue that troubled him was they were not happy coming forward without the most ideal taxing mechanism especially since he worked as hard as many others on Proposition A with the governor. He said they were faced with no alternatives and that was why they put a 3 year sunset in it. He said what they are talking about is for the average homeowner in Oakland County it would be $15.00 each year for 3 years. He said it was their hope and as Chairman of the Board and on behalf of Brooks Patterson he could assure Council if they decided to stay in and become part of this system they would work with Novi and try to meet their needs.

Councilman Pope asked why Novi should stay in this system.

Mr. Wirgau said as Al Taubman who came to the commission meeting said "if you have a major shopping center in your region that the key thing is to have the ability to get the workers to these service centers; if you're going to have economic growth how are you going to continue your growth."

Councilman Pope said he didn't want to get the mall manager in trouble with Mr. Taubman but he doesn't necessary agree with Mr. Taubman that it's urgent for his mall workers to have that. He said they also had a private company for contract workers that are providing transportation directly to a business rather than using government job express. He said he didn't understand why we need to continue a failing system.

Councilman Pope said the Metropolitan Fares Corporation did advocate for the first time a different position using the Minneapolis example. He asked if that was what he was talking about a community basis.

Mr. Wirgau said yes very much so. He said he didn't think they should have the big busses and that they weren't 60 feet long but about 40 foot and do carry about 40 people. He didn't think they should have the 40 foot busses. He thought every time they could have a more flexible service we could contract out to the private sector.

Commissioner Schmid said in August, 1994 the SMART Board, in order to get a loan, passed a deficit reduction plan calling for the shut down of the line haul service. They had to do that, they had to get it passed at the State and they had to do it for the bank to give them the money. She said if they had implemented that they would not be standing here today. She said that was supposed to be shut down the 1st of January and it is in the packets she gave Council.

AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION

Diane Davies, 24836 Jamestown Rd., was present for Community Development Week. She said she had been a resident of Novi since 1972. She said that on February 5, 1995 the children and parents of the Novi Adventurers 4-H Club, Natural Resources Group, toured the Fuerst Farm. Instead of seeing broken boarded buildings they saw history, life and excitement. She said they saw the potential of what the site could be and the members enthusiasm grew as they talked. She said they decided to do something to try and keep the farm intact and restore the buildings. Ms. Davies said they drafted a petition and eight children took them and asked friends, relatives and neighbors to sign them. She said in two weeks they had gathered over 600 signatures. She said the Novi News covered their efforts and they had received numerous phone calls, comments and more and more petitions are coming in the mail. She said it was amazing how strongly supportive everyone had been. She said on most political issues there are two sides but on this particular issue everyone seems to be united.

Ms. Davies said they knew Council had until May 31, to decide on the purchase/trade offer that had been extended by the school board. She said they were present to let Council know that the people of Novi support the idea of saving and restoring the Fuerst Farm intact with out buildings, barns and orchards. She felt that Novi could not afford to lose the past and no one wanted to see a parking lot on a main corner. Ms. Davies gave Council copies of the petitions and stated the ages ran from six to 86 years old. She said they were asking for a serious and concerted effort to save the Fuerst Farm and offer it the people of Novi as an education center which was what Iva and Ruby Fuerst wanted. She asked that Novi not lose this important asset. She said the members of the Novi Adventurers wanted to share their thoughts and ideas on how the farm could be used.

Jenifer Davies, 24836 Jamestown Road said she felt that the Fuerst Farm should be saved. She said when the Fuerst sisters left it to the schools she felt that they meant for it to be used for educational purposes not a parking lot. She said by making it a parking lot an important part of Novi would be thrown away and many concerned residents would be let down. She said today's youth are tomorrow's leaders and if it is destroyed now there would never be anything like it again. Ms. Davies said the Fuerst Farm was important to them and they would like to show their children how their fine City was started. She asked Council to look at the signatures and stated that people from five to 95 had signed. She asked Council to not let them down. She said it might not mean much to Council but it did to them and asked that on behalf of many Novi citizens to think twice and keep it there for today and tomorrow.

Sean Opperman, 21682 Clover Lane, stated his concern about the status of the Fuerst Farm which seemed to be in limbo. He felt that the farm should have never been put in the position it is in. He said the Fuerst Farm was a wonderful example of Novi's heritage and stated it should be restored and used for educational purposes. However, the Novi School Board didn't agree and felt that a parking lot was more important to Novi than a sense of community. He said the school district intended to level the barns so that there are more unnecessary parking spaces.

He said of the many people he talks to during the day almost all are concerned about how the property would be used. He said the property would be perfect for a park, barns could be used as concert shells for the summer concert series or even for performances for children. He said the house could be made into a museum containing items of Novi's history or it could be used by the City for offices or as a meeting place for various civic groups such as the Novi Historical Society.

Mr. Opperman said the Fuerst Farm lends itself for a larger purpose than a parking lot and he asked the City to do whatever it took to save it.

Allison Davies, 24836 Jamestown, stated she was nine years old and in the third grade at Novi Woods Elementary School. She said she collected a lot of signatures from the third and fourth graders. Ms. Davies didn't think the Fuerst Farm should be torn down because a lot of people like the Fuerst Farm. She said most people were upset and disappointed to hear that the farm might be torn down. She said she went out in her neighborhood on a Saturday and Sunday and only three people refused to sign the petitions. She said she was born in Novi and she wanted the Fuerst Farm to be there when she had children so they could see the beauty and history of the Fuerst Farm. Ms. Davies said her Dad said he would help with the repairs on the buildings and she felt that many other people would help too. She said Council could buy it from the school and make it a park, education center or a museum. She said she hoped Council would listen and save the Fuerst Farm.

Kristen Dee said she felt Council should save the Fuerst Farm because it represented Novi and is a landmark of our City. She thought if it were saved it could be put to good use. For instance, it could be used as a camp in the summer. She said kids could come and learn about nature. She said if it were used as a camp the money could be used for things needed in the City or be given to cancer or other disease foundations. Ms. Dee said Council should put themselves in the Farms position and asked them if they would like to be torn down.

Kristina St. Clair, 24569 Old Orchard, said the Fuerst Farm was a beautiful part of Novi's heritage and showed the contrast between Novi's past and our future. She said there were so many uses for the barns, like community theaters, concerts and expositions. She said the Fuerst sisters were very kind to give us their land for educational purposes. Novi now has a wonderful education system and we should be very thankful to the sisters. She said the Fuerst Farm commemorates their gift to the City and students such as herself. Ms. St. Clair said she understood a portion of that property was to be leveled off to form a parking lot and it would be a disappointing to see such a fate befall the Fuerst Farm. She said if there would be any way to trade the Fuerst Farm or to sell it to the City so it would be safe she thought it would make a lot of people happy. She encouraged Council to represent the interest of the community indicated by the petitions. She said it was an overwhelming positive response. We don't want another parking lot we want the farm.

Ricky Dee 24766 Applecrest, said he had heard talk about destroying the Fuerst Farm. He said if Council's favorite land mark was going to be torn down what would they do. Mr. Dee said he would fight for what he believed in and wanted. He said the Fuerst Farm was an historic land mark and could be used for all sorts of recreational events. He asked that Council save the Fuerst Farm for the rest of Novi.

Daniel St. Clair, 24569 Old Orchard, said he believed that the farm should be saved because the Fuerst sisters gave it to the school to be used for educational purposes and he didn't think that a parking lot was very educational. He said the farm could be used for a community theater or a park and the house was very nice and could be used for a school, the City and Novi Jaycees could use it for both meetings and offices. He said it would benefit both the City and the school and there was already enough parking even for the shows they have. He said because of the construction there are approximately 200 places to park that are being used up now. He said as the City Council they could be a great help and asked that the Fuerst Farm be saved.

Mayor McLallen said that Council would consider their issue at the appropriate time by May and would try to keep them informed and thanked all for coming. She said she was glad they were getting involved in their City and thanked them for their time.

John Nelson, president of the Novi Police Officers Association said the Novi Police Officers Association had been in contract negotiations with the City of Novi for over two years. He said they had been working without a contract since July 1, 1993. He asked if during the past two years had there been one instance where the safety of the public and our citizens had been placed in jeopardy due to the contract negotiations. Mr. Nelson said the answer was no. He said Novi was one of the few cities which required their police officers to have Bachelors degrees prior to application. He said as a result Novi's police officers are some of the highest educated and most professional police officers in the State of Michigan.

Mr. Nelson asked if during nearly two years without a contract had there been one instance where there was a work slow down or blue flu. He said the answer was no. He asked if the ladies and gentlemen present could think of any other organization, public or private, where during two years of contract negotiations and working without a contract the employees would cause less of a commotion then they had. He said he didn't think so. Mr. Nelson said there may have been some internal problems which resulted in failure to communicate between the City and the Department but he believed the problems had been solved. He said the labor dispute had been presented to an arbitrator under Michigan Public Act 312. He said they had requested two things in arbitration, 3% pay raise to keep pace with inflation and that if a retirement window were opened for any other City employees that eligible members of the department would be able to participate also.

Mr. Nelson said the City came to arbitration with seven items. The major two items were a change from their current 12 hour shift to an 8 hour shift and a decrease in pay of 7.5% He said the 12 hour schedule was originally proposed by the City to the Union in 1988 to increase the number of officers on patrol within the City of Novi, to decrease the use of sick time and to decrease the cost of overtime for the City of Novi. He said the contract provisions allowed either side to revert back to the eight hour shift if they were unhappy and neither did so. He said during arbitration hearings the City Administration stated several things which are in error either intentionally or unintentionally:

1. That officers are paid a guaranteed four hours of overtime each and every pay.

Mr. Nelson said that statement was incorrect. He said they do not get paid overtime until they work their scheduled 84 hours.

2. That the change to the 8 hour shift is a return to the 8 hour shift which was in effect prior to 1988.

Mr. Nelson said this was also incorrect. He said with the proposed schedule, the officers would have permanent days off and this is a novel ideal for the City of Novi Police Department. He said at no time during their prior 8 hour shift or the current 12 hour shift had they ever had permanent days off. He said each and every officer regardless of seniority always had the opportunity to have a weekend off once a month at the very minimum. He said under the proposed schedule junior officers, officers with low seniority, and new officers would work approximately ten to fifteen years without a weekend off.

3. That the change to the 8 hour schedule would be more conducive to an officers family life.

Mr. Nelson asked how this could be true. He said each officer would be working 78 more days per year in a modern society with spouses working. He said their spouses work a traditional 9 to 5 job, five day work week with weekends off. He said three quarters of the officers work evenings and afternoons with no weekends off. When would an officer spend any of that time with his family.

4. That the 8 hour shift would result in better delivery of police service to the community.

He said how can this be true. Mr. Nelson said a return to the 8 hour schedule means that each officer would spend 104 hours less on patrol a year. He said department wide that would be 3,120 hours less an officer would be patrolling your streets, your subdivision and your community. He asked if Council was willing to hire two new police officers just to replace those hours that they already had. He said the department was currently understaffed as it was working the 12 hour shift. Mr. Nelson said even the Federal Government recognized that and gave the department two positions under the Crime Bill.

5. Administration had stated there had been problems with training and court time under the 12 hour shift.

Mr. Nelson said while they had been working the 12 hour shift they had been flexing their schedule and changing their days off to avoid the City paying overtime. He said they had been violating their own contract in an attempt to keep the 12 hour shifts. He said with the proposed schedule, with 78 less days off per year, their days off were much more precious and they would abide to the contract to the letter.

6. That no comparable communities work the 12 hour shift.

Mr. Nelson said that was incorrect. He said both Plymouth Township and Canton Township, directly to our south, work the 12 hour shift. He said the City of Westland just went to the 12 hour shift and everyone was happy so far there.

7. That cities working 10 and 12 hour shifts are reverting back to the 8 hour shift.

Mr. Nelson said that was true, Pontiac and Ypsilanti both left the 10 and 12 hour shift and went to an 8 hour shift. However, in both situations the cities had found that it was economically prohibitive and have since gone back to the 10 and 12 hour shift.

Mr. Nelson stated that as Council was aware the City of Novi had apparently prevailed in arbitration. He said the members of the Novi Police Officers Association will abide by the arbitration decision. However, they want Council to realize they have hurt not only their employees but their families as well. He said they would be now working 78 more days per year while earning 7.5% less. He said as a matter of fact, they might end up owing the City some money. He said they also realized that for the City Administration to go into arbitration demanding these changes, they must have, at least, had tacit approval.

Mr. Nelson respectfully requested that Council require the City Administration to reopen negotiations with the department on these two issues. He said it was Council's choice, it was within Council's right to do so and they humbly requested that they do.

Colleen Kohls stated that she was the wife of a Novi Police Officer. She stated she would like to speak to the benefits of the 12 hour shifts to the City. She said Novi Police Officers currently work 12 hour shifts with every other weekend off. Mrs. Kohls said last year there were 27 police officers working the road patrol. She said due to the 12 hour shifts they provided 2,808 extra hours of police protection to the citizens of Novi. She said going back to the 8 hour shifts Novi would need to hire 1.35 officers to provide the same protection that they are currently receiving. She said by using the 12 hour shifts, as compared to the 8 hour shifts, the City would save the taxpayers money. She said they would save money by reducing the contributions that the City made into the extra officers benefits. She said the City would save $18,792 for a full time officer at top pay by not making contributions to medicare, social security tax, workmens compensation, pension, post retirement health care, life insurance, health insurance, dental, and long term and short term disability. She said multiply $18,792 by the 1.35 extra officers and the City would save $25,369 of taxpayers money. Mrs. Kohls said by remaining on the 12 hour shifts money could also be saved by not needing uniforms and equipment for additional officers. She said the new schedule that will be used by the City of Novi would not give a weekend off to 15 officers with the least seniority. She said only the top 14 officers would have weekends off and that 15 officers would only have 26 out of 52 weekends. She said currently with the 12 hour shifts all road patrol officers have every other weekend off. She said that was from the top seniority officer to the newly hired officer. She said it was a fair and equitable system. She said the newly hired officer would not see a weekend off for at least 10 years under the new system.

