The meeting was called to order at or about 7:00 PM.

Present:  Members Brian Burke, Victor Cassis, David Greco, Michael Lynch, Michael Meyer, Mark Pehrson, Wayne Wrobel

Absent: John Avdoulos (Excused), Andrew Gutman (Excused)

Also Present:  Barbara McBeth, Deputy Director of Community Development; Kristen Kapelanski, Planner; Lindon Ivezaj, Civil Engineer; Kristin Kolb, City Attorney

Economic Development Manager Ara Topouzian led the meeting in the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance.

Moved by Member Pehrson, seconded by Member Wrobel:

No one from the audience wished to speak.

There was no correspondence to share,.

There were no Committee Reports.

Deputy Director of Community Development Barbara McBeth said there was a Master Plan and Zoning Committee meeting scheduled for Tuesday, June 17, 2008. The second reading of the cell tower text amendment was approved by City Council. Ms. McBeth informed the Planning Commission that City Council approved the boulder wall at the Novi Town Center, and that body asks that a text amendment be considered that would provide for these structures to be installed in the Town Center District.

Economic Development Manager Ara Topouzian addressed the Planning Commission. He introduced Cindy Uglow, Small Business and Neighborhood Manager. Economic Development is a new role for the City and is part of the Neighborhood and Business Relations Group. Mr. Topouzian’s role is three-fold: retention, expansion and attraction.

There are over 1,800 businesses in Novi. Mr. Topouzian and Ms. Uglow have been meeting with as many businesses as time allows. Many of the businesses have learned how to diversify to compete in a global economy. There are struggles in the retail industry.

Mr. Topouzian maintains a business survey on every project that comes to the City. The information provides Mr. Topouzian with existing issues so that he can work on ways to address any shortcomings. Mr. Topouzian noted that Novi’s energy is very high, and the willingness of its stakeholders to work together is very high. The City impresses him. Mr. Topouzian briefly discussed each of the big projects on which he is working:

Targeting Clusters: A report was compiled that identifies business clusters in Novi . For example, the medical and bio-tech industries are strong in Novi.

Master Plan: Mr. Topouzian will continue to sell the City’s Master Plan to the larger business community.

I-96 Corridor Study: The ultimate goal is to put a gateway framework together that will involve many people, including Wixom.

Marketing Strategy: Mr. Topouzian recently launched the City’s new Economic Development website, www.investnovi.org. This website makes finding the business information more concise for the development community. Opportunities like "Coffee and Conversation" with Ms. Uglow provide networking and educational settings. Available property leasing and sales are now posted on this website. This is a different kind of marketing package. Mr. Topouzian is completing a five minute DVD that asks, "Why build your business in Novi?" The DVD will be used at trade shows and on retention visits. Mr. Topouzian hopes to make 200 retention visits per year. Mr. Topouzian is going to begin a Business Recognition program.

Ms. Uglow has been making the retention visits to the Mom and Pop stores. She began a program called BAT, Business Assistance Team. She has people from a financial institution, SCORE, the County and more who help people with their businesses, business plan, etc. The first question that is posed is, "What keeps you up at night?" Thus far she has reached fifty businesses.

Member Wrobel looked forward to the redevelopment of the east side of Novi and the Walled Lake area. Novi will only be as strong as its weakest link. He asked what Mr. Topouzian and Ms. Uglow could do to help. Mr. Topouzian responded that a viable project is necessary for a decent redevelopment project to occur. That is the hardest part of economic development, and the attraction portion is very affected by the economy. There is still new development which is occurring, though he said he could look at redevelopment possibilities down the road.

Ms. Uglow said that changes will be forthcoming for these areas. For example, Busch’s came in and upgraded their site and will have a hold on the property owner to continue with more improvements.

Member Lynch read the report and saw both challenges and opportunities for Mr. Topouzian and Ms. Uglow. He looked at the "largest employers" and "biggest taxpayers" list. Mr. Topouzian responded that the government employees (schools) were pulled out from the list. Member Lynch said the schools employ 807 and Magna employs 650. He thought this gave the City a great opportunity. Member Lynch asked what the Planning Commission could do to help redevelop the I-96 corridor. Mr. Topouzian said that the Planning Commission’s working with each applicant, which it does already, is what is necessary. Time is of the essence for these developers. Mr. Topouzian is reviewing opportunities like the state’s filming incentives. Member Lynch agreed that some areas need redevelopment. Mr. Topouzian also said Novi is partnering with NAIP (National Association of Independent Properties). They will do a site visit with NAIP this fall, and hopefully some of the visits will be in Novi.

