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

Present: Members John Avdoulos, Victor Cassis, Andrew Gutman, Lynn Kocan, David Lipski (7:34 p.m.), Mark Pehrson, Lowell Sprague (7:36 p.m.), Wayne Wrobel

Absent: Member Richard Gaul (excused)

Also Present: Barbara McBeth, Acting Planning Director; Tim Schmitt, Planner; Tom Schultz, City Attorney

The meeting attendees recited the Pledge of Allegiance.

Moved by Member Pehrson, seconded by Member Avdoulos:

No one from the audience wished to speak.

There was no correspondence to share.

Chair Kocan confirmed that Member Avdoulos would accept his Committee appointments, since they were made in his absence at the last Planning Commission meeting.

Chair Kocan said that the Implementation Committee will meet on August 16, 2004 at 6:00 p.m. The Sign Ordinance will be the main topic of discussion.

Barbara McBeth, Acting Planning Director, told the Planning Commission that the first City Council reading of the Text Amendment relating to fences was approved with some modifications. City Council agreed to the six-foot height restriction. They added definitions for brick and stone fences, and included a stipulation that both sides of a fence will be constructed of comparable material. They also added acreage parcels to the list of properties that cannot have fences in the front yard setback. The second reading of the Ordinance should be at the August 23, 2004 meeting.

Ms. McBeth told that Planning Commission that Oakland County reviewed the City’s Master Plan. The reviewer noted and appreciated that an in-house employee wrote the Master Plan, the appearance and content of the Plan, and the public participation component. The Oakland County report and minutes of the meeting will be available soon for the Planning Commission’s review. The Master Plan will likely come back to the Planning Commission for its Public Hearing and approval at one of the October 2004 meetings.

Ms. McBeth said that a City Council Committee has recommended OHM, (Orchard Hiltz McCliment) to be the new Traffic Consultant for the City, and City Council approved. They will begin reviewing new plans and Birchler Arroyo will complete the reviews already in process.

Consideration of the request of Gary Steven Jonna of Whitehall Real Estate Interests for approval of a one year Preliminary Site Plan extension. The subject project is located in Section 13 between I-96 and Eleven Mile between Meadowbrook Road and M-5. The Applicant proposes a general condominium with 94,106 sq. ft of industrial office/warehouse. The property is zoned I-1 (Light Industrial) District.

Moved by Member Cassis, seconded by Member Sprague:

The Public Hearing was opened on the request of Village Green Management for approval of a Wetland Permit. The subject property is located between Novi Road and Walled Lake on the south side of Fourteen Mile. The Applicant is proposing to reinforce an existing seawall along Walled Lake with an adjoining boulder wall.

Planner Tim Schmitt located the property on an aerial photo. Walled Lake is on the north side of Fourteen Mile. He located a small rectangle along Walled Lake that is the area proposed for repair. Beachwalk Apartments are zoned RM-1 and the subject property is zoned R-4, as are most all the properties along the lake. The Master Plan reflects these same uses.

Mr. Schmitt said that there are no lakeshore wetlands in the area. The majority of the area is developed for private use. There are no woodlands.

Mr. Schmitt explained that the existing seawall is crumbling, and he described the proposed upgrade as reinforcement. This repair falls into a non-minor use wetland permit category and must be reviewed by the Planning Commission and a Public Hearing must be held. The Applicant would like to augment the crumbling wall with a boulder wall. The MDEQ was receptive to this upgrade in light of the erosion of the existing wall. The Applicant’s request with the City includes this upgrade, as well as enhanced landscaping and the movement of a trash compactor to a more centralized location.

Mr. Schmitt said that there are minor comments in the Staff and Consultant Reviews that will be addressed at the time of Final Site Plan submittal. The Engineering Review has suggested using pea gravel instead of a 21AA base for the road. The Landscaping Review has asked that certain additional comments be shown on the plans.

Mr. Schmitt said that Beachwalk Apartments were built in 1974 and the Lakefront Protection Ordinance was not passed until 1986. Therefore, the property is considered a legal non-conforming use and the upgrades are acceptable.

David Jackson of Village Green Company, a Landscape Architect, represented the Applicant. Mr. Jackson told the Planning Commission that these improvements will help modernize the older facility. The compactor will have a masonry screen. The owner is making a substantial investment. The seawall in its current state does not provide for an aesthetically-pleasing view. They are proposing a boulder wall similar to one of the adjacent properties.

Member Sprague read the correspondence into the record.

No one from the audience wished to speak so Chair Kocan closed the Public Hearing.

Chair Kocan confirmed with Mr. Schmitt that at this time it does not appear that anyone is mooring or docking against this wall.

Member Avdoulos agreed with the comments made in the reviews. The shoreline erosion will be reduced and the aesthetics will be improved.

Moved by Member Avdoulos, seconded by Member Pehrson:

Member Sprague asked what the status of the MDEQ permit was. Mr. Schmitt responded that the request is still under review and will be approved within the next two months.