Mrs. Kohl said this is the 1990's where both spouses work to provide a better life for their families. She said most spouses of police officers have normal jobs, Monday through Friday, 9 to 5 with weekends off. This meant that the bottom half of the road patrol would not have any weekends off to spend with their spouse and family. She said she hoped Council was aware that the divorce rate for police officers was above the national average. She asked what Council thought the new schedule was going to do to the home life of the road patrol officers where they would not have a weekend off with their wife or husband. She felt Council would see the divorce rate go up for Novi Officers or officers would quit their jobs to go to another city that cares for its employees.

Mrs. Kohl said Novi had invested a lot of tax dollars into every Novi officer. She said the Novi officers care for the City and its citizens and it would be a shame to see Novi tax dollars go to waste by trained officers quitting and going to another city using Novi resources.

Mrs. Kohl said the Chief of Police stated to the arbitrator that the department could better facilitate the employees needs for time off and it would give officers 104 less hours worked a year and more hours at home with their families. She said this was not true. She said an officer may work 104 more hours a year but in return they have an extra 78 days off a year to spend with their families. She said by working 104 hours less the City requested a 7.2% pay cut. She asked how this would improve the officers home life. She said if Council was concerned with saving the taxpayers money or the morale of the police officers, she was asking Council to reinstate the 12 hour shifts for them, the families of the police officers, so they can enjoy the quality time that they have as a family as a whole.

Sherrie Lauria, police officer's wife, stated that her husband had been an officer with Novi for about 7 1/2 years working 12 hour midnights. She said her husband loved it and had loved his job since she had met him. She said she was a nurse and also worked 12 hour midnight shifts. Mrs. Lauria said for them to find time together, they have their shifts working out with the same days off and the same weekends off which rotates every other weekend. She said if her husband went to the 8 hour shift she would never see him. Mrs. Lauria said she would have maybe one day off every three weeks the way it would work out because she rotates with him now. She said with her husband having lower seniority than most he would have no weekends off.

Mrs. Lauria said when she met her husband and up until about two weeks ago when all this started he loved his job and everything he did for the City of Novi. He was excited to go to work and wanted to do everything he could. He always said he would never change jobs and he loved it here because of everything the City did for him and how happy he was with his schedule. Mrs. Lauria said that was not so any more. She said she had seen a very, very big change in his whole overall excitement to go to work and the whole morale had changed, his and everyone else's she had seen. She said it was a shame to see that because it is very difficult to find something that you love to do and have something like this change your whole attitude. She said her husband felt very, very betrayed by the City. She wished the City would reconsider the move to 8 hour shifts and the decrease in pay and realize how many lives this would affect, not only the police officers but their families.

Mrs. Lauria said the City may believe this will help everyone but she didn't see how having unhappy and dissatisfied police officers patrolling the City would benefit anyone.

Harry Avagian, 1623 West Lake, said he would like to speak as a private citizen. He said last Thursday evening he had an opportunity to attend the budget session that had on its agenda the police budget. He said he made remarks relative to the need to look carefully at the personnel needs of the department. He said with the rapid commercial and residential growth the City has experienced, with new roads being planned and additional developments on drawing boards now it is time to look very seriously at the personnel and staffing needs of this department. He wanted to piggyback remarks that were made by the individuals who came before him to the podium this evening.

Mr. Avagian said he has had, as president of the Lakes Area Residents Association, to work closely with the north end officers in the lakes area. He said while he spoke for himself he was sure that many members of the association had been very impressed with what community policing had done in their end of town. He had no reason to believe that that kind of fine work was not done all over Novi. He said it was true that Novi required some of the highest qualifications to become a Novi patrol person. He said it was important that Council bear in mind that these men and women, he said he wouldn't say they put their life on the line and all those emotional kinds of statements because we know that already, but what was not understood was we don't read in the newspapers about blue flu in the City of Novi. He said we don't read in the newspapers about the morale problem that may exist within the department, not just in the last 2, 3, or four years, but each time a contract was up for renewal. He said these men and women have held their head high, they have done their job and they have been a credit to our community. He asked Council to award them in a commensurate manner.

Chris Pargoff, Novi Forester, stated that Novi had been named Tree City U.S.A. by the National Arbor Day Foundation and that it was the fourth year that Novi had received this recognition. He said the Tree City U.S.A. program was sponsored by the National Arbor Day Foundation in cooperation with the U.S.D.A. Forest Service and the National Association of State Foresters. He said to become a Tree City U.S.A. a community must meet four standards, a tree border department, City Tree Ordinance, comprehensive community forestry program and an Arbor Day observation.

Mr. Pargoff said John Rosnow, National Arbor Day Foundation president said "Trees make a world of difference in our communities. Trees have long been recognized for the beauty and the value they lend to our homes, neighborhoods, parks and business areas. At the same time those trees conserve energy, clean the air, protect rivers and streams and provide homes for wildlife in our towns and cities. An effective community forestry program is an ongoing process of renewal and improvement. A program of tree planting and care that continues through the years."

Mr. Pargoff said the Tree City U.S.A. award was an excellent indication that there was a solid foundation for that process to improve. Mr. Pargoff said the Arbor Day Celebration is on April 24, at 7:00 p.m. at the Civic Center on the parking lot side of the complex before the Council session.

Cindy Gronigan stated she represented the Garfield Road Homeowners Association and said that they met here March 20 in regards to the MDOT project. She wanted to thank the City Council and the State of Michigan for reviewing their concerns and being prompt in their response addressing those issues. She asked the City Council to issue the mining permit for the MDOT Mitigation Contract on Garfield Road. She also reiterated that they were looking forward to the project without any incident and thought with everyone working together that would happen. She said she was glad the project was coming to Garfield Road and hoped that we didn't lose sight of why they were doing this.

George Zervos, Garfield Road, passed out pictures to Council and asked that they be very careful because the pictures showed a body of water that was very close to the mining area. He said for insurance and so there are no litigation problems he was asking them to be very careful because he didn't want to lose that body of water. He said it had happened before because of mining. He asked the Council to look into this and be sure the homework was done on this area so this body of water wouldn't be lost. He suggested that maybe a bond issue should be secured for this. He wanted Council to be aware it could happen and to understand that if the water level went down it could be a very touchy subject, if they lose their pond. He said it was roughly 20 to 35 feet deep and if they hit the proper vein of water it could be lost.

Diana Dorshe said she heard about this meeting from her neighbor and didn't have enough time to prepare. She felt it was important to not put this off any longer. She was speaking in regard to Protective Services and Child Abuse Laws. She said it came at a good time tonight with so many police officers being present. She said many worked very carefully with her as she was involved in an incident herself. She said the case was dismissed, many of the officers were very understanding, and many people tried to explain our laws. She said the difference between an officer judgement call verses the Law. She said if she patted her child on the shoulder she could be prosecuted according to one officer who repeated this many times but was corrected by so many other officers that said she wouldn't be.

Mrs. Dorshe said her incident was very humiliating and she felt she needed to protect her child and not go into it even though she would love to. She said she talked with Novi's two lieutenants. She had two teenage boys and what she feared was that it would be very easy for one of them to call this summer and say she grounded him and stood by the door because she didn't want him to leave and they got into a push fight. She talked to the Senator, Child Abuse people, Protective Services and the Youth Officer and this kind of thing could be treated from one extreme to the other. She thought it was important because we all have children in this community and it was a real insult to her. Mrs. Dorshe said what she was guilty of was being the most perfect parent that could be imagined. She felt that the law needed to be looked at and talked about much more carefully.

Rick Booms, Garfield Road, said Ms. Gronigan already mentioned that MDOT had been very cooperative with them and if they did follow through with the intent of their letter of April 3 he thought things would work out fine on Garfield Road. He asked if Consent Agenda Item #20 which related to the speed limit on Garfield Road would be tied together with the approval of the M-5 permit tonight.

Mayor McLallen explained that a Council Member would have to pull it from the agenda in order to do that.

Jean Ryker, 21591 Garfield Road, said the pictures were of her back yard and they had been working on it for 15 years. She said it used to slope off about 50 feet into a gravel pit and the pictures are what it looked like now. She said she welcomed the wetlands but was concerned about the existing wetlands. She said in the Novi News a reporter stated after the last meeting that "some of the residents have concerns over dots of ponds." She said there was approximately 10 acres of water behind her house and if the wetlands was the issue she was hoping that they would all be protected, the ones existing and the ones that are coming in.

Mick Boudre said he was grateful that Council listened to their concerns. He wanted to make sure Council kept themselves in a position to enforce them. He was not sure of the legalities but asked that if Council gave the mining permit to make sure the mining permit was tied into those concerns so once the permit was given they didn't lose the concessions. He said Council obviously agreed with them and he wasn't saying MDOT was going to cheat but things like that have happened.

Ray Meyris, Garfield Road, said if the road comes in and the project goes through we will have a road in front of our house. He said there are neighbors down the road that won't have a road and they would be interrupted by construction too. He said it was probably only 1/4 of a mile and asked the City to consider paving the last 1/4 mile and then the City wouldn't have to do anything to maintain that portion as a gravel road. He didn't think it would cost that much to take it from where MDOT was going to turn in heading east down to 9 Mile Road. He said there are people who are living down there who would really be inconvenienced by this and yet they would get no benefit. He said they would get all the dust and dirt but no road. Mr. Meyris asked the City to pave this short distance and the money they would save in the maintenance of the road over a few years would pay for the road itself.

1. Approval of Minutes, Special Meeting of February 13, Special

Meeting of February 27, Special Meeting of March 9, Regular

Meeting of March 6, Special Meeting of March 6, Special

Meeting of March 20.

2. Approval of Revised City Manager Review Form

3. Approval to prepare draft agreement between the City and the

sole bidder, Finkbeiner, Pettis & Strout, Inc. for

construction engineering services associated with the Novi

Road Signalization Project

4. Resolution - 1994 Tri Party Agreement - 14 Mile & Decker

Road Improvements

WHEREAS, the City of Novi had requested that certain

improvements to Fourteen Mile Road at Decker Road be included

within the 1994 Tri-Party Program; and,

WHEREAS, said improvements consist of constructing turning

lanes and traffic signal improvements; and,

WHEREAS, actual costs for the improvements total $72,960.41; and,

WHEREAS, the Agreement between the City of Novi and the Road

Commission for Oakland County reduces the parties'

responsibilities, costs, and reimbursement percentages to

written form.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Clerk

be authorized to sign the Road Commission for Oakland County

Road Improvement Agreement for RCOC Project #43231 on behalf

of the City of Novi.

5. Approval of Non-Motorized Transportation Facilities Agreement

between the City and the Road Commission for Oakland County

6. Resolution - Request for Permit for Memorial Day Parade

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Bruce D. Jerome is hereby

authorized to make application to the Board of County Road

Commissioners, Oakland County, Michigan on behalf of the City

of Novi in the County of Oakland, Michigan for the necessary

permit to:

Hold a "Memorial Day Parade" on Monday, May 29, 1995 from

10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. on Novi Road from Crescent Boulevard

to Ten Mile Road and Ten Mile Road from Novi Road west to the

Novi Civic Center (45175 Ten Mile Road), and that the City of

Novi in the County of Oakland, Michigan will faithfully ful-

fill all permit requirements, and shall save harmless, indemnify, defend and represent the Board against any and all claims for bodily injury or property damage, or any other claim arising out of or related to operations authorized by such permit as issued.

7. Resolutions - Acceptance of Easements

a. Wixom Road - Highway Improvements - Elizabeth Petrait -

$3,000

WHEREAS, present conditions in the City of Novi, Oakland

County, Michigan, necessitate the improvement of Wixom

Road in the City of Novi; and

WHEREAS, proposed plans showing said improvement have been

prepared by the City Engineers; and

WHEREAS, it has been determined that said improvement is

necessary for the use and benefit of the public; and

WHEREAS, in order to construct said improvement, it is

necessary that the City acquire a Highway Easement over the

parcel described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto, premises

situated in the City of Novi, County of Oakland, State of

Michigan.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City purchase said

deed, a copy of Highway Easement is attached hereto as

Exhibit "A", for the sum of Three Thousand and no/100----

Dollars ($3,000.00), the amount established as just compen-

sation for the acquisition of the property, based upon an

appraisal of the property in accordance with the Uniform

Condemnation Procedures Act, MCL 213.51, et. seq.

b. Michigan Cat - Sidewalk Easement - Michigan Cat - Gift

WHEREAS, Michigan Cat, is the Owner of certain real property

located in the City of Novi, County of Oakland, State of

Michigan, as described in a Sidewalk Easement attached hereto

and made a part hereof; and

WHEREAS, Owner desires to voluntarily convey (said property;

the rights setforth in said easement) to the City of Novi for

Public purposes; and

WHEREAS, the City has determined that said conveyance is in the publics interest and benefit.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City accepts abso-

lute delivery of the Sidewalk Easement attached hereto.

c. Decker Road - Highway Easement - Maple Point Assoc. -

Gift

WHEREAS, Maple Pointe Associates, is the Owner of certain

real property located in the City of Novi, County of Oakland,

State of Michigan, as described in a Highway & Utility Ease- ment attached hereto and made a part hereof; and

WHEREAS, Owner desires to voluntarily convey (said property;

the rights setforth in said easement) to the City of Novi

for public purposes; and

WHEREAS, the City has determined that said conveyance is in

the publics interest and benefit.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City accepts

absolute delivery of the Highway & Utility Easement attached

hereto.

8. Adoption of Ordinance 95-149.02 - Liquor License Regulations

II Reading - AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 3-15 OF THE NOVI

CODE OF ORDINANCES TO REVISE THE CRITERIA FOR TRANSFERS OF

EXISTING LIQUOR LICENSES.