Member Lynch wondered why the subdivisions were excluded from the taxpayer list. Mr. Topouzian said the list was strictly business. Member Lynch wondered if a list existed that included subdivisions. Ms. Uglow said she would look into whether such a list existed.

Member Burke said the best thing the Planning Commission can do is act like stewards for the City. Each of the members should exude positive energy. Mr. Topouzian responded that he just gave an interview today that was very upbeat Novi.

Member Burke asked what the small businesses are saying about their Novi locations. Mr. Topouzian responded that the answers vary, but the top responses were comments about the length of time it took for them to get their businesses up and running, and the difficulty of the process. Member Burke has been through the process with his own business, and he moved at his own pace, though he understood the comments. Member Burke suggested that Mr. Topouzian seek surveys from the smaller businesses that may not have been moved through the "soup to nuts" process like some of the bigger companies. He suggested too, that businesses with teardowns and rebuilds be provided surveys too. He thought that these people would have suggestions for streamlining. Mr. Topouzian responded that every completed project will get the survey.

Member Burke concluded that the City is going to bring big and small businesses here in different manners. He hoped that Mr. Topouzian would approach these two potential business types differently. How can Novi seek small businesses? Mr. Topouzian responded that networking is the key. Novi partners with so many chambers, colleges, organizations, etc. Mr. Topouzian visits the trade shows at Rock Financial Showplace. Just cold calling doesn’t work. Member Burke said that he invites successful small businesses he visits to consider another operation in Novi. He hopes that the Economic Development Department would do the same.

Member Meyer thanked Mr. Topouzian for this hard work. All of these efforts will address the negative perceptions that some people have about doing business in this community. Member Meyer noted that many grand openings are held during the weekdays, and perhaps some of these could be scheduled for the evenings or weekends. Member Meyer asked what Mr. Topouzian’s position was on the City’s Economic Development Corporation (EDC), which has been hard to staff recently.

Mr. Topouzian responded that EDCs are used in many cities. If it is not well-funded, there is limited involvement that an EDC can have. Many of the goals that Novi’s EDC wanted to achieve have been shifted to Mr. Topouzian’s department, or at least the EDC would like them to be. Mr. Topouzian said that giving the EDC things to do has become a challenge. The activity is a bit of a challenge. The EDC has not been dissolved. Member Meyer felt that this Economic Development Department may be overextended. Member Meyer suggested that these employees’ work load be examined to determine that they are performing their work, not others’ work. Member Meyer also suggested that the EDC members be rotated every four years in order to keep fresh eyes on the Committee.

Member Meyer said that there is a high quality of life in Novi, but he said that the schools are very strong and have an incredible reputation that draws people to this City. This is one of the most diverse cities in the state, if not the country. He hoped that Mr. Topouzian could bring more culture to the City. Novi Theater, for instance, could use its own theater. Part of what makes a great city is its culture. He thought Novi has just begun looking at the arts.

Member Meyer noted the comments made about Canada. He said that Michigan’s adjacency to Canada is a strength. Member Meyer suggested that the site plan manual be provided with the marketing video so that newcomers would be made immediately aware of this City’s process.

Chair Cassis thanked Mr. Topouzian and Ms. Uglow. He said both have exerted great effort. Chair Cassis noted that many firms in Novi are already able to compete in the global economy. He said that this department’s work overlaps what the Chambers of Commerce should be doing. Chair Cassis asked how much Mr. Topouzian mingled with those organizations.

Mr. Topouzian said his most recent job prior to coming to Novi was directing the Farmington Hills Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Topouzian supports all Chambers’ efforts. Joining the Chambers is a voluntary decision. Mr. Topouzian said that every business here does belong to the City. Therefore, the City must give back everything it can so that every investment in Novi can be successful.

Chair Cassis asked about the Planning Commission’s reputation. Mr. Topouzian responded that he definitely felt that the City’s Planning Commission was doing its part. Chair Cassis encouraged Mr. Topouzian to send any Planning Commission-related comments their way.

Chair Cassis supported the City’s efforts along Grand River. He said that Providence was the magnet, and he asked Mr. Topouzian whether he agreed that businesses should be sought that support the hospital. Mr. Topouzian responded that finding interdependent businesses for Providence is a natural approach to marketing the Grand River corridor.