The Public Hearing was opened on the request of Boulder Design Services for possible recommendation to City Council for rezoning of property in Section 10 located on the north side of Twelve Mile between Dixon and Novi Roads, from R-A (Residential Acreage) to OS-2 (Planned Office Service) District. The subject property is 4.46 acres.

Planner Tim Schmitt located the property on an aerial map. Twelve Mile is the parcel’s frontage; Dixon Road is one parcel to the west. Liberty Park, the residential development by Pulte, is further to the west. To the south is Fountainwalk Mall. Carlton Forest and the Gumenick Office Building are further east. The subject property and the properties west and east are zoned R-A. The OS-1 property is zoned as such based on a Consent Judgment. The northerly property is zoned R-1. The southerly property is zoned R-C, Regional Center. The Master Plan for Land Use indicates that all Twelve Mile-fronting properties are master planned for office uses. To the north the properties are master planned for single family residential. To the south the property is master planned for regional commercial. To the west is a special planning project area subject to the Sandstone Consent Judgment and currently under construction as Liberty Park.

Mr. Schmitt said there are no regulated wetlands on the site. There are no regulated woodlands, but there are two regulated trees that will be dealt with at the time of site plan submittal. The Planning Department is recommending that the property be rezoned to OS-1. This would be in compliance with the Master Plan, and is more likely used instead of OS-2 for properties adjacent to residential. OS-1 would offer lower building heights (30 feet vs. 42 feet in OS-2). The other properties in the area are zoned OS-1. The property directly east of this parcel is also seeking a rezoning to OS-1. Therefore, the Planning Department finds that OS-1 is far more harmonious with the properties in the corridor.

Mr. Schmitt said that principal permitted uses include professional and medical offices, laboratories and facilities for human care, including hospitals. The OS-1 allows personal service establishments. OS-2 Special Land Uses include uses incidental to principal uses in OS-2 (pharmacy, barber, etc). OS-1 Special Land Uses include nurseries and daycares, indoor and outdoor recreation facilities.

Mr. Schmitt said there is a 24-inch water main located in the Twelve Mile right of way, and a twelve-inch sanitary sewer line located at Dixon Road. There are no infrastructure concerns associated with this rezoning. The natural features will be dealt with at the time of Final Site Plan.

Mr. Schmitt said that the Planning Department would prefer that the parcels be combined into one parcel prior to the rezoning taking place. Mr. Schmitt noted that the property lines of the two parcels do not mimic what the design of the final property will be; there is a section of the easterly parcel that will become part of the development to the east. Mr. Schmitt said that these boundary issues should be cleared up as soon as possible.

The Traffic Review noted that the information from the Applicant is sufficient but additional information will be required at the time of site plan submittal.

John Vitale of Stucky-Vitale represented the Applicant. He said that they would like to amend their request to

OS-1 to concur with the recommendation of the Planning Department. He thanked the Planning Commission for their consideration.

Member Sprague read the correspondence into the record:

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

Member Pehrson appreciated that the Applicant changed his request to OS-1. The uses and building heights are better suited. He was in favor of the OS-1 rezoning for its consistency with the east and west properties. He said that OS-1 has been established as a buffer between residential and higher intensity uses (major thoroughfare).

Member Avdoulos said that the Master Plan and Zoning Committee has reviewed this first. He looked at this rezoning and found that it was an acceptable transitional use that corresponded to the Master Plan. OS-1 would also match the surrounding zoning.

Moved by Member Avdoulos, seconded by Member Gutman:

Member Sprague asked whether the lot combination should be noted in the motion. City Attorney Tom Schultz said that it does not need to be in the motion. Member Avdoulos and Member Gutman agreed to its removal from the motion.

Member Pehrson asked whether the April 28 traffic study date reflected a full service Twelve Mile. Mr. Schmitt confirmed that it did; there was some median work being done but the road was open as a thoroughfare.

Chair Kocan noted the Traffic Review comment that this property would have only one drive onto Twelve Mile. Mr. Schmitt responded that this Applicant and the easterly property (tentatively called Stoneridge Office Center) and the Gumenick Office Center are all working together on acceptable rear cross access.

Acting Planning Director Barbara McBeth told the Planning Commission that the text amendments relate to the proposed addition of Chapter 38, Performance Guarantees, of the City Code. A City Council Ad Hoc Committee developed this new chapter in order to consolidate the regulations relating to performance guarantee requirements.

Ms. McBeth said that several sections of the Zoning Ordinance need to be amended as a result of this new chapter. Text amendments are required wherever financial guarantees, cash deposits, bonds and/or letters of credit are referenced in the Zoning Ordinance. The City Attorney’s office searched the Ordinance to locate where these changes would be necessary. A strike-through version was provided to the Planning Commission for their review.