9. Approval of Traffic Control Order 95-3 - No Parking on both

sides of Eleven Mile Road between Clark Street & Beck Road

10. Traffic Control Order 95-5 - Eastbound Ford Way Drive to

stop at Midway Drive

11. Award bid for dust control to Bay Dust Control in the amount

of $.295 per gallon

12. Award bid for asphalt emulsion to Highway Maintenance and

Construction in the amount of $1.55 per gallon

13. Award bid for water service materials to Etna Supply in

the amount of $46,063.25

14. Approval of Change Order to Bradford street tree planting in

the amount of $2,760.00

15. Award bid for Mobile Stage to Century Industries in the amount

of $60,987.00 and budget amendment for same

16. Resolutions - Sidewalk Grant Applications

a. North side of Ten Mile Road between Taft and Novi Roads

b. South side of Ten Mile Road between Taft and Novi Roads

c. Twelve Mile Road between Haggerty and Meadowbrook

WHEREAS, the City of Novi acknowledges the need for non-

motorized transportation facilities, and

WHEREAS, the City of Novi has as one of its' goals, the

development of adequate facilities to accommodate pedestrian

and bicycle travel through the City, and

WHEREAS, the City of Novi has engaged in a comprehensive

program to provide facilities for pedestrians and bicycles,

and

WHEREAS, the construction of such non-motorized facilities are

important to the quality of life in Novi, and

WHEREAS, the construction of such facilities is consistent

with the Declaration of Policy: Intermodal Surface Trans-

portation Efficiency Act, and

WHEREAS, the Michigan Department of Transportation's Trans-

portation Enhancement Activities program has been identified as a funding source for qualifying projects in the State of

Michigan, and

WHEREAS, the non-motorized facility project proposed by the

City of Novi is a qualifying project,

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Novi requests

that funds from the Michigan Transportation Enhancement

Activities program be dedicated for the completion of the

submitted projects within the City of Novi.

17. Condemnation Resolution - Doice and Joanne Ward - Eleven Mile

Paving

18. Resolution and Offer to Purchase - Donald & Leonabelle Hogue - 13 Mile Project

WHEREAS, present conditions in the City of Novi, Oakland

County, Michigan, necessitate improvement of Thirteen Mile

Road near Meadowbrook Road in the City of Novi; and

WHEREAS, proposed plans showing said relocation and improve-

ment have been prepared; and

WHEREAS, it has been determined that said relocation and

improvement is necessary for the use and benefit of the

public; and

WHEREAS, in order to construct said improvement, it is

necessary that the City acquire fee simple title to and

easements rights in certain real estate described in and

attached to the original minutes;

A. Fee simple interest in certain parcels of land described

in and attached to the original minutes

B. A temporary construction easement including the right to

move men and equipment on and through, the right to store

materials and excavated dirt and the right to remove vege-

tation and alter the underlying land in, over, upon and

through the following described premises situated in the

City of Novi, Oakland County, State of Michigan, to wit:

See attachment to original minutes.

WHEREAS, it has been determined to be in the best interest of

the City of Novi to offer to purchase the subject property from the owners of such property.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Mayor of the City is

hereby authorized to execute, on behalf of the City, a good

faith offer to purchase, a copy of which is attached hereto as

Exhibit "1", calling for the payment of $15,050.00 for the

subject property. The above amount has been established as

just compensation for the acquisition of the property, based

upon an appraisal of the property.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that after the execution of the good

faith offer to purchase by the Mayor, the good faith offer to purchase shall be submitted to the owners of the property.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that all resolutions and parts of

resolutions insofar as they conflict with the provisions of

this Resolution be and the same hereby are rescinded.

19. Traffic Control Order 95-4 - Eastbound Mystic Blvd. to stop

at Novi Road

20. Traffic Control Order 95-17 - Repeal of TCO 85-4 (30 MPH)

and Traffic Control Order 95-21 - 25 MPH on Garfield Road

21. Resolution - Budget Amendment - Library Network Hardware

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the following 1994-1995

budget amendment is authorized to provide for the additional

funds needed for the central site hardware and telecommuni-

cations costs for the Library Network.

LIBRARY FUND Increase

(Decrease)

CAPITAL OUTLAY $ 68,600

FUND BALANCE (68,600)

22. Request of Selective Group to connect Lot 8, Barclay Estates

to City Water System

Councilwoman Mason removed Items #2, 9, 17 and 19.

Councilman Mitzel removed Items #16A and B and Item #20 to place with Item #1 of the agenda.

Councilman Pope removed Item #3.

Councilman Schmid removed Item #22.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Toth

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason

That Consent Agenda Items # 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10,

11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16C, 18 and 21 be approved.

Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried unanimously

MATTERS FOR COUNCIL ACTION - PART I

1A. Resolution concerning the SMART Transit Authority.

WHEREAS, by adoption of Miscellaneous Resolution 95083, the

Oakland County Board of Commissioners has established a

Public Transportation Authority under PA 196 of 1986, as

amended, and

WHEREAS, in accordance with Act 196 and the Articles of

Incorporation, a political subdivision within the boundaries

of Oakland County may be released from the Authority and

withdraw from the Metropolitan Area of the Authority by

utilizing the procedures set forth in Section 8 of the Act,

MCL 124.458,

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Novi does

hereby withdraw from the Public Transportation Authority

created by the Oakland County Board of Commissioners through

the adoption of Resolution #95-83, on March 30, 1995.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Novi takes this

action to withdraw from membership of the Public Transpor-

tation Authority prior to the 30th (thirtieth) day following

the date the Public Transportation Authority was appointed

and the Articles of Incorporation published.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that by passage of this resolution,

the City of Novi does hereby withdraw prior to the levy of

any tax being assessed upon the City of Novi and attests

that there is no payment of tax owing from the City of Novi

to the Public Transportation Authority.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that copies of this Resolution be sent to Lynn D. Allen, Oakland County Clerk, Larry Crake, Chairman of the Oakland County Board of Commissioners, Roy Rewold, Chairman of the Act 196 Oakland County Transportation Authority, Michael Duggan, Interim General Manager of SMART, and Matthew Wirgau, Chairman of the Board of SMART.

Councilman Pope stated in the packet Commissioner Schmid gave to Council there was a Miscellaneous Resolution that had "DRAFT"

written on it and it was the document that Councilman Pope would be referring to.

Councilman Pope said the Resolution allowed Council to exempt themselves from the SMART system. He said using that resolution he would like to put in the City of Novi any where on the resolution where it says "Township/VIllage/City". He also wanted to add a

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Resolution shall be sent to Lynn Allen, Oakland County Clerk, Larry Crake, Chairman of the Oakland County Board of Commissioners, Roy Rewold, Chairman of the Act 196 Oakland County Transportation Authority, Michael Duggan, Interim General Manager of SMART, and Matthew Wirgau, Chairman of the Board of SMART.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Pope

Seconded by Councilman Toth

That the Resolution be adopted inserting the words City of Novi in the appropriate places and add BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that copies of this Resolution be sent to Lynn D. Allen, Oakland County Clerk, Larry Crake, Chairman of the Oakland County Board of Commissioners, Roy Rewold, Chairman of the Act 196 Oakland County Transportation Authority, Michael Duggan, Interim General Manager of SMART, and Matthew Wirgau, Chairman of the Board of SMART.

DISCUSSION

Councilman Pope stated that Council should not prop up a failing system. He said the government should be able to do the things it does best and that's not very much. He said if you looked at the Audience Participation tonight and the contrast of the audience's concern about the Fuerst Farm and preserving it and then listen to a governmental official pleading to save a system that doesn't work and nobody cared about. He said there was not the same kind of interest from watching the residents. He said the best example of why this system failed was Novi Manufacturing which Mr. Kriewall provided in the packets. He said a company called Staff Solutions didn't even use the SMART system to bring out contract employees to work at Novi Manufacturing or one of the other facilities. He said there are private options that have to be used.

Councilman Pope said Commissioner Schmid had done a great job on this issue. He said the Commission only gets major issues like this once in a while but she had done a great job. He said the biggest argument that could be made would be to allow the voters to decide and then those Commissioners who made that argument would have to justify spending a half a million dollars on a special election. He said to let the voters decide costs money and why would they prop up a failing system. He said this money won't be our tax dollars at the City level for the election but it would be County dollars and we pay into that also. He urged Council to adopt the resolution and exempt Novi from the system. He said the biggest fear was that we would lose $25,000 in senior citizen transportation dollars. He said there was no way Council should ask the taxpayers to pay $450,000 to get $25,000 back.

Councilman Mitzel asked Mr. Fried if he had reviewed the resolution and Mr. Fried said he had and it was in proper form.

Yes (6-Pope, Toth, No (1-Mitzel) Motion carried

Mason, Schmid,

Crawford, McLallen)

1. Approval of the Permit for M-5 Wetland Mitigation Project

Mayor McLallen said the packet information indicated that the permit was in order and the issues discussed at the last meeting had been addressed. She said discussion this evening indicates that the community where this project would be placed supported the project and their concerns had been addressed.

Councilwoman Mason asked Mr. Fried regarding the letter from the Department of Transportation it said "MDOT would maintain ownership of the property until it is sold or relinquished to a state agency, local municipality, environmental group or any other interested party." She said her concern was that the City of Novi had to put so many dollars into this, is that correct.

Mr. Fried said the City agreed to put so many dollars into it.

Councilwoman Mason asked why the City didn't have part ownership in this.

Mr. Fried said our dollars were a contribution to the fund. There was not an ownership of any property within acquiring this property.

Councilwoman Mason said she believed it was. She said when it was talked about it was X amount of dollars to buy the property, this is the City of Novi's amount and she thought it was $28,000.

Mayor McLallen asked Mr. Fried if that involved us in ownership of the property. She said this had to do with relinquishment of the ownership of the property.

Mr. Fried said this had to do with the permit alone. He said all it dealt with was the granting of the permit. He said these are the conditions with which the Department of Transportation agreed to be bound by in the granting of the permit.

Tony Nowicki, Department of Public Services, said he believed it was an Act 51 requirement. He said two thirds of whatever the percentage is is required for a project that takes place within the community and it doesn't have to do with ownership of the property. He said that property was vested, the title vested in the Michigan Department of Transportation. He said that was the City's contribution for having the project constructed.

Councilwoman Mason said it was our contribution to have the project here and what we were told was the property was more expensive mitigating in the City of Novi as the majority of Council wanted and that was why the City had to put in $60,000.00. She said if we put in $60,000.00 because the property was more expensive because it is located in Novi, where it belongs, then she didn't understand why the total ownership belonged to MDOT when the City had a $60,000.00 investment.

Mr. Nowicki said the provision that required Novi to fund a certain percentage of the project did not speak to property ownership or any rights in that respect. He said it was the City's contribution towards the project.

Mr. Kriewall said that was not what the contract said. He said we have a contract and entered into an agreement and it did not speak to the ownership of the property.

Mr. Fried said the matter before the Council was the issue and grant of this permit and not the interpretation of the contract that Councilwoman Mason wants. He said they would review the contract and send in an opinion to the Council in regard to the questions that she raised and have the Council review it at that time.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Pope

Seconded by Councilman Schmid

That the permit be approved and the waivers requested by MDOT in the April 3, 1995 letter be granted as well as a waiver of the requirement of the ordinance to spray for insects. Approval of permit is subject to adherence to C. 1-6 of the April 3rd letter from MDOT regarding the Garfield Homeowners Association concerns. The Department of Public Services to notify the Garfield Homeowners Association and the Garfield Road residents of any meetings regarding this project.

DISCUSSION

Councilman Toth said on Page 2 of the letter from MDOT, Item D assumed that work would begin in mid August, 1995. He said further on in the closing of the letter they assumed that the completion date of the project was May, 1999. Furthermore, under Item D it indicated that they would install a traffic signal at Garfield and 8 Mile Road. He said this traffic signal might be in operation for 4 plus years. He said it stated that it was a temporary traffic signal and Councilman Toth wanted to know the difference between a temporary traffic signal and 4 plus some years and a regular traffic signal that might be up there for four years. He asked what our involvement was in this.

Mr. Nowicki said he believed this traffic signal was to be up for the duration of the trucking operations and then it could be removed.

Councilman Toth asked if it was just for the excavating of the material or for the project completion.

Mr. Nowicki said for the trucking operations and not for the entire project. He said a traffic signal wouldn't be needed if just routine checking of the site was required in the latter 5 years of the project. He said that would just be one vehicle going in and out to monitor the wetland growth.

Councilman Toth said there would be trucks bringing in planting materials and so forth and there was no need for a light.

Mr. Nowicki said as long as there was activity and materials coming in in bulk the traffic signal would be operational.

Councilman Toth said they would be doing plantings until May of 1997. He said they would be excavating and bringing in materials and asked Mr. Nowicki if he was saying that traffic light would be there.

Dave Wilson, MDOT, said the intent of the temporary traffic signal was primarily for the trucking operation to remove the 400,000 yards of material off site. He said bringing in planting material would be minimal traffic compared to the trucking operation. He said the intent was that when the trucking operation was completed the traffic signal would come down.

Councilman Toth asked if he considered it to be a safety problem after that point.

Mr. Wilson said their traffic engineers did not feel it was a safety problem.

Councilman Toth asked what the difference was between a traffic signal and a temporary traffic signal.

Mr. Wilson said it was a traffic signal that would not be there permanently.

Councilman Toth asked if it would be a fully operational traffic light that would normally be seen at a corner.

Mr. Wilson said it was and that a sensor would be put in the pavement of Garfield Road and the signal would remain green on 8 Mile Road for through traffic. He said when a vehicle pulled up to the intersection of 8 Mile and Garfield it would activate the sensor which would sequence a signal to stop traffic on 8 Mile and allow traffic to pull out from Garfield onto 8 Mile.

Councilman Toth asked Mr. Nowicki if in his experience on other projects the temporary traffic lights were kept longer than just for the excavating projects or until the project ended.

Mr. Nowicki said the extended completion date was for the establishment of the planting materials that they would put in. He said for a couple of the years the only thing the contractor would be doing would be cultivating the plants that were planted two years previous to that. He asked if that was correct.

A representative of MDOT said that was correct He said they would come in in April of 1997 and all the planting would be done then. He said there would be 4,800 tree seedlings planted and then after that it would be inspected and monitored for two years. He said they would come back the following spring to replace any seedlings that had died or were unacceptable. Then there would be that growing season and another fall inspection and the last replacement planting would be May 10, 1999. He said there would be minimal traffic, probably a landscape truck hauling seedlings.

Councilman Mitzel said in addition to the variances for the mining permit they would also be asking for the exemption to not have to spray the water for insect control.

Mr. Nowicki said that was correct and it was the one particular area that the letter had missed addressing.