Chair Cassis concluded by discussing the City’s Master Plan vision for the West Oaks area. Chair Cassis thought West Oaks was a great place for development and could be easily marketed. Deputy Director of Community Development Barbara McBeth said that her department shared the Master Plan vision with Mr. Topouzian and Ms. Uglow. Chair Cassis thanked Mr. Topouzian and Ms, Uglow for their time.

Consideration of the request of Amson Dembs Development for a one-year Final Site Plan extension. The subject property is located in Section 9, north of Twelve Mile, east of West Park Drive, in the Novi Corporate Campus Development, in the OST, Office Service Technology District. The subject property is approximately 8.34 acres and the Applicant is proposing to build a 28,638 square foot speculative office/warehouse building.

Consideration of the request of Providence Hospital and Medical Centers for a Section 9 Façade Waiver. The subject property is located in Section 17, south of Grand River Avenue, west of Beck Road, in the OSC, Office Service Commercial District. The subject property is approximately 173 acres and the Applicant is proposing to construct a 576 square foot maintenance building for the existing Providence Hospital campus.

Consideration of the request of Landry & Newman Architecture, for a revised Final Site Plan for façade only.  The subject property is located in Section 13, north of Eleven Mile and south of I-96 between Meadowbrook Road and Seeley Road, in the I-1, Light Industrial District.  The subject property is approximately 11.9 acres and Building B is a 14,210 square foot speculative office/research and development/industrial building in the three building general condominium development.

Moved by Member Pehrson, seconded by Member Wrobel:

The Public Hearing was opened on the request of ITC, International Transmission Company, for Wetland Permit approval. The subject property is located in Section 13, south of Twelve Mile, between Haggerty Road and the M-5 Connector, in the OST, Planned Office Service Technology District. The subject property is approximately 83.63 acres and the Applicant is requesting approval to utilize water from an existing on-site pond for irrigation of landscaping on site.

Deputy Director of Community Development Barbara McBeth described the project. She reminded the Planning Commission that they gave this project its site plan approval in December 2006. The first building of 180,000 square feet and the first parking deck have been constructed. The building is occupied. There will be a second building and parking deck. The Applicant would now like to use its pond water to irrigate the site’s landscaping. The plans were reviewed and recommended for approval by the City’s Environmental Consultant. Ms. McBeth said that the City recently learned that a revised MDEQ permit is not required for this proposal, but the City still requires a permit. The only change on the site at this time is the water will come from the pond rather than the Applicant using City water. One of the plans shows the location of the pump. There are no other changes to the site.

The Applicant submitted a letter indicating that there will be no appreciable decline in the pond’s volume. The City’s Environmental Consultant generally agrees with that statement. It was suggested that, "The Applicant suspending irrigation withdrawal from the on-site pond if the pond water level drops to a level that is greater than 6 inches below the bottom invert of the pond outlet pipe" be a stipulation of the motion, if the Planning Commission desires to approve this Wetland Permit request.

Tim Melvin of Gillett Associates addressed the Planning Commission. He designed the facility and offered to answer any questions. Adam Wendt from Michigan Automatic Sprinkler was also present. Mr. Melvin said that they originally planned to use City water to irrigate the landscape. An adjacent property owner commented that his site was occasionally flooding. Therefore, using the pond for irrigation seemed to be a possible solution for reducing this occurrence of flooding for the neighbor. Mr. Melvin and his consultant ran the numbers and determined that using the pond water would not adversely affect the pond. Mr. Melvin said that they think a lot of the pond water is coming from other areas in the City, which may be why there have been flooding issues. When the M-5 work was performed, it is possible that the outlet was raised a little bit. Mr. Melvin surmised that this project may not alleviate the flooding on the neighbor’s site, but at least ITC won’t be exacerbating his problem. He ensured the Planning Commission that even in dry weather the Applicant would not be reducing the water in the pond by a full six inches below the outlet pipe.

Member Meyer read the Public Hearing responses:

• Ruth Beadshaw, Novi: Objected because it would adversely affect the wildlife habitat.
• Jeanne Childs, Novi: Objected because of her concern for the wildlife in the area.

No one in the audience wished to speak, so Chair Cassis closed the Public Hearing.