Ms. McBeth said that the Gateway East District text regarding SDO guarantees will be modified to reflect Chapter 38 information. The Conference Zoning District will be modified to reference Chapter 38. The Subdivision Open Space Plan (Subsection 2402.7) will reference Chapter 38. The Site Condominium section of the Ordinance will reference Chapter 38. Clarity of terms and grammar were also reviewed. The section of Temporary Use Permits for portable concrete batching plants will also reference Chapter 38. Sections relating to Temporary Certificates of Occupancy and Final Certificates of Occupancy (Sections 3005) will also reference Chapter 38.

Ms. McBeth said that the Planning Commission has been asked to hold this Public Hearing and forward their recommendation to City Council. It is anticipated that this item will appear on the August 23, 2004 City Council Agenda.

Chair Kocan closed the Public Hearing after determining there was no written communication and no one from the audience wished to speak.

Member Sprague asked for clarification on the Planning Commission’s role. Chair Kocan and City Attorney Tom Schultz explained that the City Council has already held the first reading on adding Chapter 38 to the City Code and cleaning up the Code language in Chapters 7, 11, 12, 31, 34 and 37. The changes to the Zoning Ordinance must be heard publicly and reviewed by the Planning Commission.

Chair Kocan asked that Section 904H.4 be rewritten as, "The developer shall comply with those requirements for performance guarantees contained in Chapter 38 of the Ordinance Code as amended. If the amount is not (no further changes)..." She did not like the "may" language of the proposed text.

Later in the meeting Mr. Schultz suggested replacing adding to the section with the following language: "The City Council may require the posting of performance guarantees in addition to those required by this Chapter and Chapter 38 in order to secure improvements authorized under this Section." He said that performance guarantees will automatically be posted. This will give the City Council the ability to require more. He said that Chair Kocan’s sentence could be added – a general statement that a developer has to post a normal performance guarantee – and then add the sentence that City Council can require additional guarantees to secure performance of the improvements authorized under this section. Chair Kocan agreed.

Chair Kocan reviewed Chapter 38 and made the following suggestions for City Council’s consideration:

38-33.A.2.a: Add the words "before a final inspection will be conducted" to the last sentence for clarity.

38-33.A.2.b: Replace the (first) words "After acceptance" with "Upon presentation." Remove the word "request" from the second to last sentence. More specifically, she recommended the sentence be changed to, "If it is determined by the City Engineer that the development is not ready for this inspection, the affidavit will not be accepted and the inspection shall not occur until a determination is made that the inspection is proper. If it is determined by the City Engineer that the development is ready for inspection, the affidavit will be accepted by the City a final inspection shall occur. The City will conduct this inspection as soon as practical." Mr. Schultz said that the affidavit will be a form designed by the City Attorney and if it is signed it will not be rejected by the City. He agreed that "request" should be removed, or changed to "requested." He said that his office would look at Chair Kocan’s suggestions. He said that the language was meant to protect the City’s right to collect inspection fees. Member Avdoulos concurred, and said that it is meant to ensure the developer is accurate in timing his request for inspection.

38-39: The first sentence is cumbersome. Chair Kocan suggested, "A Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for any building or structure for which landscaping is required in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance…" Mr. Schultz responded that "in accordance with" should be removed and the existing sentence would be acceptable. Chair Kocan agreed.

38-42: Chair Kocan asked about the numbering system being "1, 2 AND 3", or "1, 2 OR 3." Mr. Schultz responded that the section will be changed to just "1 OR 2".

Member Avdoulos appreciated the work put into making these text amendments. Mr. Schultz responded that Marina Neumaier of the Finance Department was instrumental in making these Text Amendments happen.

Moved by Member Avdoulos, seconded by Member Pehrson:

Chair Kocan confirmed with Mr. Schultz that everyone in the City approved of these changes, including Don Saven.

Member Cassis asked whether other municipalities’ practices were reviewed prior to making these changes to Novi’s Code. Mr. Schultz responded that Ms. Neumaier researched several municipalities’ codes for guidance. Member Cassis stated that he has heard Novi charges higher fees than other municipalities, and he felt that self-examination is probably in order for the City.

The Planning Commission turned in their corrections for incorporation into the minutes.

Moved by Member Pehrson, seconded by Member Sprague:

There were no Consent Agenda Removals.

There were no Matters for Discussion.

Chair Kocan reminded the Planning Commission that the Implementation Committee meeting would be on August 16, 2004 at 6:00 p.m.

No one from the audience wished to speak.

Moved by Member Avdoulos, seconded by Member Cassis:

The meeting adjourned at 8:34 p.m.

MON 08/09/04 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7:30 PM

TUE 08/10/04 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 7:30 PM

WED 08/11/04 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 7:30 PM

MON 08/16/04 IMPLEMENTATION MEETING 6:00 PM

MON 08/23/04 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7:30 PM

WED 08/25/04 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 7:30 PM

Transcribed by Jane Schimpf, August 16, 2004 Signature on File

Approved: August 25, 2004 Angela Pawlowski, Planning Assistant Date