Councilman Mitzel asked if there was merit in Council looking at the ordinance for revisions so in the future when wetland mitigation projects came in it would be more crafted towards wetland mitigation projects.

Mr. Nowicki said he thought that was a good idea. He said in the very first part of the ordinance there are specific areas which would exempt specific operations from this particular ordinance. He said we might want to look at that and include wetland mitigation as a possible exemption from this ordinance. He said it didn't quite fit the type of operation that would be conducted.

Councilman Mitzel said he would like to refer that to Ordinance Review Committee in the future. He thanked MDOT for working with the City to finalize the agreement.

Councilman Schmid wanted to commend MDOT. He said he often had disagreed with MDOT. He felt that the agreements that they made with the people on Garfield Road and the City of Novi was commendable. He said there was some fine cooperation of everyone concerned. He said he was confident that the gentleman that was talking about the water problems that they would certainly look after that carefully.

Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried unanimously

20. Traffic Control Order 95-17 - Repeal of TCO 85-4 (30 MPH) and Traffic Control Order 95-21 - 25 MPH on Garfield Road

Councilman Mitzel removed this Item because he had some concerns over the proposal. He absolutely agreed that 25 MPH during the construction where the homes were was very appropriate. His concern was that there was about a half mile stretch south of the homes from 8 Mile up to the homes that's through vacant farm land. He said this stretch was straight and a main shot and he was concerned if 25 were posted there when they got to the residential the 25 wouldn't mean as much. In other words, people tend to view the road and drive what the road conditions allow. He said if the road had no homes on it and it was straight and flat, post 25 and he felt it would take away from the meaning of 25 in the residential section. He said it had been documented with the Michigan State Police pamphlets that people drive 85th percentile and a speed limit can't just be arbitrarily posted.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Mitzel

That the speed limit change for Garfield Road be approved at 25 MPH in the residential area north to 9 Mile Road.

Motion died for lack of second.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Pope

Seconded by Councilman Crawford

That Traffic Control Order 95-17 and 95-21 be approved.

Yes (6) No (1-Mitzel) Motion carried

2. Extension of Final Preliminary Approval of Royal Crown Subdivision #6

Councilman Pope said he had asked JCK to answer a question regarding a mitigated wetlands site in this location that is currently landscaped but not functional. Councilman Pope asked Larry Wilkinson if he could help him out on this issue.

Larry Wilkinson said there was a mitigation area but this was an open space subdivision. He said there were mitigation areas throughout the subdivision and he thought 3 of the 4 were in Phases I and II. He said they didn't necessary correspond with wetland areas in the particular phases. He said the mitigation area was in place and was just graded late last fall. He said he was not aware if all the vegetation was inspected. He said they had consulting engineers inspect, over the years, all of the mitigation areas in Royal Crown and the reports were in Council's packets.

Councilman Pope said he didn't have the specific site location but there was a wetland mitigation very close to this side. He asked if he was aware of it.

Mr. Wilkinson said the creek runs very close.

Councilman Pope said they had dug it out last fall and the outlet drains had not been installed and it was not a functioning wetland mitigation at this point.

Mr. Wilkinson said he couldn't answer that question totally. He said last fall they did everything in regard to culverts and crossings that had to be done to comply with the wetlands permits. He said they would do everything, following the winter season, that they had to do to comply with the mitigation area. He said they did comply with everything that related to the DNR permit last fall and he thought that was confirmed on Council's report.

Councilman Pope asked if he was going to continue to comply with everything he had been asked to comply with.

Mr. Wilkinson said absolutely. He said it was his understanding that they had resolved the issues of relocation of the Edison lines and redesigning the swale and discussion of the silt fence to the property adjacent to Royal Crown #6.

Mayor McLallen agreed that was Council's understanding also.

Councilman Pope asked Mr. Kapelczak if there was a 5 year monitoring that JCK's office would handle when a wetland mitigation was done.

Mr. Kapelczak, JCK and Associates, said that was correct.

Councilman Pope asked how that was handled.

Mr. Kapelczak said Sue Tepatti or another designated wetland person would visit the site on an annual basis and that there were several in the City that they monitor. He said they would do them in the summer through the fall of the year because they are basically looking for plant material growths.

Councilman Pope asked if a written report was filed on their inspections.

Mr. Kapelczak said that there were and it was available on a yearly basis.

Councilman Pope asked if they stopped monitoring them after 5 years.

Mr. Kapelczak said that was correct.

Councilman Pope asked who paid for the monitoring.

Mr. Kapelczak said the developer paid up front with a fee.

Councilman Pope said up front with a fee and reimbursed each year they go out and check the location.

Mr. Kapelczak said yes on a percentage basis.

Councilman Pope said Mr. Wilkinson said he was going to follow the wetland mitigation and that he was not clear what site he was referring to. He asked Mr. Kapelczak if they would be inspecting to make sure that if the drains are not in properly now that they would be.

Mr. Kapelczak said that was correct.

Councilman Pope asked even without holding final site plan on it.

Mr. Kapelczak again responded that was correct and that there was a bond that was placed in effect also. He said it made sure that all the growth did occur.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Schmid

Seconded by Councilman Mitzel

To extend the Final Preliminary Plat approval for Royal Crown Subdivision #6 for one year.

Yes (6) No (1-Pope) Motion carried

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Pope

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason

That the Final Plat for Windridge Subdivision be approved.

Councilman Mitzel reminded the petitioner that the City had revised the Street Sign Ordinance last fall.

Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried unanimously

4. Final Plat Approval - Barclay Estates No. 2 Subdivision

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Toth

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason

That the Final Plat for Barclay Estates No. 2 Subdivision be approved subject to the consultants letters and conditions therefore.

DISCUSSION

Councilman Pope asked if it was appropriate to move Consent Agenda Item #22 which also deals with Barclay Estates subdivision.

Mayor McLallen said that would be most considerate.

Councilman Mitzel reminded the petitioner that the Street Sign Ordinance and the Street Tree Ordinance had been changed.

Yes (6) No (1-Pope) Motion carried

Mayor McLallen stated that Councilman Pope requested that Consent Item #22 be brought forward to this portion of the agenda. She said it was a request by the Selective Group to connect Lot #8 only in Barclay Estates No. 2 to City water. She said this subdivision came in after the moratorium and had experienced some trouble. She said there were supporting letters from both our department and Oakland County on this issue.

Councilman Pope said Councilman Schmid removed it and that he thought it would be convenient to address it at this time.

Councilman Schmid said he pulled this because after reading the information he wanted a clearer explanation as to what the problem was. He said he also wanted to know what the ramifications were.

Mr. Nowicki said there are three well logs that were provided by the developer in his letter and Council had his letter but the attachments were not with it. Mr. Nowicki apologized. He said the developer had provided them with well logs and a letter from the Oakland County Health Department indicating that for the health and safety of this particular lot that their recommendation was that they connect to the City's water system. Mr. Nowicki said apparently that particular lot had been experiencing problems. He said they had three well drilled and they were unable to get a well that would produce a quantity of water sufficient enough to provide the needs for the home. He said on that basis they recommended that this lot be able to connect to the City's water system. He said they would be scheduling a meeting with Oakland County Health Department that regulated the wells and see if there was a way to resolve that. Mr. Nowicki said presently all that was required was that they show proof that there is a well that is producing water. He said unfortunately there is no measurement for the quantity of water and the well permitting agency is Oakland County Health Department.

Councilman Schmid said his question was who checked this.

Mr. Nowicki said the County was the permitting agency for wells.

Councilman Schmid asked if anyone checked the well.

Mr. Nowicki said he believed the County did. He said the County's letter was not in the packets and he apologized again for the missing letter it was an oversight on his part. He said none the less the County did send a letter indicating that there were problems and that they recommended it be connected to the City's water system. He said this was the only lot that had this type of problem. He said Selective Group had a series of homes within that entire area tested for water and the rates of well producing and they were all sufficient and this was the only lot that was not. He said the only other alternative was large holding tanks in the basement, a lot of plumbing and that was not really a viable alternative.

Councilwoman Mason asked if these homes had holding tanks.

Mr. Nowicki said they did have a small one for their water and that they did have to have some kind of pressure tank for their wells. He said this well was only producing about 3 1/2 gallons per minute or hour however it was measured.

Councilwoman Mason said she wanted to mention to Councilman Schmid that unbelievably so the houses are put on property all over the northwest suburban area. She said the wells wee not put in until the house was built and so the letter said that from now on they would dig the well first. She said if the lot cannot provide sufficient pressure and a well would not work then they wouldn't sell that lot.

Mr. Nowicki said that had been modified somewhat. He said before Don Saven would issue a building permit he would make sure that they had something from Oakland County that indicated there was a source of water there.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Schmid

Seconded by Councilman Toth

That only Lot #8 of Barclay Estates be allowed to connect to the City water system per the restrictions of Mr. Nowicki's letter of April 6.

Councilwoman Mason asked if the water line was to the house.

Mr. Nowicki said the water line would be to that house.

Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried unanimously

15

Mayor McLallen said this project had been recommended to Council by the Planning Commission to grant the variance of this project bringing forward less than a 50,000 sq. ft. building. She said the Council needed to act on the variance on the size and the preliminary review of the site plan.

Clif Seiber said 1 1/2 years ago Council did grant preliminary site plan approval to Computer City who was going to occupy the new building located to the westerly portion of the site. He said the existing building was the existing location of the Fretter store. Mr. Seiber said the site plan before Council tonight was nearly identical and the only difference was that Fretter now plans to relocate its facilities from the existing building to the new building. He said the existing building may be occupied by a computer store but that had not been finalized at this point.

Mr. Seiber said the approval then had been an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance requiring additional parking for appliance stores and this site plan now complied in total with that requirement. He said they were requesting three things from City Council: waiver of the 50,000 sq. ft. minimum building requirement, approval of the PD3 Option and preliminary site plan approval.

Councilman Schmid asked Brandon Rogers, Planning Consultant, if the 50,000 sq. ft. building requirement had changed.

Mr. Rogers said looking at the June 20, 1985 agreement that said "the Fretter Appliance Company shall construct a second building of 32,000 sq. ft. connected by some mechanical grid work

on the old site plan." He said the 50,000 sq. ft. was an exception not a waiver or a variance granted by Council. He said it was analogous to that which Council granted for Scott Shuptrine. He said it was not possible to put and meet the retail shopping parking requirements of 50,000 in back of Fretter which is about 18,000. Mr. Rogers said it was a tight piece of property.

Councilman Schmid said in speaking to the tight piece of property, he asked if Fretter was moving from the front to the back.

Mr. Rogers said that was his understanding and Computer City was going to take the front building but he had heard now that it might be some other kind of computer building. He said the parking was met in total for both buildings on one site or since there are two sidwells each one can stand on its own.

Councilman Schmid asked what could be used in this area and if this was a PD3 Option.

Mr. Rogers said it was and the underlying zoning was RC, Regional Commercial, so any kind of indoor commercial enterprise could go in.

Councilman Schmid asked if the pole sign in front of Fretters would be removed.

Mr. Rogers said he would assume it would be.

Councilman Schmid asked him to check with the petitioner or developer and determine whether or not the Fretter Sign would be moved.

Mr. Rogers stated that the property between Karevich Dr. and Novi Road was owned by the City. He said it was part, more or less, of the right-of-way and he didn't know how the sign was allowed to be placed there. He felt that since Fretter was moving that sign should be removed.

Jack Homestead, Construction Manager for Fretter, stated that it was their wish to keep the pylon sign or ground sign in its present location because of the distance that they would be moving their building behind the existing building.

Councilman Schmid asked Mr. Fried if they could have the sign where it was presently located with a building to the rear.

Mr. Fried said there was an original understanding or agreement and he would have to read that to answer the question.

Councilman Schmid asked if any of the setbacks were being waived.

Mr. Rogers said only in one area because of the loading and shallowness of the depth of the property the 10 ft. green space on the back side was being waived in lieu of alternate green space. He said all the other green space was being provided. He said the ZBA had already given a degree of variance for the building setback from the south property line.

Councilman Schmid asked if the discussion with the planning commission regarding the building itself, the windows and so forth had been resolved.

Mr. Rogers said in his opinion it had and said the building facade plans were in Council packets. He said they were upgrading the Fretter building considerably with a design equal to the new Fretter building. He said the old Fretter building was rather mundane. He said they were adding windows, which was the problem. Mr. Rogers said a year ago he stood before Council and they had directed him to be sure they had windows on the Computer City building in the back. He said the only issue on facades was the new Fretter logo. He said they are involved with a firm out of Chicago and they have a lightening bolt arrow coming down and he was not pleased with that particular thing. He said it was in their logo and on their business cards but other than that he felt the signage was compatible. He said they would get into this at the time of final site plan review.

Councilman Schmid said it would have to meet the ordinances.

Mr. Rogers said they would. He said both buildings would be all brick on all sides, all roof appurtenances would be concealed and they had no variances on parking.

Councilman Schmid said his inclination would be not to vote for this because of the sign.

Mr. Fried said he would check it out and irrespective of how Councilman Schmid voted on this it was an issue that had to be resolved.

Mr. Rogers said there was one piece of research that Councilman Mitzel drew his attention to. For the record, Karevich Drive is a City street, a right-of-way. He said Karevich Drive was the north/south segment in front of the existing Fretter store. He said the road that goes along the north edge of this property was a City street 40 ft. wide right-of-way and it dead ended at the westerly end of this project. He said the road wraps around back to West Oaks Drive in front of Scott Shuptrine and that was a private drive owned by Ramco Gerchenson.

Councilman Schmid asked if the property where the sign sits was City property.

Mr. Rogers said it was.

Councilman Toth said the PD3 Option required a building envelope of 50,000 sq. ft. He said he thought the PD Option was a requirement for one building envelope and not a cluster of buildings.

Mr. Rogers said that was the way it read for a single entity, a single store like Dobbs Furniture building.

Councilman Toth said the waiver that the Council's granting an exception on would actually be an exception for the 50,000 sq. ft. for the new building plus the ability to put two building envelopes on the site. He said under the PD3 Option technically there was only one envelope on the site allowed. He asked if that was correct.