Member Lynch thought this recycling of water effort should be encouraged. He thought this use of pond water should be considered for other sites. He didn’t think the effort would affect the pond or the habitat. Member Lynch asked if the pond was spring-fed. Mr. Melvin said the northerly Twelve Mile culvert feeds this pond. Member Lynch concluded that the pond is getting the M-5 runoff, and something has to be done with this water. He thought this was a win-win proposal. Member Lynch said he considered this a ‘green’ effort.

Member Burke thought this proposal made sense. He noted that the Applicant has agreed to use non-phosphorous fertilizer. That fact, along with the Environmental Consultant’s recommendation, satisfied Member Burke’s concerns.

Moved by Member Burke, seconded by Member Lynch:

In the matter of the request of ITC, International Transmission Company, ZCM08-20, motion to grant approval for the Wetland Permit subject to: 1) A Wetland Use Permit being granted by the MDEQ; 2) The Applicant suspending irrigation withdrawal from the on-site pond if the pond water level drops to a level that is greater than 6 inches below the bottom invert of the pond outlet pipe; and 3) The conditions and comments in the Staff and Consultant review letters; for the reason that the plan is substantially in conformance with the Wetland and Watercourse Protection Ordinance.

Member Wrobel thought the proposal made sense. He asked if the water removal would affect the quality of the wetland. Mr. Wendt said that the irrigation will run back into the pond, though he hoped that 75% of the water would be absorbed into the soil. Mr. Melvin did not expect the quality of the pond water to change with this change to the Applicant’s Wetland Permit.

Member Greco was inclined to support the project. He thought that this design could be considered for other projects, as long as Novi was mindful of its effect on the City’s natural features. He said that the pond will not be policed all of the time, so it will be up to the Applicant to ensure that his irrigation is not adversely affecting the pond. He hopes the Applicant will take this responsibility seriously.

Member Pehrson asked how "six inches" was determined versus "two" or "four" inches. Ms. McBeth responded that this number was approved by a wetland professional. Dr. John Freeland of ECT also suggested that a measurement stake be placed near the outlet. Ms. McBeth thought that Providence was looking at irrigating from a man-made pond. She was not aware of any other situation in Novi where a natural pond was being used in this manner.

Member Pehrson did not think the City has the capacity to accurately predict the hydrological impact of new projects coming forward. Though there is a science to performing the mathematical calculation of such impacts, he didn’t think that nature’s course was so easily predictable. He’s leery of jumping on the "green" bandwagon just yet because of the negative wetland impacts that have occurred elsewhere in Novi throughout the years. This proposal will make a difference; will it be something of concern? Perhaps not. Nature takes care of these issues on its own. He just didn’t think this irrigation style should be promoted throughout the City just yet. He was concerned that the "six-inch" threshold isn’t clearly defined. Does this level have to occur for a period of time? Is it a problem only certain times of the year? Should contiguous seasons of reaching the six-inch level negate this approval? Ms. McBeth responded that the Wetland Consultant will do some onsite monitoring of this project. Also, ITC will be put on the honor system. The water does flow from north to south; this means the flow is already regulated by a couple of existing control structures. If there appears to be a problem, all of the elements of this water flow will have to be looked at.

Mr. Melvin wished to add that ITC owns the entire area and it takes pride in the natural beauty. They would not want this irrigation plan to adversely affect the land. Member Pehrson concluded that as it is today, this proposal is good for the City, good for ITC and good for the ecology. However, if things change in the future, everyone must be mindful of the potential that ITC’s irrigation efforts may have to change. There are likely more unknowns than knowns in this scenario, so everyone should proceed with optimistic caution. Mr. Melvin responded that ITC will take a proactive approach.

Member Lynch felt this was more of closed-loop system; the run-off will return to the very same pond. Member Lynch hoped that the salt from the roads wouldn’t impact this project. Member Lynch was not in support of "wholesale" removal of pondwater City-wide. He did feel that this project was not very risky.

Member Greco asked if the Permit was revocable. Ms. McBeth said the stipulation in the motion has the same effect as revoking the permit, i.e., if the pond level is adversely affected, the Applicant’s use of the pond for irrigation is suspended. City Attorney Kristin Kolb concurred. The onus is on the Applicant to monitor to this irrigation project. The City would be in position to pursue a remedy if the pond is negatively affected.