Mr. Rogers said that would be his understanding. He said in this agreement back in 1985 it was in accordance with the zoning exception granted to the Fretter Appliance Company by the Novi City Council. He said it went on to say "the Fretter Appliance Company shall construct a second building of 32,000 sq. ft." He said the existing Fretter building was approved back in 1984-85 at 18,000 sq. ft. He said it looked like it could have been one building but if they came in with a second building of 32,000 sq. ft. then they would have their 50,000.

Councilman Toth said he was on the Planning Commission at that time and Councilman Schmid was on the Council. He said at that time the 32,000 sq. ft. building was connected through a courtyard arrangement to their original building. It was one building envelope.

Mr. Rogers said it was proposed with a grid work as he recalled.

Councilman Toth said the original PD3 Option allowed the proprietor to move into a building and did not allow them to move into a second building. He said there was no condition in the PD3 Option that allowed movement within buildings.

Mr. Rogers said that was correct and that was why this entire PD3 including existing Fretter was being brought back before Council. He said they are changing the location from one building to another. Mr. Fried's office wrote an opinion on this back in December of 1993 that this would be a change in the PD3 agreement or approval. He said now we are going back to the original PD3 property which comprises 4.2 acres with a new program and a new plan. He said Fretter would switch and the buildings were not too different from what was earlier approved for Computer City U.S.A. in the back and Fretters staying at the front.

Councilman Toth asked if Mr. Rogers recommendations were for Council to approve two buildings of less then 50,000 sq. ft. on this site.

Mr. Rogers said Councilman Toth had a point because if they move out they are leaving a vacant 18,000 sq. ft. store for some other tenant. He thought it could be looked at that way. He said there could not be any more square footage put on the property and still be able to meet the parking under the new standards including handicapped.

Councilman Toth asked if Mr. Rogers was recommending approval of the PD3 Option.

Mr. Rogers said he was and that was an action Council had to approve and with this particular project the site plan had to come to Council also. After action by Council tonight the final site plan could be done Administratively.

Councilman Crawford asked how many parking spots there were.

Mr. Rogers said there was a requirement for 255 and they had met that requirement.

Councilman Crawford said that seemed awfully unreasonable particularly in relation to the Fretter store. He said he had been in the store several times and didn't think there had ever been more than 10 cars in the parking lot.

Mr. Rogers said parking could not be borrowed from West Oaks II because they are right at the cap because of the way they built it. He said the Council amended the Zoning Ordinance 1 1/2 years ago and it was called the Land Banking Ordinance. He said this ordinance allowed them to come in with a lessor amount using the divisor of 700 instead of 110, 125. He said they had opted to meet the toughest standard. He said they could have left 100 of the parking spaces as grass and potential future parking.

Councilman Crawford asked why they chose to do this. He said even over and above that he was not pleased with this plan. He said it was nothing like the original. He said it was supposed to be what looked like an interconnected building to give at least the illusion of a larger footprint and it seemed to be getting further and further away from that. He said now we have a less than 20,000 sq. ft. building surrounded by asphalt and the potential of a vacant building sitting on Novi Road.

Mr. Rogers said he could not speak to the tenancy of the first building.

Councilman Crawford asked if the first building could be divided up and occupied by several retail stores.

Mr. Rogers said there was a requirement in the RC District that if that was done there had to be a larger square footage. He said it could not be done because both buildings are single uses.

Mayor McLallen asked Mr. Rogers to tell her why this plan represented conformance with PD3.

Mr. Rogers said he had to build upon the agreement that Council passed ten years ago where an 18,000 sq. ft. building was approved with the proviso that at least 32,000 sq. ft. of an additional building would be built and connected. He said this property had laid dormant for ten years and it had been a concern to the Commission and the Council and he thought Council had a contract already released last year to have it landscaped if it was going to sit as dead land. He said Fretter had come in and asked to develop a second building under the PD3 Option. He said the big difference being that the setbacks of the building under RC without the PD3 would be 100 ft. on all four sides and would render the property practically useless. He said they were coming in to get the relaxation in the PD3 Ordinance for setbacks. He said the setback in the front was considerably in excess of the 35 feet. Mr. Rogers said under the PD3 they had to go back and revisit the original Fretter plan which they were upgrading with landscaping, new facade work to make both parcels integrated under the PD 3.

Otherwise, they would have come in behind the existing Fretter. He said it was conceivable but he didn't think they could have done it because the whole parcel was a PD 3. He said it was conceivable they could have come in just with the back property as shown on the plan. Mr. Rogers said this was not possible. He said if they were going to develop the rear they had to address the top, integrate the parking, and landscape treatment and facades consistently along the front.

Mayor McLallen said apparently the agreement was 10 years old and had been pushed, pulled, moved but was still a binding agreement between the City and the property owner that the property can be developed under the umbrella of the PD3 Option.

Mr. Fried said this was an amendment to the PD3 agreement.

Mayor McLallen said to the original 1985 agreement to find a final solution to the problem.

Mr. Fried said he would hope so.

Councilman Mitzel said technically this was an amendment to an existing site plan.

Mr. Rogers said of an existing PD 3 agreement of 1985.

Councilman Mitzel asked if it was approved was it a new site plan or do we have to reference an amendment.

Mr. Rogers said the whole thing was a new site plan even though the existing Fretter store was approved in final site plan back when it was built in 1985.

Councilman Mitzel asked if there was any possibility that a sidewalk along Novi Road would be part of this development.

Mr. Fried said he wouldn't think so.

Councilman Schmid said that the building was supposed to be connected and there were renderings that showed a connected building. He said Council allowed the 18,000 sq. ft. building with the provision that Mr. Fretter would continue the project and add a 32,000 sq. ft. building behind it with some type of connection.

Mr. Rogers showed a drawing and there was a gridwork connecting the two buildings.

Councilman Schmid said he agreed with Councilman Crawford that this was not an attractive concept as to what the original concept of the PD Regional Center was supposed to be. He said also the parking had some problems. He wondered if there had been any thought and why they reverted from the original plan to not connect the two buildings which would have created a large complex as opposed to a small.

Mr. Rogers said it was a good question and that they had discussed many alternatives. He felt they wanted a separate identity with parking convenient on all four sides of Fretter.

Mr. Seiber said the driving force behind moving the buildings apart was the parking. He said they thought that this was more centrally located with the driveway access in the middle it would tie the parking area in so that it could be utilized by both buildings. He said the buildings were separate users so they felt that it worked from a traffic circulation and parking convenience standpoint this worked much better.

Councilman Schmid said he would prefer that it be connected but wanted to see if they could come to some reasonable look at this. He said historically and perhaps by ordinance these buildings are built in a sea of asphalt with nothing between the building and the parking lot. He felt this made it look like a sea of asphalt with a building stuck in the middle of it. He asked if there were a 6 ft., 8 ft., or 5 ft., greenbelt between the building and the parking lot. He asked if that was provided in this design.

Mr. Rogers said they did have an apron of plant materials at the front entrance of the new building and a 5 or 6 foot sidewalk in front. He asked Councilman Schmid if he was suggesting that they add some base plantings.

Councilman Schmid said it seemed that when they park right up against the building it looked like buildings in Detroit and Westland as opposed to the City of Novi.

Mr. Rogers said he did have a point but there was a generous greenbelt planting around the street side.

Councilman Schmid asked if Mr. Seiber would be willing to work with something in that area.

Mr. Seiber said that he was not aware that some of the parking could be land banked and that there could be additional landscaping. He thought that the 255 parking requirement was what they had to meet for the site. He agreed with Councilman Crawford that it was way too much parking for this type of use. He said they could easily eliminate some parking and add some additional greenbelt areas.

Councilman Schmid said he was looking for greenbelt along the buildings as opposed to along the edge.

Mr. Seiber said he didn't see any problem eliminating a good portion of it but still had to be sure that the barrier free spaces were close to the entrance.

Councilman Schmid said he was a little disappointed but would probably support it if Council could get some commitment to make these as attractive as possible. He told Mr. Rogers the greenbelt around the buildings could be improved and even in the parking lots.

Mr. Rogers said he had taken notice and what we were looking at was the space on the three sides that could easily be given up. He said ultimately if the building changed tenancy from an appliance store to a retail store that parking could be revisited.

Councilman Crawford had a question regarding the ZBA variance

on February 7th which was in their packets. He said it appeared that they were aware that the two stores might switch but it looked like they based their decision on the setback on some discussion from Terry Jolly that to his knowledge they were not going to switch. He asked if that had any bearing on their decision now that the stores are switched. He said it said "Dennis Watson indicated in a legal opinion via the City Council or the Planning Commission that if they flip buildings and put Fretter in the back and Computer City in the front they have to go back through the planning process." He asked what that meant and to what extent was it.

Mr. Fried said recommendations had to be made from the Planning Commission just as they did for the original.

Councilman Crawford asked if it was for the total site.

Mr. Fried said it was.

Councilman Crawford said their opinion was that if it was flipped that Computer City would be in the front building and it sounded like all the facts that their decision was based on had changed. He said he wondered how the ZBA process might be altered based on what we know now. He said he would like that answer before a decision was made. He said he was not happy with what was transpiring and with the sea of asphalt and the sign. He said if any kind of approval was granted to the new concept he could not see the sign staying out in front.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilman Mason

That tentative approval be granted to Preliminary Site Plan SP95-16 for Fretter in accordance with the consultants letters, granting the exception for the 50,000 sq. ft. and subject to the ZBA variance on the setback.

DISCUSSION

Councilman Mitzel said he moved for approval because in essence this was almost identical to the plan that Council approved on November 8, 1993 except for the fact that Fretter would be in the back and there was a different use in the front. He said the buildings are within 910 sq. ft. of the same size. The only question he had was whether ZBA action was petitioner specific and Mr. Fried was apparently working on that question.

Mr. Fried stated it was petitioner specific in his opinion.

Councilman Mitzel said he should then condition his motion on them getting ZBA variance.

Mr. Fried said absolutely.

Councilman Mitzel said he would like to incorporate that into his motion.

Councilman Mitzel said previously Council approved a motion that stated that either the currently approved site plan would be under construction or it would be landscaped in May. He asked Mr. Seiber what their timing was for the developing of the site so Council would know when it would be cleaned up.

Mr. Seiber said the plans were to proceed with final site plan approval to the Planning Commission and he thought to City Council.

Mr. Rogers said this would come back.

Mr. Fried said that was correct.

Mr. Seiber said under the PD3 option requirements and that being the case they thought they would be before Planning Commission for final site plan approval in June and by the first part of July before City Council for final site plan approval. He said construction would commence by mid July.

Councilman Toth said it was interesting to hear everyone talk about the businesses. He said all these businesses happen to go away at times. He said we now have a business that is leaving the front building and going to the back building. He said there are buildings that are vacant due to the fact that the businesses have gone from them. He said Source Club and Dobbs Furniture disappeared and we got stuck with these buildings now that we have to work with. He said the intent of the PD 3 Option, the intent of the Regional Center area was the fact that we would have buildings of at least 50,000 sq. ft. He said that was the intent when Fretter walked in the door 10 or 15 years ago. He said they promised to build a 50,000 sq. ft. building and now Council was going to approve this and he believed it violated the PD 3 Option because there are two separate buildings. He said there was not one building envelope. He said his concern was Council would approve this and if Fretter decided to move somewhere else we would be stuck with another small building. Councilman Toth said we would end up with two small buildings instead of one that was 50,000 sq. ft. He said the intent was to make sure that this area did not have the small businesses.

Councilwoman Mason said in 1993 Council voted unanimously which meant that Councilman Toth voted for this.

Councilman Toth said he had never voted for anything for Fretter.

Councilwoman Mason stated the motion of 1993 and that the motion carried unanimously, voice vote. She stated that she felt that if you bought a business it would be easier to rent two small buildings then to rent one big building. She said she would support it.

Councilman Schmid pointed out that they may or may not have voted for this similar building in 1993. He said Fretter had been fooling around for 15 years whether or not they were going to build a building so don't anyone feel too much empathy for Mr. Fretter. He said they had been jockeying the City around for many years and are now coming before Council with a building that was completely different that what was agreed to before. He said he would support this but would not support it when it came back for site plan approval if it was not cleaned up and the greenbelting done so that it looked like a more attractive area.

Councilman Crawford asked if the conceptual plan shown was what Council approved in 1993.

Mr. Rogers said they didn't have it before Council and it was for Computer City at the time.

Councilman Crawford said he remembered a lot of discussion about inter-connecting and it may be what Council approved.

Mr. Rogers said it was a pedestrian way and he didn't think there was any arcade. He said at that time the ZBA granted the same variance for the rear yard for Computer City which Fretter had obtained last month for the new plan. He said there were no two by fours connecting the building. He said it was sort of a plaza.

Councilman Crawford said he never got an answer from the City Attorney as to what going back through the planning process meant.

Mr. Fried said the plan had to be approved by the Planning Commission.

Councilman Crawford asked if the total site had to be approved including the front building, back building, parking, landscaping and the sign.

Mr. Fried said the whole site was up for review.

Councilman Crawford asked what Council was approving if all that was up for re-review.

Mayor McLallen said her understanding was that it was an amendment to the original PD 3 Option.

Mr. Rogers said it was a basic preliminary site plan.

Mr. Fried asked Mr. Rogers to explain to the Council the effect of approving the site plan.

Councilman Crawford said if this was approved it would be approving the concern he had about parking and the sign.

Mr. Rogers said Council could condition a preliminary site plan to provide the perimeter green space or any other circulation issues. He said Council would be establishing two buildings. The new wrinkle was to reduce the amount of parking and to add green space and this they would take under advisement and so would the Planning Commission and Council would see that plan when it came back as a final site plan. He said Council was also approving the single curb cut on the east/west roadway, the curb cut on the west edge, the loading in the back south side of the two buildings.

Councilman Crawford said if Council makes that approval tonight with the information that they have he felt it would be a mistake. He said when it came to the next step Council would be locked into some of this. He said without additional information on what had to go through the planning process and the ZBA approval, elimination of the sign, and increasing of greenbelt he didn't think Council was in a position to make a good decision.

Councilman Mitzel said the motion included that they had to go before the ZBA because when they went to the ZBA it was for Computer City and not for Fretter. He said it went through the planning process March 15 where the Planning Commission made a positive recommendation to Council and they also waived the requirement for the south side green space. He said the waiver of the green space was dealt with by the Planning Commission and the setback had to go back to the ZBA. He said he believed signs were not considered as part of site plans.

Mr. Rogers said they should be shown conceptually where they are located.

Councilman Mitzel asked if they are not part of the building.

He said he never remembered dealing with a sign on a building as part of a site plan.

Mr. Rogers said if they came in with a plan without any sign on it he would call that out because it was in the site plan check list regarding general concept of sign, design and location. He said it was still subject to a separate ordinance.

Councilman Mitzel that was correct because in Mr. Rogers' review letters indicated the sign would have to be reviewed by the sign ordinance. He said Mr. Fried would follow up as to why the sign was in public right-of-way. He said these are issues that would be dealt with between now and the final site plan.

Mayor McLallen asked Councilman Mitzel to restate his motion. Councilman Mitzel said it was:

That tentative approval be given to preliminary site plan number 95-16 in accordance with the consultants letters with the granting of the exception of the 50,000 sq. ft. requirement and also subject to the ZBA variance for the setback.

Councilman Schmid said he would not support the motion because it was silent to some of the other concerns about the signage and the green belts and the parking areas.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Schmid

That the decision on the revised site plan be tabled, PD 3 Option, Fretter Appliance until further information is received on the planning process, ZBA decision, reduction in parking, sign on Novi Road and the enhancement of the greenbelt area.

Councilman Mitzel said he didn't see what more information was needed for the ZBA and Mr. Fried stated that it had to go back to them. He said the planning process it has already gone to the Planning Commission and they recommended approval and now it is before Council.

Yes (3-Crawford, No (4) Motion defeated

Schmid, Toth)

Vote on main motion:

ROLL CALL: Crawford No, Mason Yes, Mitzel Yes, Pope No, Schmid No, Toth No, McLallen No.

Yes (2) No (5) Motion defeated

Novi Project

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason

That the Revised Area Plan dated March 23, 1995 and PUD Agreement for the Vistas of Novi be approved.

DISCUSSION

Councilman Mitzel stated that he had a couple of questions and he would like Mr. Fried to advise him if amendments to the motion had to be made. He said one was under Tab 2 the Single Family Residential Development Code it said "Draft" and he thought it was now final.

Mr. Fried said that was correct.

Councilman Mitzel questioned a note on the general area plan sheet which was note #1 that stated "the roads would be dedicated to the City upon completion" and his question was did the language on this sheet have to correspond to the language that was elsewhere or did the language elsewhere override that.

Mr. Fried said they may dedicate it but the City would not accept it unless the Council accepted it.

Councilman Mitzel said then the language elsewhere that said it was up to the Council to accept them or not prevails.

Mr. Fried said that was correct.

Councilman Mitzel asked if within the legal agreement does the ZBA meeting in October when they got their variances and the Planning Commission meeting and public hearing have to be referenced.

Mr. Fried said they do not.

Councilman Mitzel said the only one that Council would have to make an amendment to would be changing "Draft" to Final on Tab 2.

Mr. Fried said that was correct and that there was also a typographical error in that there were 235 town houses instead of 231.

Councilman Mitzel said he just mentioned that in case the developer wanted to correct it. Mr. Fried said he would recommend amending that also.

Councilman Mitzel said he was confused by an advertisement in the paper stating that there was over 100 acres of nature preserves, walking trails and, 11 neighborhood parks and he thought that maybe more parks had been added since the last time they were before Council. He said he recalled only 9 parks and around 80 acres of open space. He asked for clarification.

David Lanciault said the ad was done by the builders and they contributed to an advertising fund as a developers assistance to kick off the grand opening. They developed that copy and where they got the information he wasn't sure but if they looked at one of the last several books prepared he felt they had been consistent in that regard. He asked that Council not equate a builders advertisement to their contract.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason

That the Revised Area Site Plan be amended to correct the typo on page 7 to 235 from 231 and also under Tab 2 to strike

"Draft" and insert Final.

Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried unanimously

Councilman Pope spoke to the main motion. He stated this was for the minutes and the developer. He said this project would probably outlive every member of the Council on its planning process. He said his fear was, as he had watched them develop the project, the dialogue you just had. He said it was positive but look at what the Maples went through with the developer at war with Council and at war with its residents over promises it made. He cautioned that their builders are less than up front about the future of that development. He said they had set themselves in a difficult situation marketing Phase I. He said folks would show up at Phase I and it was not what was advertised and he cautioned them because it was their product. He said the communication that your builders, not what promises the developers made, are something that future Councils would hold them responsible for and not the builders. He said maybe the builders are making the representations but the developer had to stand by them. Councilman Pope said he was quite concerned that the dilemma that Maples had gotten into with the Council does not happen. He said he knew they were good people and wanted to keep their word but that communication was very important.

David Lanciault, said he appreciated Councilman Pope's comments and that he had been consistent in that regard. He said unfortunately they only have a certain amount of control over the contractual arrangements made in Phase I. He said the new urbanism

concept didn't come up until after that process was approved and done. He said they had tried to elbow them around a bit as much as they could to get them to conform architecturally and they made some changes in additional plans. However, they did buy essentially 72 lots a piece and they do their own advertising.

Councilman Pope said absolutely and that he was cautioning him that in the next Phase that answer won't work.

Councilman Schmid said in his opinion this was the worst development the City of Novi had ever authorized and it started some years ago. He felt it would be nothing but another tract development. He said it additionally added probably two to three hundred thousand square feet of commercial in area that was never designated for commercial. He said it was strictly against the City's Master Plan and Ordinances whereby we maintain a centralized commercial development in the City of Novi. Councilman Schmid said this allowed a major development commercially on the outskirts of the central City of Novi.

He said the live/work town houses were grossly inadequate for parking. He said this would haunt Council from day one. He said when they suggest that you have to walk 600 feet to get to a doctors office at one of these subdivisions streets to live/work town house. He said Council traded off several hundred square feet of commercial for an option that they can have 3,000 square foot of City property and some people think that the Main Street deal was a give away. Councilman Schmid said Council traded off several hundred square feet of commercial for a lousy 3,000 square feet of land the City might build on some day.

Councilman Schmid said it was a bad project and he would not support it. He said as Councilman Pope said, in a different context, this would never be built or it would take 15 years or longer to be built and it would never follow the plan that it had now. He said Council had put into this community 300 and some lots of 50 feet and there was a strong ordinance that suggested that 80 foot lots were the minimum.

Councilman Schmid said this project took away everything that the City had stood for for a number of years. He said it was a shame, it was too bad and he was glad the PD Optional was gone and it would not happen again. He said Novi will have another tract home project with over 1,300 residents trying to get up Meadowbrook Road and Novi Road. He said it was a slap in the face to the north end and if they didn't realize that now they would in a few months.

Councilwoman Mason said that under the PUD Ordinance and the way this was developed she thought it would probably be one of the finest properties and there are people all the time talking about the Sandstone/Vistas. She thought it was unkind for a Council Member to say it had anything to do with a thing that the majority of Council did giving a million dollars worth of property to Main Street. She said Vistas had taken nothing from the City and they had invested millions of dollars in the community without anyone giving them right-of-ways or paving the streets for them. She said she would vote for this project.

Mayor McLallen restated the main motion to grant approval for the area plan on the PUD contract with the two amendments made by Councilman Mitzel for corrections.

Yes (6) No (1-Schmid) Motion carried

Mr. Lanciault, asked what the next procedural aspect was.

Mr. Rogers said they would like to get this signed and asked Mr. Fried how that happened.

Mr. Fried said the contract was before the Mayor and the Clerk and ready to go.

AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION

Kathy Mutch, representing Preservation Novi, said earlier Council had heard students on the Fuerst Property and that was why she was present to speak. She advised Council that they heard from the architect who was commissioned by Preservation Novi to do a feasibility study on the house and the barn. She said they would be providing written information on that to Council as soon as it was finished. He would be on site tomorrow and the next day and the engineering would be following his preliminary work. He had been working on this and just had not been on the site yet. She said Council would, if not weekly, at least at every meeting get some sort of update.

Mrs. Mutch wanted Council to know that she was as surprised as anyone else to hear that students were circulating petitions and particularly pleased with the Novi News that they chose to reproduce that petition. She said she heard from one of the students afterwards that the petitions in the newspaper were the ones that are coming in to Mrs. Davies home. She was hoping that the Novi News would continue to print the petition and they would continue to come in and they would have even more to present to Council.

7. Request to seek bids - Main Street Project

Mr. Fried said this request was merely to seek bids and would not commit the City to anything in regard to Main Street.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Toth

Seconded by Councilman Crawford

That bids be sought to establish prices for the

Main Street project.

Councilman Mitzel said this was to seek bids for the road construction and the street scape for the north and south leg of the street, was that correct. He said those two are within this one resolution.

Mayor McLallen said that was correct.

Councilman Mitzel said with the street scape it was mentioned to construct it in phases and to get bids within phases. He asked when the bond was issued what time frame do they have to be spent within. He asked if there was a three year limit.

Mr. Kriewall said it was a three year limit.

Mr. Fried said roughly speaking about three years.

Councilman Pope said there was a question regarding material Mr. Fried put in Council packets for informational purposes in regard to an easement exchange. He said it was an agreement to give land from one person to another, an exchange of City land for right-of-way. He asked if Mr. Fried knew what he was referring to. Mr. Fried said he did not.

Councilman Pope said for informational purposes and not before Council tonight was an exchange agreement. He said that agreement could, if the two parties agree, outline exactly what was going to be built in this location.

Mr. Fried said that was correct.

Councilman Pope said now, as it was written, it was a very simple document exchanging one piece of land for another.

Mr. Fried said that was all the document did but it could encompass everything.

Councilman Pope said he would like to point out to Council they are going out to bid on a street scape and if and when the SAD came back he would ask the five members who are supporting this project to think about what kind of promises the developers made to them. He said Council had the power to put that within the agreement to make sure that the development would be what they envisioned it would be and under the time lines it would be. He was encouraging Council to consider that option since it was before Council tonight. He said he would vote against this because he had consistently opposed it.

Councilman Schmid said the street scape had him concerned only to the extent that without the street scape this project was nothing more than another project. He said with the street scape and with the idea of the Main Street Town Center it becomes something more than just another development. He said as of today Council had not received real definitive ideas to what the street scape would be. He said there had been some overtures there would be brick here and mortar there, street lights here, and so forth. He said for this project to proceed this should be clarified with the developer and with the City Administration as to exactly what they were going to see. He said he wanted to make sure Council had a complete plan because when this came back for some real serious votes that would have to be before Council. Councilman Schmid said he would vote for the request to seek bids.

Mr. Fried said it was part of the SAD that was created for that and he would have to review the plans and approve those plans in regard to that.

Councilman Schmid said he was just trying to encourage the planning department to work on that.

Councilman Mitzel said he noticed in the street scape information they show banners and he didn't think banners were allowed according to the ordinance.

Yes (5-Toth, Mitzel, No (2-Pope Motion carried

Crawford, Schmid Mason)

McLallen)

proceed to final design - Main Street project

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Toth

Seconded by Councilman Crawford

That the conceptual water and sewer design and approval to proceed to final design on the Main Street project be approved.

Councilman Schmid asked for clarification from the engineer as to exactly where the sewer and water was going and which side of the buildings, etc.

Garey Foyt said the water main would run along the north side of Main Street on the east/west leg behind the curb and gutter and underneath the proposed sidewalk area. He said it would tie in at Vic's and terminate at Novi Road. He said as part of the water main construction there would be modifications to the existing line that was put in by Vic's. He said there was a PRV located up there to provide adequate pressure to Main Street and they would have to bypass the PRV.

He said the sewer is proposed to come in at Flint Street at Novi Road and run under the proposed Main Street until the crossover street on Main Street. At that point it would terminate and run laterals north and south for future extension into Main Street development when ever it occurred. He said the only thing going in with the water main would be the fire hydrants and with the sewer main they would bring sewer in to that crossover street.

Councilman Schmid asked where it went from there.

Mr. Foyt said to hook up to the buildings would be part of the development as it occurred north and south of Main Street. He said the sewer would be under the street and there would be extensions, laterals, running out beyond that crossover street. He said the sewer would be roughly 300 to 400 feet from Novi Road. He said they know there are adequate adapts to run laterals wherever the development goes behind Main Street.

Councilwoman Mason asked if Vic's Market had water.

Mr. Foyt said Vic's Market was hooked up and there was already eternal water mains put in for that development.

Councilwoman Mason said was she to understand that Mr. Gibson, Director of Finance, said "since the cost is at approximately $250,000 it is not economically feasible to bond for the project. It is recommended that existing water and sewer resources be used to finance this construction", she asked if that meant to take the money out of our own water and sewer fund.

Mr. Kriewall said that was correct.

Councilwoman Mason asked why.

Mr. Kriewall said because it had been done with other small projects within the community and that was the typical way of financing. He said the entire sanitary sewer network in the Grand River/Novi Road area was financed through non special assessment means back in the early 70's and it was built through a connection charge basis to the City.

Councilwoman Mason asked if that was from Meadowbrook to Novi Road.

Mr. Kriewall said it was from about where Marty Feldman is down to the CSX tracks west of Novi Road and from an area on Novi Road about where Flint St. was all the way up to the expressway.

Councilwoman Mason asked what we had financed.

Mr. Kriewall said the City financed the whole sanitary sewer system in that area.

Councilwoman Mason said the County did it west of Novi Road.

Mr. Kriewall said the City paid for all of it.

Councilwoman Mason said by the bridge by Lanny's Road was an old county sewer and the county paid for it.

Mr. Kriewall said on Lanny's Road where the intercepter goes through the City contracted with the County, the County built it and the City was paying the County.

Councilwoman Mason said the rest of Main Street would not have any actual water in the buildings until the moratorium was off.

Mr. Kriewall said that was correct.

Councilwoman Mason said we are talking about taking $250,000 out of the Water and Sewer Fund to pay to put the infrastructure in to just the mains.