Chair Cassis visited the site and he believed that this "pond" is a lake, not a pond. He hoped to alleviate the other Planning Commission members’ concerns. He wanted to ensure the others that nothing fishy was going on here. The water level of this lake and the nine other water features surrounding the area are in good shape. The land is completely forested. The lawn is limited. Chair Cassis applauded ITC for their citizenship; the City once placed a moratorium on water use. This project is a friendly effort and the Applicant should be commended. ITC doesn’t need to save money, but they are instead showing their civic duty and goodwill. The Consultant has approved the plan. ITC is a good steward of the land. They are a good citizen. They will be on the honor system and Chair Cassis’ knowledge of them is they are a good neighbor. Chair Cassis said that ITC just presented the City a wonderful gift for their parks; obviously they have great respect for nature. He supported the project.

In the matter of the request of ITC, International Transmission Company, ZCM08-20, motion to grant approval for the Wetland Permit subject to: 1) A Wetland Use Permit being granted by the MDEQ, if necessary; 2) The Applicant suspending irrigation withdrawal from the on-site pond if the pond water level drops to a level that is greater than 6 inches below the bottom invert of the pond outlet pipe; and 3) The conditions and comments in the Staff and Consultant review letters; for the reason that the plan is substantially in conformance with the Wetland and Watercourse Protection Ordinance. Motion carried 7-0.

The Public Hearing was opened on the request of McDonald’s USA LLC, for Preliminary Site Plan with a PD-2, Planned Unit Development Option, Special Land Use and Stormwater Management Plan approval. The subject property is located in Section 14, south of Twelve Mile and east of Novi Road, in the RC, Regional Center District. The subject property is approximately 1.35 acres and the Applicant is proposing to demolish and rebuild a 5,364 square foot McDonald’s Restaurant at 42665 Twelve Mile.

Planner Kristen Kapelanski described the plan to demolish and rebuild the existing McDonald’s store at the Twelve Oaks mall entrance drive near Twelve Mile. The subject property is bordered by Twelve Mile to the north, the mall entrance drive to the east, Twelve Oaks to the south, beyond the ring road, and Ethan Allen to the west.

The subject property is zoned RC, Regional Commercial, and is bordered by the RC District to the east, west and south and R-4 One-Family Residential beyond Twelve Mile to the north.

The future land use map indicates PD-2 (Planned Development Option 2) uses for the subject property and the properties to the east and west with Regional Commercial for the mall property to the south and cemetery uses beyond Twelve Mile.

There are no wetlands or woodlands on the subject property as indicated by the natural features map.

Recently, the Zoning Ordinance was amended to permit fast food drive-through restaurants using the PD-2 Option subject to certain conditions. As a result of that text amendment, the proposed McDonald’s is now a permitted use under the PD-2 Option, which also requires a Special Land Use permit. When applicants are utilizing the PD-2 Option, City Council ultimately approves or denies the Preliminary Site Plan and Special Land Use permit after a recommendation from the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission should consider the findings listed in Section 2516.2.c of the Ordinance. The Staff has not identified any major concerns regarding this Special Land Use request and recommends approval. The Planning Commission should consider the factors listed in Section 2406.4.A of the Ordinance in their review of the Preliminary Site Plan. Utilizing this option, the Applicant must seek approval from City Council for deviations from the Ordinance as part of the site plan approval process rather than appear before the Zoning Board of Appeals.

The Planning Review recommended approval and indicated the Applicant was generally in compliance with the Ordinance. The Applicant will seek an Ordinance Deviation for the northern and eastern parking setbacks and for the lack of parking spaces. The Applicant will also seek an Ordinance Deviation to allow the loading zone in an exterior side yard and for the lack of loading zone space. Staff does not have any issues with any of the Ordinance Deviation requests. The Planning Review also indicated minor items to be addressed at the time of Final Site Plan submittal.

The Landscaping review also recommended approval. The Applicant is seeking a Planning Commission Waiver for the berm required along Twelve Mile and for the remainder of the greenbelt canopy and sub-canopy trees. Staff supports this Waiver because of the steep grade along Twelve Mile.

Projects utilizing the PD-2 Option are required to submit a Traffic Impact Study. The Applicant is requesting a wavier of this requirement. The City’s traffic consultant has reviewed this request and concurs that a Traffic Study is not necessary given the fact there is already an existing McDonald’s on-site. There were minor traffic items to address on the Final Site Plan submittal.

The Applicant is requesting a Section 9 Façade Waiver for the underage of brick material and the overage of cast stone and trim materials on the south façade. The Façade Consultant supports this Waiver.

The Engineering Review and Fire Department Review noted minor items to be addressed at the time of Final Site Plan submittal.

Jeff Chase, Construction Manager of the McDonald’s project, addressed the Planning Commission. He introduced Otis Carter, the Real Estate Manager. The new franchisor of this site also owns McDonald’s at Ten Mile, Fourteen Mile and Haggerty, Twelve Mile and Halsted, and perhaps a few others. Mr. Chase offered to answer any questions.

Chair Cassis asked Member Meyer to read the correspondence into the record.

• Wanda Chirop, Novi: Approved of the project
• Tina Beard, Novi: Approved of the family-oriented, value-priced restaurant.

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

Moved by Member Meyer, seconded by Member Burke:

Member Wrobel confirmed the building would be slightly larger. The old building will be torn down and the new building will be 55 feet further west. The teardown-rebuild will take ninety days. Member Wrobel did not want the construction to interfere with the holiday traffic at Twelve Oaks. Mr. Chase responded that if they start the process in September, they would miss the holiday traffic, and if they don’t start that quickly they would begin at the beginning of the new year.

Chair Cassis thought McDonald’s was doing a fantastic job. He knows they will keep to their construction schedule. He thought that it was good that the restaurant was bringing the site up to date. Mr. Chase said that the trucks deliver between 4 and 5 AM, and there wouldn’t be a problem with the reduced loading area. McDonald’s controls the delivery times. Chair Cassis said that the loading wasn’t an issue because when he was in the restaurant business he too, would not allow truck deliveries during peak customer-serving times.

Moved by Member Meyer, seconded by Member Burke:

Moved by Member Meyer, seconded by Member Burke:

The Public Hearing was opened for Planning Commission’s recommendation to City Council for an ordinance to amend Ordinance No. 97-18, as amended, the City of Novi Zoning Ordinance to modify the standards for the number of days certain Zoning Board of Appeals rulings are valid.

Member Wrobel asked whether he should recuse himself from hearing this Public Hearing because he also sits on the ZBA. Chair Cassis did not think that was necessary.

Planner Kristen Kapelanski said these changes relate to Section 3107 of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff suggests that modifications be made regarding the length of time ZBA variances are valid. The members of the ZBA recommended changing the time frame for a building permit to be applied for and used from ninety days to 180 days, as variances sometimes expire prior to an Applicant being able to finalize his plans. Without the extension from the board, the variance is no longer valid. Under the proposed text amendment, the use variance would remain at ninety days.

No one from the audience wished to speak and no correspondence was received so Chair Cassis closed the Public Hearing.

Member Lynch asked whether the need for this text amendment was necessary because the City’s process is too slow. He said the easy thing to do is to extend the timeframe a variance is valid. He wanted to ensure that the City continues to monitor its own process and streamline it where possible. Deputy Director of Community Development Barbara McBeth responded that previously the requests for variances could not go forward without the plans; now the ZBA will consider requests based on the plot plan first. That said, the plans will be reviewed only after a request has been granted, potentially saving homeowners substantial money because now they aren’t developing building plans until they know the variances have been granted. This is more customer-service friendly. Member Lynch was glad to have this explanation be part of the record.

Member Wrobel said this was to help the residents out with their building process. Not everything runs like clock-work, especially when residents are trying to manage their projects on their own.

Moved by Member Pehrson, seconded by Member Burke:

Moved by Member Pehrson, seconded by Member Meyer:

Moved by Member Wrobel, seconded Member Pehrson:

There were no Consent Agenda removals.

There were no Matters for Discussion.

There were no Supplemental Issues.

No one wished to address the Planning Commission.

Moved by Member Wrobel,

The meeting adjourned at or about 8:55 PM.

TUE 06/17/08 MASTER PLAN AND ZONING COMMITTEE MEETING 6:30 PM

MON 06/23/08 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7:00 PM

WED 06/25/08 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 7:00 PM

FRI 07/04/08 CITY OFFICES CLOSED

MON 07/07/08 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7:00 PM

TUE 07/08/08 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 7:00 PM

WED 07/16/08 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 7:00 PM

MON 07/28/08 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7:00 PM

WED 07/30/08 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 7:00 PM

Transcribed by Jane L. Schimpf Signature on File

Customer Service Representative Angela Pawlowski, Planning Assistant Date

June 18, 2008

Date Approved: June 25, 2008