Mr. Kriewall said that was correct and they would pay it back when they are connected.

Councilwoman Mason asked what happened if they never connected.

Mr. Kriewall said it was an investment in development.

Councilwoman Mason said but we spent the $250,000 and that was it.

Mr. Kriewall said that's correct.

Councilman Mitzel asked if Council was being asked to approve the mechanism that they are going with a payback ordinance as opposed to an SAD.

Mr. Kriewall said Council was just directing the engineers to go to final design at this time.

Mr. Fried said Council was not committing themselves to anything beyond that.

Councilman Mitzel said he would support this going out for bids to get prices but he would not support and would have grave concern over a pay back ordinance. He felt the SAD was the proper way to do that.

Councilwoman Mason said it says, "In summary should the Council elect to move this project forward then it is recommended that this department be authorized to take the Main Street Water and Sewer Project to the final design phase with funding for said work to be via connection charges as recommended by the Finance Director." She said basically it was saying that if Council said yes tonight to the water and sewer Council was moving the project forward and we are saying yes to the funding.

Mr. Fried said he didn't understand Councilman Mitzel to make that a part of his motion.

Councilman Mitzel said he didn't make a motion.

Councilwoman Mason said it says if Council moves the project ahead they have approved the funding that Mr. Gibson had recommended.

Mr. Fried said if Council approved that as a motion that was what they would do. He said the only thing before Council was to approve to have the engineers go to final design and not the funding mechanism.

Councilman Toth said the motion was to approve the conceptual water and sewer design and approval to proceed to final design.

Councilwoman Mason asked if "with the exception of funding" could be added.

Councilman Mitzel said it raises the question of how we are going to pay for final engineering. He said if it was a SAD that would be rolled in with the SAD costs and if it was pay back it would be rolled in with the pay back ordinance.

Mr. Fried said either method that Council selected for the funding of this project that would be paid back, he assumed out of the sewer and water fund if it comes out of anything, until such time as the funding was created for it. He said that would be if it is special assessment it will be an SAD.

Councilman Mitzel said he was curious who would pay for it now until that was decided.

Tony Nowicki said as indicated in his memo the Finance Director had looked at this and he recommended a connection charge. However, if Council didn't want to make that decision at the time the work would be financed out of the water and sewer fund and then would be reimbursed by a SAD if Council desired and they would include that in any SAD contractual language.

Councilwoman Mason asked what the estimate was for this.

Mr. Nowicki said the estimate of the design costs was $23,750.

Councilwoman Mason said what about the fact that the developer was putting $25,000 into an escrow account with us constantly.

Mr. Nowicki said that was for the road primarily.

Councilwoman Mason said that was for the road but why didn't the developer put $25,000 once again to take care of this $23,750.

Mr. Nowicki said he could be asked to do that.

Councilwoman Mason said that could be done and we could continually have this $25,000. She said when this project was first presented that was what was said every time we used $25,000 another $25,000 was going to be put in there.

Mr. Nowicki said the developer committed to spend approximately $190,000 on the design for the road and other related items. Mr. Nowicki said they posted a $50,000 deposit and he had been drawing on that and the developer had been reimbursing us.

He said if Councilwoman Mason would recall the agreement that was approved by the developer and by Council it did not include anything with respect to water and sewer.

Councilman Schmid asked if we had, on numerous occasions, put in sewer and water on a pay back basis for development and future development.

Mr. Kriewall said yes all over town. He said all the sewers in the Grand River and Novi Road area were put in on that basis as well as Nine Mile when all the residential was put in.

Councilwoman Mason said the latest sewer on Grand River between Novi Road and Taft was an SAD wasn't it.

Mr. Kriewall said it was an SAD from Taft Road west to Beck Road.

Councilwoman Mason said it was not all done pay back and that it was basically about 50% in this City SAD and pay back. She said she remembered when Council said they weren't going to do pay backs

anymore because the City ends up losing money and not getting our money back for 100 years.

Mr. Kriewall said Council never said that.

Councilman Mitzel said his concern about using pay backs was first it was a mixed use project and there was uncertainty as to the amount of taps that would be needed because of the varied uses that could be in there. He felt that an SAD would assure pay back of the complete amount on schedule. If Council goes with the pay back ordinance we may get more we may get less depending on the water moratorium and the timing may be different. He said it looked like the preliminary funds were coming out of the water and sewer fund so he would not support the motion.

Yes (4-Toth, Crawford No (3-Mitzel, Motion carried

Schmid, McLallen) Pope, Mason)

Councilwoman Mason asked when it comes to spending public money doesn't it take a 5-2 vote.

Mr. Fried said if the money had been appropriated it only takes a majority and if the money had not been appropriated it took 5 votes.

Councilwoman Mason said the money had not been appropriated Council just discussed where the money was coming from.

Mr. Kriewall said it was an Enterprise Fund and only took four votes.

Mr. Fried said Mr. Kriewall suggested that because it came from the Enterprise Fund it doesn't have to be appropriated. He said he didn't have an answer to that.

Mayor McLallen asked Mr. Fried to answer that question to the Council before the money was expended.

Mr. Fried said he would.

9. Appointments to the Beautification Commission, Library Board, Cable Access Committee, Construction Board of Appeals, HCD Committee and Computer Committee

Mayor McLallen said the Library Board was a Mayoral appointment and she nominated Andrew Mutch to hold that position. She said it was a very difficult choice but it was her choice at this time and the appointment did take concurrence of the Council.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilman Mason

That Council accept the Mayor's appointment of Andrew Mutch to the Library Board.

DISCUSSION

Councilman Pope said that he would vote against this. He said he spoke to Mr. Mutch about this in anticipation that this might happen. He spoke to the Mayor and urged her not to make this appointment. Councilman Pope said Mr. Mutch was a good man and would do a good job if appointed. He said Mr. Chambers provided good advice to the Library Board; however Councilman Pope stated he was very distressed at the direction of the Library Board. He said if this went through and there was a change in the Library Board then maybe that would send a message to the Library Board and in that way it might be positive. His concern with Mr. Mutch was that he is a current employee of the Library and he knew he would step down as an employee of the library. Councilman Pope said it was tough to move from an employee to the Board of Directors and that was his hesitation. Councilman Pope said he thought it was a fine appointment and the Mayor had made a decent decision but he just did not agree with it. He said Mr. Mutch was informed how he felt before this was said publicly and nothing was in any way personal to him. Councilman Pope said he voted for him on the HCD but he would not support this.

Councilman Crawford said one of the best interviews that he had ever had the pleasure to be part of was the interview with Andrew Mutch. He said he saw no reason not to reappoint the incumbent in this case. He said Mr. Chambers had contributed a lot to the Library Board and he would continue to do so. He said he was also sure the Mr. Mutch would do the same and that he supported him in HCD. He hoped that if a bigger and better appointment came up in the future, perhaps Library Board again on a different occasion, he would encourage Mr. Mutch to apply for it.

Councilman Schmid said he was shocked at the Mayor's choice not because of who was chosen but because we have a standing member on the Board who had done an outstanding job over the years. He said Mr. Chambers was committed and had missed very few meetings. He said Mr. Chambers had the expertise from a finance standpoint and was a very intrical part of that Board. He had served honorably and had done an exceptional job. Councilman Schmid said he could not imagine and he encouraged the Council to retain Mr. Chambers because he was a worthy person. He said there may be others but he did not think it was John Chambers who caused that Library Board to do whatever from a negative standpoint. He said Mr. Chambers had always been very positive, always progressive and he felt it would be a major mistake to take Mr. Chambers off the Library Board. He hoped that Council would reverse that decision and revert back to Mr. Chambers.

Yes (2-Mitzel, No (5-Mason, Toth, Motion defeated

McLallen) Pope, Crawford, Schmid)

Mayor McLallen asked for a vote on all those in favor of Mr. Chambers for the Library Board.

ROLL CALL: Mason Yes, Mitzel Yes, Pope Yes, Schmid Yes,

Toth Yes, McLallen No, Crawford Yes.

Yes (6) No (1-McLallen) Motion carried

10. Discussion - Owani Visitation

Mayor McLallen stated this was discussion of the visitation of our sister city of Owani, Japan in conjunction with the Novi City Schools. She said an invitation was issued on a biannual basis to the Mayor of the City Council to take this trip. She said she was unavailable to attend and Member Crawford as Mayor Pro-Tem would like to go. She said there had been a discussion of the possible funding necessary for this. At this time the City Council budget did not have money for this project although it could be covered out of Community Promotions. She asked if there were any prices, etc. available as they were not in the packet.

Mr. Kriewall said traditionally it had been around a $2,000 limit and that money was available in the Community Promotion Account.

Mayor McLallen said it was a similar sum used to send Mayor Quinn several years ago and the remainder of the expenses are picked up by the individual.

Mr. Kriewall said that was correct.

Councilwoman Mason said Councilman Mitzel was kind enough to give her the minutes for the last time this was done. She said at that time it was push come shove when it was presented and the thinking that Council should do this because they come here all the time. She said apparently they could afford it better than Council. She said it was a one time thing and not something that Council agreed to do all the time. She said looking at the information in the packet she looked at what the Council had spent in conferences and workshops and the majority of this Council spent $13,000. She said at a time when almost the entire police force was front of Council, perhaps with a pay decrease, she felt that there were some people who couldn't afford to feed their families and a lot that would like to go overseas and can't afford it. She said she would not support doing this every year or every other year. She felt that Council spent enough just on conferences and workshops. She thought that the money should be raised some other way or people should pay their own way when they go.

Councilman Toth said Council had got into this a number of years ago and he was surprised that it was being discussed now. He said Council should really be discussing it when talking about a budget. He said the problem was Japan was on the expensive side, it's far away and it costs a bit of money. He said going every other year was not that bad but he thought it should be a discussed item, discuss the merits of having a sister city and discuss whether Council really wanted to support this type of effort. He said they had discussed this and were working with an agreement with the school board to serve with them as co-conspirators of the sister city. Councilman Toth said he thought it was a valid effort. He felt the more they communicate with other people in the world, as we are becoming more global, with our thoughts and ideas and we should communicate with other communities. He said it was especially important for the school system and maybe not that important for the City government. He felt Council should still have a presence and should still work with them.

Councilman Schmid said this had no reflection on the Mayor or the Mayor Pro-Tem as to whether or not they go. He said he had a very difficult time supporting it the first time, although he did. Councilman Schmid said unfortunately he had not seen anything that was brought back from there that had been a benefit to the City. He said there had never been a report on it and he felt that it was a waste of time. He said he saw some merit in the schools sending young people over there because they learned something. He felt that any Mayor or Mayor Pro-Tem would not learn much and he didn't see the benefit of sending people to this particular city in this particular country other than the nicety of having a sister city. He said it was very expensive and Council was talking budget now and $2,000 was not a lot of money and whoever went would have to sacrifice because they would be spending some of their own money. He just did not think it was a worthy cause but maybe someone could convince him that it had great merit. He said there was nothing in the packet to justify it and he had heard nothing about it since the last time someone went. He said it was talked about briefly a few weeks ago and he thought it was a dead issue.

Mayor McLallen stated that part of the reason it was before Council now was because if Councilman Crawford were to go as a representative of the City some decision would have to made relatively soon. She said the trip took place approximately the first or second week in June.

Councilwoman Mason suggested that items not be put on the agenda unless there was back up information available.

Mr. Kriewall stated that City Council indicated that they would discuss this in the future and that was where the back up and impetus came from. He said City Council discussed it prior to budget amendments that had to do with various conference and work shops and they indicated they might deal with this in the future.

Mayor McLallen suggested if Council would like to establish a policy on this type of exchange that it be part of the budget category and would be appropriate Thursday, April 13. At that time the Administration could bring forward any further information.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Pope

That Claims and Accounts Warrant No. 436 be approved.

Councilwoman Mason asked about #29 Cafe Development, Financial Guarantee, $6,075.00. She asked what the guarantee was for.

Mr. Kriewall said he was not familiar with that and he would check on it.

Councilwoman Mason questioned #98, Maple Hills of Novi Refund on overpayment of water bills, $4,129.10. She asked how this happened.

Mr. Kriewall said to call during office hours and she could get that answer.

Councilwoman Mason then questioned #131 NBD Bank N A, Conference Expense/Park Program Equipment, $1,151.73. She asked why these two items were put together. She said she preferred they were in two separate areas so she could track them.

Mr. Kriewall said he didn't know and would check on it.

Councilwoman Mason questioned #142, Oakland County Register of Deeds, Document Recording Fees, $945.00. She asked if everything was held for a year and then recorded.

Yes (5-Crawford, No (2-Toth, Mason) Motion carried

Pope, Mitzel,

Schmid, McLallen)

12. Schedule Executive Session for 7:00 p.m. Monday, April 24, to discuss property acquisition for drains

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Toth

That an Executive Session for 7:15 p.m., Monday, April 24 be scheduled to discuss property acquisition for drains, litigation and union negotiation.

DISCUSSION

Councilman Pope asked to add pending litigation and union negotiations.

Gerry Stipp requested it be scheduled for 7:15 p.m.

Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried unanimously

13. Schedule an Executive Session for pending litigation immediately following meeting.

Councilman Pope requested union negotiations be added.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Pope

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason

That an Executive Session be scheduled to follow the meeting for pending litigation and union negotiations.

Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried unanimously

AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION - None

Mayor McLallen asked Gerry Stipp what the date was for Ordinance Review. Mrs. Stipp said it was April 18.

Councilwoman Mason said she would not be there.

Beautification Committee - Patricia Taub appointed

Yes - McLallen, Mitzel, Crawford, Mason, Toth and Pope

Councilman Schmid did not vote

Cable Access Committee - Wayne Wrobel appointed

Yes - McLallen, Mitzel, Crawford, Schmid, Mason, Toth and Pope

Construction Board of Appeals - Briggs, Cullity and Kirkish appointed

William Briggs - Yes - McLallen, Mitzel, Crawford, Schmid, Mason, Toth and Pope

Michael Cullity - Yes - McLallen, Mitzel, Crawford, Schmid and Pope

No - Mason and Toth

Elmer Kingham - Yes - Toth and Pope

No - McLallen, Mitzel, Crawford, Schmid and Mason

John Kirkish - Yes - McLallen, Mitzel, Crawford, Schmid, Mason and Toth

No - Pope

Housing/Community Development Committee - Andrew Mutch appointed

Andrew Mutch - Yes - Mitzel, Crawford, Mason, Toth and Pope

No - Mc Lallen, Schmid

Laura Lorenzo Yes - McLallen and Schmid

No - Mitzel, Crawford, Mason, Toth and Pope

Computer Advisory Committee - Timothy Burke appointed

Yes - McLallen, Mitzel, Crawford, Schmid, Mason and

Toth

Councilman Toth said he was not in attendance at the April 6 meeting because he was in Wisconsin and they presented a discussion

on the storm water program with the Wisconsin Association of Lakes. He said they are in the process of preparing a paper which would be part of the proceedings of the conference and as soon as they were available they would get them back. He said the conference had approximately 500 people attend and they had the better part of 300 in the audience. He said the discussion was very good and they were very positive with them receiving our storm water program and how it is working.

Councilman Toth said on the Computer Committee everything was rolling along and there should be some computers coming in this week. He said all the cables have been put in and they are starting to hook up the equipment. Councilman Toth said 25 computers would be in the week of the 10th and 25 the following week and the final 25 on the third week.

Councilman Mitzel said he was scheduled for the Chamber Board meeting on the 25th and would not be able to attend that meeting. He asked if anyone else from Council would fill in for him.

Councilman Mitzel said he had also been trying to revise the resolution for the sidewalk committee to bring back to Council but needed to meet with Mr. Nowicki to review the sidewalk program to take that into consideration with the resolution.

Councilman Crawford said there would be a regular meeting on Thursday, April 13. He said they had been in negotiating committee consisting of Farmington City Council Member, Farmington Hills City Manager and Councilman Crawford in about 4 or 5 meetings regarding the transfer process. He said they had been up and down meetings and it might be a long process. He said they had extended the dead line until the 15th of May and had hoped to have an agreement worked out and approved so that it could go to the Farmington City Council on Monday for their first reading. He said it needed to be back to us by April 24 but all of that was some what up in the air.

Councilman Crawford said there would be a public hearing on Wednesday, May 10 in Council Chambers and it would be televised.

Councilman Mitzel asked if Council was going to receive a report from the Consultant Review Committee.

CONSULTANT REVIEW COMMITTEE

Councilwoman Mason said they had met once and are to meet again April 11 but the meeting had been cancelled because of the death of Mr. Klaver's father.

Mr. Fried said he was asked to make a report on Vic's Market and their licensing agreement. He said he had given Council a copy of a letter in their packets and was prepared to answer any questions in that regard.

Councilman Mitzel said they are in violation of our agreement, is that correct.

Mr. Fried said that was correct.

Councilman Mitzel asked Mr. Kriewall what action the Administration was taking to have them come into compliance with the agreement.

Mr. Fried said when it was discussed with the Building Department they said they would discuss it with Vic's and ask them to post a check in the amount of the $28,000 until such time as Council decided whether they are going to proceed with a special assessment on the Main Street street. He said the money was not posted with the Building Department although Vic's was requested to do so. He said they would follow through on that and suggested that Council let the Building Department determine what Vic's position was on it and bring the matter back to Council at the next Council meeting.

Councilman Mitzel said he was confused because there was a very clear agreement back in October. He said his concern was that the road was open, the agreement had not been fulfilled and also the alignment with Town Center Drive on the north side of Grand River wasn't up to the standard that the City engineers said it would have to be up to in order to have a signal and turning limits there. He said the whole situation greatly concerned him because not only was it being used and it was City property still but there was also that traffic . . . . .

Mr. Fried said in order for the Council to make an intelligent resolution of the problem they should have reports from the engineer and the Building Department as to what the situation was and why it existed the way it does. When Council had that report then they could make a determination.

Councilman Mitzel said he appreciated that but his concern was this Council entered into a legal agreement six months ago. Administration was supposed to enforce that legal agreement and here we are talking about getting reports to see what should be done and should not be done. He said the agreement said either they pay $28,212 and it is a private road and posted as a private road or we accept it as a public road.

Mr. Kriewall said it was resolvable.

Mayor McLallen said by April 24 the City Attorney and the City Administration would have a resolution to this problem.

Councilman Mitzel asked what the City's exposure was in the meantime.

Mr. Fried said the City did not own the property.

Councilman Mitzel said we own 0.9 acre.

Mr. Fried said if an injury occurs on that property we probably have recourse against Vic's Market.

Councilwoman Mason asked if an injury occurred on the piece of property the City owned then the person who was injured or died would have recourse against the City of Novi.

Mr. Fried said then we would have recourse against Vic's Market because any injuries caused would probably result because of Vic's Market's negligence.

Councilman Mitzel said within that report he would appreciate Administration addressing the issue of the traffic signal and the

alignments because at Decker Road we didn't open that road because of safety concerns. He asked for a report on what level of safety concerns there were with that alignment.

Councilwoman Mason removed this Item. She stated she removed it because she believed that Council agreed that the City Manager Evaluation Procedure would begin now in 1995 and not January 1, 1996.

It was then,

Moved by Councilwoman Mason

Seconded by Councilman Schmid

That Council adopt the following City Manager Evaluation Procedure Resolution and that it become effective April 10, 1995 rather than January 1, 1996.

WHEREAS, one of the goals of the Novi City Council was to

consider establishing a revised evaluation procedure for

the City Manager, and

WHEREAS, a Committee was established to provide for a

goal related approach to evaluation, and,

WHEREAS, the attached revised procedure sets out time tables

for goal establishment and evaluation related to a calendar

time line,

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the attached revised

City Manager goal establishment and evaluation procedure shall take effect April 10, 1995.

Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried unanimously

3. Approval to prepare draft agreement between the City and the sole bidder, Finkbeiner, Pettis & Strout, Inc. for construction engineering services associated with the Novi Road Signalization Project

Councilman Pope stated he removed this Item so he could vote no.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Schmid

Seconded by Councilman Mitzel

That a draft agreement be prepared between the City and Finkbeiner, Pettis & Strout, Inc. for construction engineering

services associated with the Novi Road Signalization Project be approved.

Yes (5) No (2-Pope, Toth) Motion carried

9. Approval of Traffic Control Order 95-3 - No Parking on both sides of Eleven Mile Road between Clark Street & Beck Road

Councilwoman Mason removed this item. She asked Mr. Kriewall where the origin of this was.

Mr. Nowicki responded that the origin was the Department of Public Works, the traffic engineer Bruce Jerome and his recommendation was based on the pavement widths. Mr. Nowicki said that road was 28 feet back to back or 24 feet total pavement width and that provided for two travel lanes and if there was parking on either side of the road that it would be violation of the major street criteria as established by the Michigan Department of Transportation.

Councilwoman asked about parking on one side of the road.

Mr. Nowicki said if parking was allowed on one side of the road it would still be narrowed down and it would create a traffic problem.

Councilwoman Mason said she knew a lot of people on 11 Mile Road and the only time she saw parking on the road was for holidays. She said those homes, a lot of them, don't have room to have 10 people over for a birthday party or holiday. She said their right to have company was being taken away. She can't believe that after the City paved a road the residents didn't want paved, now we are going to take away their parking. She said this used to be a resident neighborhood and now they won't be able to have any company other than what can fit in their driveway. Councilwoman Mason asked Council to at least have it changed to parking on one side of the road.

Councilman Crawford said he also knew someone on 11 Mile Road and would encourage Council not to allow parking on 11 Mile Road on either side. He said it would be a disaster safety wise to have cars parked virtually blocking one lane. He said it was no longer a dirt road it was a paved road with a gutter so there was no way to pull off the road. He said they would actually have to park in the road. He said it had changed in character and they accepted that but if Council allowed parking on one side it would be a very dangerous situation.

Councilman Crawford said in regard to signage, he agreed with the decision not to allow it and hoped they wouldn't be polluted by signs up and down that say no parking.

Councilman Crawford said there was no parking on 9 Mile where there was curb and gutter and he didn't see signs there and there are no signs on a lot of roads that he assumed were no parking.

Mr. Nowicki said if there are no signs on Nine Mile Road there should be. He said they would have to post in accordance with the manual. He didn't know off hand what the spacing was but it would have to be in accordance with the established criteria.

Councilman Mitzel asked if there was a problem with people parking there now.

Councilwoman Mason said there was not.

Mr. Nowicki said there was not a problem but potentially there could be if it was not posted for no parking and then we do have someone park there it could be a significant problem.

Councilman Mitzel asked if it was any different than Nine Mile.

Mr. Nowicki said if 9 Mile was not posted then they would review that and most definitely go out there.

Councilman Toth said he had to laugh because in Village Oaks they had a lot more traffic than there was on 11 Mile Road and they have 24 foot wide roads and traffic parked on both sides of the street. He said they finally had the Village Oaks Road that comes in expanded to 28 feet and they still allow parking on it because the residents need it. He felt it was kind of over kill because all of a sudden we are focusing in the past 6 or 8 months on 11 Mile. He said the speed limit was to high even before the road was constructed, traffic problems were there before the road was built and now we have parking problems even before the road was finished.

Councilman Crawford said there was no problem because nobody parks on the road because everyone has common sense, it would be like parking in the middle of Grand River.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Schmid

That Traffic Control Order 95-3 - No Parking on both sides of Eleven Mile Road between Clark Street and Beck Road be approved.

Yes (4-Schmid, Pope, No (3-Mitzel, Motion carried

Crawford, McLallen Mason, Toth)

16. Resolution - Sidewalk Grant Applications

a. North side of Ten Mile Road between Taft and Novi Roads

Councilman Mitzel said they were proposing a sidewalk on the north side of Ten Mile between Taft and Novi Road and he thought it was between Novi and Meadowbrook Roads. He spoke to Mr. Nowicki and he stated that the section east of Novi Road would be handled with the road improvements to Ten Mile Road. The question comes down to whether or not we wish to have two good applications or throw in a third that may be less money and we may not get the other two that are bigger.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilman Pope

That the grant application for Consent Agenda Item 16a

not be submitted.

Councilman Schmid asked if it would make any difference if they get the grant could it make a difference in the next grant.

Councilman Mitzel asked Mr. Wahl or Mr. Nowicki if it was a legitimate concern that we may compete against ourselves.

Mr. Nowicki said that it was a good concept that Councilman Mitzel had come up with. He said if you are a reviewing agency and and trying to maximize the exposure of your dollars you would most likely pick the least costly project in one particular community to make sure you can spread the money out in as many different communities as possible. Thereby, basically competing with ourselves and jeopardizing some projects that may have more merit.

Councilman Mitzel said he would still encourage the City to try to pursue bringing the sidewalk from the edge of Jamestown Green over to the traffic light so that could be a designated crosswalk. He said that was about 200 feet of sidewalk and might be able to be handled through our own budget.

Councilman Mitzel removed Item 16b because he wanted to make the clarification that it should be a bike path on the south side of Ten Mile Road.

Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried unanimously

b. South side of Ten Mile Road between Taft and Novi Roads

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Pope

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason

That the following Resolution be amended to say "bike path" and be approved on the south side of Ten Mile Road between Taft and Novi Roads.

WHEREAS, the City of Novi acknowledges the need for non-

motorized transportation facilities, and

WHEREAS, as one of its' goals, is the development of adequate

facilities to accommodate pedestrian and bicycle travel

through the City, and

WHEREAS, the City of Novi has engaged in a comprehensive

program to provide facilities for pedestrians and bicycles,

and

WHEREAS, the construction of such facilities is consistent

with the Declaration of Policy: Intermodal Surface Trans-

portation Efficiency Act, and

WHEREAS, the Michigan Department of Transportation's

Transportation Enhancement Activities Program has been

identified as a funding source for qualifying projects in

the State of Michigan, and

WHEREAS, the non-motorized facility project proposed by the

City of Novi is a qualifying project,

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Novi requests

that funds from the Michigan Transportation Enhancement Activities program be dedicated for the completion of the

submitted project within the City of Novi.

Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried unanimously

17. Condemnation Resolution - Doice and Joanne Ward - Eleven Mile

Paving

Councilwoman Mason removed Item #17 from the Consent Agenda because she was against these condemnations and wanted to vote no.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Schmid

Seconded by Councilman Toth

That the following condemnation Resolution, Doice and Joanne Ward, Eleven Mile Paving be approved:

WHEREAS, present conditions in the City of Novi, Oakland

County, Michigan, necessitate the improvement of Eleven Mile

Road near Beck Road in the City of Novi;

WHEREAS, proposed plans showing said improvement have been

prepared by the City Engineer.

WHEREAS, after evaluating the plans, it has been determined

that said improvement is necessary for the use and benefit of the public; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the authority vested in the

City of Novi by law, that it is hereby declared and determined that it is necessary to improve Eleven Mile Road in the

vicinity of Beck road within the City of Novi in accordance with the plans, and that said improvement is necessary for the use and benefit of the public; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Manager is hereby

authorized to execute the Declaration of Taking, which is

attached hereto;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Law Firm of FRIED, WATSON &

BUGBEE, P.C., is hereby authorized and directed to institute

condemnation proceedings pursuant to MCL 213.51, et seq.;

MSA 8.265(1), as amended, for and on behalf of the City of

Novi, against the owner(s) and other parties in interest in

said property necessary for improving Eleven Mile Road as

hereinbefore described.

DISCUSSION

Councilman Crawford said he would not support this because he was against adding any impetus to that portion of 11 Mile being paved and we still have to contend with the Taft Road extension and the fact that we may need those road dollars for Taft Road or other places before we even consider 11 Mile paving.

Yes (5-Mitzel, Schmid, No (2-Mason Motion carried

Pope, Toth, Crawford)

McLallen)

at Novi Road

Councilwoman Mason asked if there was going to be a signal.

Mr. Kriewall said there would be a stop sign.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason

That Traffic Control Order 95-4 - Eastbound Mystic Blvd.

to stop at Novi Road be approved.

Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried unanimously

There being no further business to come before Council, the meeting was adjourned at 12:10 a.m.

MAYOR

CITY CLERK

Date approved: