| View Agenda for this meeting View Action Summary for this meeting REGULAR
MEETING - ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Proceedings had and testimony taken in the matters of the ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, at City of Novi, 45175 West Ten 10 Mile Road, Novi, Michigan, Tuesday, June 9, 2009. BOARD MEMBERS ALSO PRESENT: REPORTED BY: 1 Novi, Michigan 2 Tuesday, June 9, 2009 3 7:00 p.m. 4 - - - - - - 5 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Good evening. 6 It's almost 7:00 p.m. and I would like to 7 call to order the June 9th, 2009 meeting of 8 Zoning Board of Appeals for City of Novi. 9 Will you please rise and join me in 10 the pledge of allegiance. 11 BOARD MEMBERS: I pledge allegiance to 12 the flag of the United States of America and 13 to the Republic for which it stands, one 14 nation under God indivisible with liberty 15 and justice for all. 16 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Mr. Boulard, 17 will you please call the roll. 18 MR. BOULARD: I will defer to Ms. 19 Martin if that's okay. 20 MS. MARTIN: Member Bauer? 21 MEMBER BAUER: Present. 22 MS. MARTIN: Chairman Sanghvi? 23 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Here. 24 MS. MARTIN: Member Wrobel?
4
1 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: Present. 2 MS. MARTIN: Member Skelcy? 3 MEMBER SKELCY: Here. 4 MS. MARTIN: Member Ghannam? 5 MEMBER GHANNAM: Here. 6 MS. MARTIN: Member Krieger? 7 MEMBER KRIEGER: Present. 8 MS. MARTIN: Member Ibe? 9 MEMBER IBE: Present. 10 MS. MARTIN: Member Cassis? 11 MEMBER CASSIS: Here. 12 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Very good. We 13 do have a quorum and the meeting is now in 14 session. I am not going to go over all the 15 rules because they are already printed and 16 are up front. If you need them you can find 17 them with the agenda. 18 Just a friendly reminder to please 19 turn off your cell phones and pagers. 20 Individual applicants may take five 21 minutes and groups may take up to ten 22 minutes to address the Board. 23 Zoning Board of Appeals is a hearing 24 board empowered by the City of Novi Charter
5
1 to hear appeals seeking variances from the 2 applications of the Novi Ordinances. 3 It's takes a vote of at least four 4 members to approve a variance and a vote of 5 the majority of the members present to deny 6 a variance. Tonight we have a full Board so 7 all the decisions taken will be final. 8 Let's look at the agenda. Are there 9 any additions, deletions to the agenda, Ms. 10 Martin? 11 MS. MARTIN: No, there is not. 12 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: Motion to 13 approve the agenda. 14 MEMBER GHANNAM: Second. 15 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: All those in 16 favor to approve the agenda please indicate? 17 BOARD MEMBERS: Aye. 18 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: All those 19 opposed same sign. 20 Now, let's go and have a look at the 21 minutes. We have some minutes for approval 22 today and are there any additions or 23 commissions, omissions, commissions, 24 anything about the minutes you would like to
6
1 discuss before making the motion? 2 MEMBER BAUER: I have number of 3 changes. 4 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Okay, all right, 5 sir. Please go ahead. 6 MEMBER BAUER: We have page 23 at the 7 bottom where it says, we ask that Mr. Bowman 8 was to take the oath and he was given the 9 oath. 10 And page 38 second line it says torn. 11 It should be turned down. 12 Page 57 down at the bottom where I 13 said, I am against it and why I would like 14 everyone, it says to vote. It was not to 15 vote for it. 16 And 82. What happened to 83? 17 MS. MARTIN: I'm not sure because I 18 made copies of the whole packet so maybe we 19 don't have the full set of minutes in here. 20 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: You don't have 21 complete minutes here? 22 MEMBER BAUER: We don't have an ending 23 to these? 24 MS. MARTIN: No, it does not look like
7
1 their complete. Do you want to table the 2 minutes? 3 MS. KUDLA: If anybody else has 4 changes first and then -- 5 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: You want to put 6 the corrections in the minutes and then we 7 will review them again next time and make a 8 motion next time. 9 MS. MARTIN: Okay. 10 MS. KUDLA: Sure. 11 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you. I 12 don't think we have them all complete here 13 so we can't go ahead a make motion. 14 MEMBER BAUER: I make a motion that we 15 postpone these until next meeting. 16 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Table this for 17 next meeting? 18 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 19 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Okay, thank you. 20 All right, we are moving along. Well, 21 surprisingly I never seen that happen 22 before. 23 Okay. Is there anybody in the 24 audience who would like to address the Board
8
1 regarding anything other than what is on the 2 agenda tonight? 3 (No response.) 4 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Seeing 5 none, we will close the Public Remark 6 Section. 7 And this brings us to the first case 8 on the agenda and that is case number: 9 09-018 27225 Wixom Road Catholic Central 10 High School. 11 Catholic Central High School is 12 requesting a variance to allow one 13 additional 24 square foot, 54 inch high 14 identification ground sign located at the 15 entrance to the property of 27225 Wixom 16 Road. The proposed sign would also include 17 changeable copy. The property is zoned R-1 18 and located south of Grand River and west of 19 Wixom Road. 20 Is the Applicant here regarding 21 Catholic Central High School? I think I did 22 see Father Elmer. For the record will you 23 please identify yourself and I know who you 24 are, and state your address as well. Thank
9
1 you. 2 FATHER ELMER: My name is Father Dick 3 Elmer. I am the president of Catholic 4 Central High School in Novi, Michigan. My 5 address is in Livonia but I will soon be a 6 resident of the City of Novi. The 7 (unintelligible) are building a residence on 8 11 Mile and Taft. 9 The request that I have to make is for 10 this second sign for two purposes. One is 11 to advertise our coming events. And the 12 second is to acknowledge the achievements of 13 our young men in the various areas of 14 goodness, discipline and knowledge. Those 15 are the three items in our motto. Teach me 16 goodness, discipline and knowledge. 17 And such things in goodness would be 18 -- or our run for -- if we raise money, our 19 students do, for such programs as Make a 20 Wish Foundation, and Coins for Tots. And we 21 did have a joint venture with Novi High 22 School where we raised money that was then 23 given to the Novi Youth Council. Those are 24 the kind of events in the area of goodness.
10
1 The area of discipline, of course, is 2 athletics, developing an interior 3 discipline, and so we would like to brag 4 about our successes there and coming events 5 as well. 6 And then, of course, knowledge, the 7 successes of our students. The fact, for 8 example, this year we put up the sign that 9 said we had 11 national merit finalists and 10 nine recommended students. So that was put 11 up on a temporary basis before we found out 12 that we needed this permit for the signage. 13 So, we took it all down. Recently put the 14 sign back up at the request of the 15 administration so that you could look at it. 16 So, that's my presentation as far as 17 why we want the sign. And for any technical 18 questions Mr. Tom Ryan who is a friend of 19 mine and represents us in our building of 20 the school is now with us to answer any 21 questions that you night have. And, of 22 course, I'm available for any questions too. 23 So, thank you. 24 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you. Is
11
1 there anybody in the audience who would like 2 to address the Board regarding this case? 3 This is the time to come forward. 4 (No response.) 5 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Seeing none, I 6 would request our Secretary to read any 7 correspondence regarding this case. 8 MEMBER BAUER: There were 236 notices 9 mailed. Twenty-two were returned. Six 10 approvals. Five objections. 11 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Okay. 12 MEMBER BAUER: The main problem for 13 objecting is they do not need an additional 14 sign because they already have one and it 15 just becomes an eyesore. 16 And this one goes into a little more 17 than that, but it's the same thing. 18 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Would you like 19 to just read the names of the people so we 20 know who they are. 21 MEMBER BAUER: Yes, we can do that. 22 Tom and Francis Sitko (ph); Marlene Martin 23 and Dan Martin; Carl Gruwall (ph); Jesta 24 (ph) U-S-K-I-C; Robert Pednick (ph). Those
12
1 were all objections. 2 MEMBER CASSIS: Do you have your thing 3 on? 4 MEMBER BAUER: I'm sorry. Those for 5 approval: I can't believe that it's been 6 there for so long. And they see no problem 7 in giving you that variance. There was no 8 name on that one. 9 Richard Gilbert Eaton has approval for 10 it. Thomas Robb, approval. Gamila Langley 11 (ph), approval. L. Steven Waynard (ph), 12 approval. Jane Keller approval. And that's 13 all, sir. 14 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you. All 15 right. Building Department, any comments? 16 MR. BOULARD: Just a couple of points 17 of clarification. You have in your packet 18 an overhead layout of the intersection of 19 the entry drive. There is an existing sign 20 that's mentioned in the staff comments in 21 the island. 22 The new sign, the new proposed sign is 23 to the south corner there. If the new 24 proposed sign were the only sign it would be
13
1 allowed by right including the changeable 2 copy portion of it which complies with all 3 the Ordinance requirements. And the 4 existing sign that's in the island does not 5 have changeable, electronic changeable copy 6 on it. 7 I did have one question, if I could. 8 On the drawings provided there is a view 9 triangle, a line noted there. I'm not sure 10 if that complies or if that is -- that 11 triangle at the corner to provide clearance 12 for drivers to see oncoming traffic and so 13 on, I'm not sure if that is dimensioned the 14 same as the City's requirements, but could 15 you confirm that if approved the sign will 16 be installed in accordance with the City 17 setback requirements? 18 MR. RYAN: Yes, sir. I'm Tom Ryan 19 (unintelligible) on behalf of Detroit 20 Catholic Central of Novi. Yes, we 21 understand that it doesn't comply but 22 certainly if it is approved we would make 23 sure that it would comply. 24 MR. BOULARD: Okay. That's the only
14
1 information I have. I would be happy to 2 answer any questions. 3 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Okay, thank you. 4 So now I open it up to the Board for 5 discussion. 6 Yes, Mr. Wrobel? 7 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: Thank you, 8 Mr. Chair. The changeable lettering on this 9 sign is this going to be a digital sign? 10 MR. RYAN: No. 11 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: Or is this 12 going to be -- 13 MR. RYAN: Banners or placards that 14 are put in, that's what I want to make sure. 15 It's not a neon changeable sign. It's going 16 to be static placards that are put in and 17 taken out as needed. 18 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: The other 19 question is, there is a sign already at the 20 entrance. Why couldn't you consider 21 incorporating lettering into that sign and 22 thereby only having one sign rather a second 23 sign? 24 MR. RYAN: Well, Mr. Wrobel, that's a
15
1 good question. The sign we have now meets 2 the Ordinance. We have to get a variance for 3 that because it has to be placed on top of 4 the sign or something like that. I mean, 5 it's just not -- the way it was placed it 6 doesn't lend itself unless we go up to place 7 the banners up there, if you will, the 8 information up there. 9 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: I have no 10 trouble with you advertising your 11 achievements. They are very great and 12 everyone knows what a good school it is, but 13 personally I would prefer to see it all 14 incorporated into one side similar to the 15 one that Novi High School has out there on 16 Ten Mile. 17 Either way you would have to look for 18 a variance. I would be more apt to give a 19 variance for the one sign rather than two 20 signs. 21 That's all, Mr. Chair. 22 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: You are done? 23 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: Yes. 24 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you.
16
1 Yes, Mr. Bauer? 2 MEMBER BAUER: I agree with my cohort 3 here. You have a nice sign for the name of 4 the school and I would prefer to see it go 5 higher. 6 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Okay. Anybody 7 else? 8 When I went through this application 9 process and all the paperwork, I just had 10 one question. But I think that question has 11 been eloquently answered by Father Elmer, 12 what this sign is going to add to the 13 circumstances as they are. So, to 14 incorporate that further information, 15 something needs to be done, whether you have 16 two signs or one sign incorporating 17 everything. It looks like a couple of my 18 colleagues are in favor of incorporating 19 everything in one sign. Any other ideas? 20 MEMBER BAUER: Prefer. 21 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Prefer. Prefer 22 or favor, whatever. 23 MEMBER CASSIS: Nobody wants to go. 24 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Go ahead. Yes,
17
1 Mr. Cassis? 2 MEMBER CASSIS: I am going to go along 3 with my colleagues. You know, I have a lot 4 of respect for the school and Father Elmer, 5 he knows that, but I sincerely think that 6 going with two signs with a beautiful 7 entrance like that is going get it busier 8 and people driving down they will not know 9 where to look. Whether to look at the name 10 of the school or look at the changeable 11 thing. I believe it's like 45 per hour 12 there, miles per hour or what? 13 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Forty, yes. 14 MEMBER CASSIS: And across the street 15 there is a bank, there is Sam's, there is 16 all kinds of other entities that have signs. 17 And I believe that putting them, 18 incorporating them in one sign would be 19 better for the school. 20 Mr. Boulard, what is the opinion of 21 the City on this? You didn't give us a 22 direction. 23 MR. BOULARD: Well, I think this sign 24 if it were the only sign would be allowed by
18
1 right. The institution or the development 2 is allowed one sign. So, the Ordinance, 3 strict interpretation of the Ordinance says 4 one sign. That's why a variance is required 5 for two signs. I'm not sure that when the 6 Sign Ordinance was written it was intended 7 to include all specific situations and 8 that's why the Board is here. 9 But the Ordinance would not support 10 more than one sign. 11 MEMBER CASSIS: Thank you, Mr. 12 Boulard. That's all I got to say at this 13 time. Thank you. 14 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you. Yes, 15 Mr. Wrobel? 16 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: To the 17 Applicant. Would you consider, hearing what 18 the consensus is so far from the panel, 19 would you consider putting this into one 20 sign? 21 MR. RYAN: The only thing I could say, 22 sir, is that I have been talking to Father 23 Elmer and that Mr. Argenta (ph) who you 24 remember designed the school and the sign.
19
1 The sign that's there now is specifically 2 made for the entrance sign and whatnot and 3 we're concerned that it might detract having 4 something above it relative to this 5 temporary signage that's going to be 6 changed. It is a beautiful entranceway sign 7 and as your building official stated, I 8 understand the Ordinance. We don't want a 9 proliferation of signs in Novi, we 10 understand that. 11 If I may, this area, the entrance to 12 the school there is a traffic light, you 13 know, we have the island with the one 14 beautiful sign which is legal and conforming 15 and whatnot and it's just tucked away a 16 little bit to the south. So, in answer to 17 Mr. Cassis' issues about proliferation of 18 signs and trying to confuse people, it would 19 still be in the line of sight when people 20 came in, turned in or turned out of Catholic 21 Central. And as you know there's all that 22 vegetation is to the south. 23 We have those three residential 24 properties, so they would be screened from
20
1 this sign and because it would be changing 2 you wouldn't want people to wonder what the 3 sign on top of the existing sign is going to 4 say every time. It might be distractive to 5 people when they could just look to the 6 left, if you will, to the south and see, 7 well, if there is a race coming up or if 8 there is merit scholarships or whatever that 9 sign would say it would be in a discrete 10 area of the property and it would be for a 11 different purpose than that general entrance 12 sign which wouldn't change. 13 I mean, it can be done. I mean it's 14 not impossible, but the way the sign is 15 designed concerning the architect and 16 whatnot, he is just concerned that it might 17 not look appropriately on top of it. It 18 might look top heavy and it may detract from 19 the current sign. That's our only concern 20 about that. 21 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: I guess I'm 22 just concerned that based on what my 23 colleagues and I are saying it's going to be 24 very difficult it appears at this time to
21
1 approve a sign like this. And we're looking 2 for a way to help you by minimizing it. And 3 that's the one suggestion that I personally 4 have. If you can look at it and maybe we 5 can (unintelligible). 6 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Anybody else? 7 Yes, Mr. Ryan? 8 MR. RYAN: I just was going to say if 9 that's the consensus of the Board we respect 10 your position. We understand what the 11 Ordinance says and we're obviously asking 12 for a relief from the Ordinance and I don't 13 know -- I mean, the school or any kind of 14 learning use is a dynamic use which is not 15 -- I mean, we are not selling, we are not a 16 retail place, that's why the new sign or 17 some variation would be necessary. If you 18 would like we would ask maybe to table this 19 and we can go back and talk to the architect 20 and maybe come back with not to waste your 21 time tonight and we appreciate your input. 22 And we'll go back and talk to the architect 23 and come back with something that maybe is 24 more along the lines of your thinking if we
22
1 can do that. We would like to look at every 2 option. We appreciate your input if that's 3 agreeable with the Board. 4 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes, Mr. 5 Ghannam? 6 MEMBER GHANNAM: I just have a couple 7 of questions and you may not be able to make 8 a decision tonight. But, first of all, the 9 way it's proposed right now is it meant to 10 attract attention from both southbound and 11 northbound Wixom Road? 12 MR. RYAN: Yeah, I don't think so, 13 sir, because it's just the southbound 14 because it's sort of tucked in there. So, 15 really northbound people, they can see our 16 main sign but they really can't see this 17 sign. 18 MEMBER GHANNAM: I guess that's part 19 of my issue because part of what you want to 20 do is advertise these things that the Father 21 has indicated. And if you came back with 22 other plans where maybe you could put that 23 sign in your island there that would be the 24 changeable, it would be viewable from north
23
1 and southbound. 2 MR. RYAN: True. 3 MEMBER GHANNAM: And I guess that was 4 one of my original questions I had in my 5 mind, what is aesthetically more pleasing 6 not only to your school but to the 7 community? Is it the one sign that can be 8 seen both north and southbound Wixom or is 9 it these multiple signs where really one of 10 them can only be seen on southbound Wixom? 11 So, I think those would be good issues and I 12 would have no problem making a motion to 13 table this for further exploration. 14 FATHER ELMER: The one thing that I 15 would be considering right now is the fact 16 is that that sign that we have up now is 17 directly perpendicular to Wixom Road. And 18 it's setback a bit so that traffic going by 19 would hardly even see the sign if it were on 20 top of the monument sign that we have there 21 now. So, I don't think it would serve our 22 purposes even from the southbound traffic 23 which is really what most of the traffic 24 that we have we find is coming south going
24
1 into Target and that, and then, of course, 2 our own people going into our property. 3 MEMBER GHANNAM: So, you are 4 suggesting that you still, you think you 5 would need two signs? 6 FATHER ELMER: Yes, sir. 7 MEMBER GHANNAM: Is it worth us 8 tabling it at this point in order for you to 9 explore that or do you have time 10 constraints? 11 FATHER ELMER: Yes, if you would do 12 that we would request that. 13 MEMBER BAUER: I'll second it. 14 MEMBER GHANNAM: I would move, I have 15 no problem -- 16 FATHER ELMER: May we leave that sign 17 up in case any of you would like to have a 18 second look at it just to see what it would 19 look like on top of that big sign? 20 MEMBER GHANNAM: Is there any problem 21 with that? 22 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes, Mr. 23 Boulard? 24 MR. BOULARD: I think as it stands
25
1 right now even if there was a movement on 2 the Board to approve a sign that was on top 3 of the center sign, the publication, it was 4 made for public notice doesn't support that. 5 My suggestion would be that if the Board is 6 inclined to table this, that you all go 7 back, take a look, work with the architect 8 to find out, take a look at what might work 9 for you. Get us some revised information so 10 that we can publicize it appropriately for 11 the next meeting. 12 And then at some point we need to have 13 a mock sign there even if it's just an 14 outline of it on top of that existing sign 15 so that the Board Members can look at it. 16 MR. RYAN: Great. Thank you. 17 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes, Mr. Cassis? 18 MEMBER CASSIS: Are you done? 19 MEMBER GHANNAM: I am done. I'll make 20 a motion. 21 MEMBER CASSIS: I will let you have 22 the motion. But, you know, it doesn't have 23 to be on top. I mean, I'm not an architect. 24 I think you need to go back to the architect
26
1 with imagination and so on. It could be 2 underneath or to the side or whatever, you 3 know, attached to this. Save some money 4 also. 5 MR. RYAN: Thank you. 6 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Okay. 7 MEMBER GHANNAM: I will move in this 8 case if it's okay with the Chair. 9 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Go ahead. 10 MEMBER GHANNAM: In case number: 11 09-018 for 27225 Wixom Road that we table 12 this until further notice of hearing at the 13 Petitioner's request. 14 MEMBER BAUER: I will second that. 15 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: The motion has 16 been made and seconded by Mr. Bauer. Is 17 there any further discussion regarding the 18 motion? Seeing none, Ms. Martin, will you 19 please call the roll. 20 MS. MARTIN: Member Bauer? 21 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 22 MS. MARTIN: Member Cassis? 23 MEMBER CASSIS: Yes. 24 MS. MARTIN: Member Ghannam?
27
1 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes. 2 MS. MARTIN: Member Ibe? 3 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 4 MS. MARTIN: Member Krieger? 5 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 6 MS. MARTIN: Member Wrobel? 7 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: Yes. 8 MS. MARTIN: Chairman Sanghvi? 9 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes. Thank you. 10 MR. RYAN: Thank you very much. Have 11 a good evening. Thank you. 12 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Moving on. Case 13 number 2 is Case: 09-019 43170 Grand River 14 Avenue PEI WEI Diner. Allied Signs is 15 requesting a variance to allow installation 16 of one additional 22 square foot wall sign 17 on the west elevation of the multi tenant 18 building located at 43170 Grand River Avenue 19 for PEI WEI Diner. The property is zoned TC 20 and located north of Grand River and east of 21 Novi Road. 22 Is the Applicant here? Okay, go 23 ahead. Please identify yourself. Give your 24 name, address and if you are not an attorney
28
1 be sworn in by our Secretary. Thank you. 2 MS. DEMOL: I'm sorry, if I'm not 3 what? 4 MEMBER BAUER: Not an attorney. 5 MS. DEMOL: Oh, I'm not an attorney. 6 MEMBER BAUER: Okay. 7 MS. DEMOL: My name is Carrie Demol. I 8 am with Allied Signs. My address is 33650 9 Giftos Drive in Clinton Township, Michigan. 10 MEMBER BAUER: Raise your right hand. 11 Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth 12 regarding case: 09-019? 13 MS. DEMOL: I do. 14 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you. 15 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Go ahead and 16 make your presentation. 17 MS. DEMOL: We're basically here to 18 request a third wall sign to go on the east 19 elevation -- or the west elevation that 20 would be for the east traffic flow on Grand 21 River. Before I came to the meeting tonight 22 I went and took a drive by to look at the 23 banner that our company had installed for 24 all of the Board Members to take a look at.
29
1 In viewing that and not just like 2 conceptually because a lot of times 3 conceptually and reality obviously you guys 4 probably know from approving different 5 things that it sometimes turns out 6 differently. But it really is a necessity 7 for our customer to have that identification 8 on that wall. Coming up on Grand River I 9 couldn't, I couldn't see that that was a PEI 10 WEI Diner right there until I was like right 11 up on it and then I saw the banner there and 12 whipped in really quick. 13 So, you know, having said that, the 14 store has been there for a little while and 15 we do feel that at this time it still is a 16 necessity for them to have that third wall 17 sign. Thank you. 18 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you. Is 19 there anybody in the audience who would like 20 to address the Board regarding this case? 21 (No response.) 22 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Seeing none, Mr. 23 Secretary, do you have any correspondence? 24 MEMBER BAUER: There was 164 notices
30
1 mailed. Seven returned. Two approvals. 2 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Would you like 3 to read those? 4 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. Skip Tuck, 5 president of Novi Auto Parts: We have no 6 with the diner having the other sign 7 installed. With the economic climate 8 businesses need all the help they can get. 9 And from a Banks Vacuum Superstores: 10 The requested signage by the business will 11 not detract from the community. 12 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Very good. 13 Thank you. Building Department? 14 MR. BOULARD: Thank you. The staff 15 comments include some history. When this 16 restaurant moved into the building some time 17 ago there was a sign on the north elevation 18 that was approved and amended by right. 19 There was a variance request that was 20 partially approved for an additional sign on 21 the south. The sign on the west at about 33 22 square feet was denied at that time. So, 23 this request is for a smaller sign on that 24 west side. But it is a third sign where one
31
1 is allowed. 2 So, if there are any questions I'll be 3 happy to help. 4 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you. I 5 will open it up to the Board. Any comments? 6 (Unintelligible). 7 MEMBER CASSIS: I don't want to take 8 over. 9 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: I am just 10 kidding. You are very welcome. People 11 don't realize I have known Mr. Cassis for 12 over 35 years. (Unintelligible). 13 Yes, Ms. Krieger? 14 MEMBER KRIEGER: I drove by the PEI 15 WEI Diner, and it being a destination that 16 people would be aware of where they were 17 going, so I would not very much be in favor 18 of a third sign. As I drove down Grand 19 River I did find it and then if it's for 20 parking and you drive around inside the mall 21 area you know right away where you are going 22 to have to go and park. So, at this time 23 that's my impression. 24 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you.
32
1 Anybody else? Yes, Mr. Wrobel? 2 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: Mr. Boulard, 3 does any of the other lots at Town Center 4 have a third sign? I know we approved some 5 for dual signs at the other locations. 6 MR. BOULARD: I can't say without a 7 doubt, but as best of my knowledge there are 8 some stores that have two signs, but I am 9 not aware of any that have three signs. I 10 could be wrong. 11 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: As Ms. 12 Krieger said earlier, this is a destination. 13 I too believe there is adequate signage and 14 I would have a hard time supporting a third 15 sign at this time. Thank you. 16 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes, Mr. Bauer? 17 MEMBER BAUER: I too have to agree 18 with the two ahead of me that they are now 19 right now more than they are allowed. And 20 with the location that's the reason why they 21 were permitted one additional sign from this 22 Board, and I would not like to go along with 23 this either. 24 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you. Yes,
33
1 Mr. Cassis? 2 MEMBER CASSIS: I would agree with the 3 previous colleagues. You know, we go with 4 one sign, then we gave you another sign. 5 So, that's two. Now you want a third sign. 6 That is a difficult terrain to really tread 7 on to begin with. 8 I think sometimes restaurants or 9 entities think that they are not getting the 10 business because they don't have enough 11 signs. I don't think that's the case in 12 your case. Every time I drove by there, and 13 I drive there almost twice a day. The sign 14 I see is on Grand River, the one facing 15 south. And it's big and good and I can see 16 PEI WEI. 17 The other thing is, you know, 18 sometimes on the Planning Commission we go 19 along with certain setups of buildings where 20 they are located and how they are located 21 and so on. I must admit, I was there on the 22 Planning Commission when we approved the 23 setup of these three or four buildings that 24 came up.
34
1 And I want to make a statement that is 2 not necessarily connected with this, but I 3 think that is overbuilding there. They 4 overbuilt too many, too many entities in a 5 very small sized lot. And thus you have all 6 that cluster of the different entities, 7 different restaurants. And people sometimes 8 get confused and so on, but that's the 9 consequence of leasing in that building. 10 When PEI WEI came in to lease in that 11 building they should have known, look, you 12 know, maybe we need three signs so we're not 13 going to lease there. But I don't think 14 that decision was made. So, I don't want to 15 be lecturing, but I think the circumstances 16 speak for themselves. So, I will not go 17 along with a third sign. 18 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you. Well, 19 anybody else? Would anybody like to make a 20 motion? 21 MS. DEMOL: May I interject something? 22 Am I allowed to do that or is my turn over? 23 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Well, your turn 24 has come and gone. All right, I will let
35
1 you have your say. 2 MS. DEMOL: Another option that they 3 had talked about wanting to do because they 4 kind of had a feeling that that might be the 5 general consensus of the Board. Obviously 6 they are a business within the City of Novi 7 so they know, and they see how everybody 8 else is set up. They would also like to 9 request or had talked about asking that 10 instead of a third sign moving one of the 11 other two elevations to the west elevation 12 as opposed to the north and south. So, they 13 would still have two signs just moving the 14 location so that they would get the 15 visibility on Grand River instead of within 16 the shopping center itself. 17 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Well, that's up 18 to you to decide, it's not for me to decide 19 and then you can come and talk to the City 20 about it if you want to do that. 21 MS. DEMOL: So, would I be able to 22 table this for another meeting to make that 23 proposal? 24 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Okay. You have
36
1 a got slider coming here. 2 MS. KUDLA: I think what you could do 3 is you could approve this variance as 4 requested and conditioned on removal of one 5 of the other two existing wall signs. 6 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Okay. Yes, Mr. 7 Cassis? 8 MEMBER CASSIS: You know, I think you 9 may want to rethink that. 10 MS. DEMOL: Moving, relocating one of 11 the signs? 12 MEMBER CASSIS: Because you've got a 13 beautiful sign where it is right now. I see 14 it all the time. Think about it before you 15 do that. 16 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you. 17 MEMBER GHANNAM: I just have a quick 18 question for the City. 19 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes, go ahead. 20 MEMBER GHANNAM: Thank you, Mr. Chair. 21 This petition is for a third sign. If we 22 denied this couldn't the Petitioner go in 23 and try to just simply move this? They have 24 already got the variance for the second and
37
1 just move that? 2 MS. KUDLA: I would have to look at 3 how specific the other variance was. 4 Whether it was for a particular location and 5 what the size of the variance was because 6 this one is specifically 22 feet and I don't 7 know if that would be greater or lesser. I 8 think the only way you could approve this or 9 getting rid of one of the other ones is to 10 approve this one that we have the specifics 11 on and let them choose the other ones to 12 remove. 13 MEMBER GHANNAM: Given that, I have no 14 problem supporting that scenario. I mean, 15 if that's your choice and your client's 16 choice to have the elevation you wish, but 17 conditioned upon one of the other signs 18 being taken down. But on the third sign I 19 would have move to deny that. So, it's your 20 choice however you would want to approach 21 that. 22 MS. DEMOL: They did say before we 23 came to the meeting this evening that that 24 is something that if they weren't able to
38
1 get the third sign which they did want, to 2 relocate one to that elevation that they 3 wanted the third sign on and still just have 4 the two, they would prefer that as opposed 5 to having one on each end of the building as 6 it currently exist. 7 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Okay, I just 8 have one question. Do you have the 9 authority to decide that now? 10 MS. DEMOL: Yes, I do. 11 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: On behalf of the 12 owners? 13 MS. DEMOL: Yes, I do. 14 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Or you are just 15 representing the sign maker? 16 MS. DEMOL: Yes, it was something that 17 was sent back and forth in numerous e-mails 18 before we even actually got to the 19 application of the variance itself. So, 20 that is something that they wanted. 21 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Which sign would 22 you propose to move onto the other 23 elevation? 24 MS. DEMOL: It would be the north
39
1 sign, the one that faces inward toward the 2 shopping center is the one that they would 3 prefer to move. I understand that it is over 4 their main entrance, but they feel very 5 strongly about that lack of identification 6 on the west wall. 7 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you. 8 MR. BOULARD: Mr. Chairman, if I may, 9 do you know how big the existing sign on the 10 north is? 11 MS. DEMOL: That's a very good 12 question. 13 MR. BOULARD: The sign that was 14 previously turned down for the west 15 elevation was 32.95 square feet. I guess my 16 concern is, if the Board were inclined to 17 allow the option or allow a sign, a 22 18 square foot sign on the west elevation with 19 the condition that the existing sign on the 20 north elevation is taken down, and the 21 Petitioner wanted to actually reuse that 22 sign on the north elevation it may be too 23 big. 24 On the other hand, the Board could
40
1 grant that variance and then the Petitioner 2 could decide if they wanted to go through 3 with that. If not, correct me if I'm wrong, 4 that they could keep the status quo. They 5 wouldn't have to take advantage of the 6 variance and the conditions. Is that 7 correct? 8 MS. KUDLA: Right. And they are not 9 obligated to proceed forward with doing 10 anything. 11 MEMBER GHANNAM: Would we need 12 additional notices because of the size of 13 the sign? 14 MS. KUDLA: Well, that is what is 15 going to be the tricky part. If those signs 16 are any bigger -- this then is still a 17 request for an additional sign conditioned 18 on the removal of the existing sign, so you 19 could still end up with a bigger sign 20 depending on what the size of those existing 21 signs are. 22 So, yes, the only way we could really 23 work this without tabling it and getting 24 more specific information is if the
41
1 Petitioner was to say they're going to, 2 we're going to grant the variance as 3 requested for a 22 square foot wall sign, 4 and that's what you would have to put up 5 there. 6 MS. DEMOL: Right. 7 MS. KUDLA: And if that sign isn't 22 8 square feet, then you would not be compliant 9 with this variance. You would be in 10 violation and you could be issued a 11 citation. 12 MS. DEMOL: Right. No, they would 13 understand that. That was the premise of 14 the smaller wall sign on the west elevation. 15 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Very good. 16 Thank you. Yes, Mr. Bauer? 17 MEMBER BAUER: I was just going to say 18 exactly what you said, just to move that 19 sign, but it would still, we could approve a 20 22 square foot sign but not as a third sign. 21 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Did we find out 22 how big is the other sign? Is there any way 23 of knowing that? 24 MR. BOULARD: It appears from the
42
1 drawings there is on one of the pages there 2 is a table that shows the existing north as 3 21.93 square feet. If that's indeed the 4 case -- 5 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Maybe they are 6 the same size. 7 MR. BOULARD: -- that might solve the 8 issue. 9 MS. KUDLA: Eliminating one sign, this 10 would still be a motion to grant the 11 variance requested, but it would actually be 12 a lesser variance because it's not a third 13 sign, it's a second additional sign. 14 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Okay. So, 15 really the motion should be to approve this 16 sign provided the north elevation sign is 17 taken down? 18 MS. KUDLA: Yes. Twenty foot square 19 wall sign. 20 MR. BOULARD: Twenty-two. 21 MS. KUDLA: Twenty-two foot square 22 wall sign as requested subject to removal of 23 the sign on the north elevation. 24 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Okay. I have no
43
1 problem with that. Anybody else? Yes, Mr. 2 Ghannam? 3 MEMBER GHANNAM: Is that acceptable to 4 you? Do you understand that? 5 MS. DEMOL: Yes. Yes, that would be 6 acceptable. 7 MEMBER GHANNAM: If it is acceptable 8 to you then I am okay with that and I would 9 be willing to make a motion. Is that okay, 10 Mr. Chair? 11 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Sure. Go ahead. 12 MEMBER GHANNAM: Okay. Then I will go 13 ahead and move in case number: 09-019 for 14 43170 Grand River Avenue to approve the 15 Petitioner's request for a 22 foot or 16 smaller sign on the west elevation of the 17 building conditioned upon the removal of the 18 existing sign on the north elevation of the 19 building. And that's it. Because I think 20 the Petitioner has established practical 21 difficulties as she stated on the record. 22 Is that okay? 23 MEMBER BAUER: Second the motion. 24 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Okay, it's been
44
1 seconded by Mr. Bauer. Is there any further 2 discussion? Seeing none, Ms. Martin, will 3 you please call the roll. 4 MS. MARTIN: Member Cassis? 5 MEMBER CASSIS: No. 6 MS. MARTIN: Member Ghannam? 7 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes. 8 MS. MARTIN: Member Ibe? 9 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 10 MS. MARTIN: Member Krieger? 11 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 12 MS. MARTIN: Member Wrobel? 13 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: Yes. 14 MS. MARTIN: Member Bauer? 15 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 16 MS. MARTIN: Chairman Sanghvi? 17 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes. Thank you. 18 MS. DEMOL: Thank you very much. 19 20 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Moving along to 21 the next case on the agenda is case number: 22 09-020. The address is 40798 Ladene Lane. 23 Mr. John M. Reed is requesting a 24 variance from the minimum rear yard
45
1 requirement to allow construction of a 2 sunroom on the rear of the existing 3 residence. Property is zoned R-3 and is 4 located north of Eight Mile and west of 5 Haggerty Road. 6 Are you Mr. Reed? 7 MR. REED: Yes, I am. 8 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: All right, 9 please state your full name and address and 10 if you are not an attorney please be sworn 11 in by our secretary. 12 MR. REED: I am not an attorney. 13 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Very good. 14 MR. REED: My name is John Reed, 40798 15 Ladene Lane, Novi. 16 MEMBER BAUER: Do you swear or affirm 17 to tell the truth regarding case 09-020? 18 MR. REED: I do. 19 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Please go ahead 20 and make your presentation. 21 MR. REED: Okay. I appreciate this 22 opportunity to ask for a variance. I'm 23 going to go by -- I turned in a little 24 packet and I am going to kind of go by what
46
1 I submitted in that packet. Essentially 2 what I am requesting is we have a 3 pre-existing deck that's I believe it's in 4 the neighborhood of about 22 and a half feet 5 from the property line. 6 What we're interested in doing is 7 re-engineering the deck because it's a 8 floating deck right now. It's not attached 9 to the house and it cantilevers, meaning the 10 deck extends over beyond the footing. So, 11 what needs to be done is the deck needs to 12 be re-engineered to be able to support the 13 weight of I guess what you would regard as a 14 typical sunroom. 15 It may be something and I put this in 16 the packet that we will go with the 17 possibility of stick build or traditional 18 construction. Either way, the City allows 19 that type of construction on a re-engineered 20 deck provided the deck can support that, the 21 weight of the sunroom. And presently the 22 deck extends to about 22 and a half foot 23 from the property line. I guess I learned 24 that the typical setback is to 35 feet.
47
1 So, what I am formally requesting here 2 is to take about 12 and a half feet, so I'm 3 looking to change the variance from the 35 4 feet to 22 and a half feet to the edge of 5 that deck essentially and to be able to 6 build a sunroom on that. We're on a pie 7 shaped lot on a cul-de-sac that backs up to 8 the commons of Whispering Meadows. So the 9 house is sort of setback a little bit deeper 10 than some of the other houses to accommodate 11 the setbacks I suppose from the original 12 build. 13 So, we are kind of shoved back a 14 little bit on the property. But like I 15 said, we back to a commons of a number of 16 acres and there is pond and we're looking to 17 get away from the bugs and whatever and have 18 a sunroom built on that I guess 19 re-engineered deck. 20 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Good. Thank 21 you. 22 Is there anybody in the audience who would 23 like to address the Board regarding this 24 case?
48
1 (No response.) 2 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Seeing none, Mr. 3 Secretary, do you have any correspondence? 4 MEMBER BAUER: There were 29 notices 5 mailed. Three returned. Two objections. 6 Gail Ford 40784 Ladene. She does not 7 want to grant permission for anyone to 8 trespass on her property and go all the way 9 up to the side of her home without any 10 permission or knowledge. She is against it. 11 Edward and Marty Ann Brunet (ph). 12 Objection. We see no benefit to the Novi 13 community as such. The requirements that 14 are established should be followed. 15 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you. 16 Building Department? 17 MR. BOULARD: Thank you. There are 18 some unique circumstances as the Petitioner 19 mentioned in terms of the shape of the lot 20 and where the house sits on the lot. And I 21 would like to take the opportunity if I 22 could to ask the Petitioner to explain if 23 there is a way to put the sunroom on without 24 having, without requiring a variance?
49
1 MR. REED: I think, and this is just 2 my guesstimation, I think the distance at 3 least to the back lot line, the house is, 4 the deck goes back probably 14 feet. So, 14 5 plus 22 and a half is in the neighborhood of 6 36 feet. So the house is essentially right 7 at the, very close to the limit of the 8 variance. So, I guess, what I envision we 9 have a door wall that goes out of the family 10 room and the sunroom would be attached 11 there. And there really is no other place 12 even if we tried to skooch it kind of more 13 to the center, and I think my lot it's a 14 little bit angular. 15 So, I mean, if you were to go to the 16 vertex of the angle, you'd still, I don't 17 know, maybe gain a couple of feet. So, 18 putting it on the back of the house which we 19 desire to do because you back to the commons 20 in the big open area and the pond. I mean, 21 that's really the only place I guess if 22 that's what your question, is the only place 23 you could be. We couldn't stick it on the 24 side I'm sure because of variance and it
50
1 would begin to probably detract from, 2 architecturally from, I mean the house would 3 start to look peculiar probably. So, I am 4 just trying to look for a traditional build 5 on the back of the house. 6 MR. BOULARD: Thank you. One other 7 question. Will you be able to do this work 8 without going on any of your neighbors' 9 property? 10 MR. REED: Yes. 11 MR. BOULARD: Okay, thank you. 12 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Okay, I will 13 open it up to the Board. Yes, Mr. Wrobel? 14 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: From the 15 back of the proposed sunroom across the 16 commons to the other homes approximately 17 what is the distance of the open common 18 space? 19 MR. REED: I would say -- to the back 20 of their property line? 21 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: Yes. 22 Approximately? 23 MR. REED: I would say at least a 24 pitching wedge which would be at least I
51
1 would say 80 to 90 yards at least. 2 MEMBER GHANNAM: (Unintelligible). 3 MR. REED: Yeah, I would say 80 yards. 4 It angles this way as you enter into the 5 commons but we're out on probably what would 6 be -- I think I have a picture there. I 7 have a Google earth. 8 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: You can put it 9 on the overhead if you like. So, people at 10 home can see it also. 11 MR. REED: Sure. The X as I have 12 marked right here, that's our home. And, 13 yeah, this distance right here is probably 14 60, 80 yards. I would say 80 yards. And 15 there is a deck you can't see with the trees 16 here, but the deck is like right in here. I 17 think that's on the survey plan that I 18 submitted. And like I said, I picked the 19 shortage distance to that property line here 20 and that was to the edge of the deck was 22 21 and a half feet. 22 I guess I learned too that I guess an 23 enclosed structure is different than a deck. 24 The deck is 18 feet, I guess, and an
52
1 enclosed structure needed to be 35. I 2 thought I could just pop the sunroom right 3 on, but, no, it required a variance. And 4 you can see how it kind of narrows down 5 here. I mean, this is a very large area. 6 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: As we can 7 see, this is a very uniquely shaped lot. 8 And from personal experience my lot is 9 shaped the same way and I built a sunroom on 10 here and I had to come and get a variance to 11 build a sunroom on mine just because of the 12 shape of the lot. Given the distance 13 between the back of your lot and other 14 residences, given the fact that your house 15 sits back on the lot as mine does, I have no 16 issue with granting this. It's not out of 17 line. It's not out of character with the 18 other homes in the area. It doesn't 19 interfere with anybody else's use of 20 property or view. There is a substantial 21 difference so I have no problem supporting 22 this. 23 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you. 24 Anybody else? Yes, Ms. Krieger?
53
1 MEMBER KRIEGER: I agree. 2 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: You agree. Thank 3 you. 4 MEMBER BAUER: And I agree. 5 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: One other 6 agreement. Thank you. Actually I was there 7 in your neighborhood this morning and I saw 8 your place. It's a lot of room behind, so I 9 don't think there is going to be a major 10 issue about that. 11 MR. REED: Thank you. 12 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: So, anybody 13 else? Otherwise I will entertain a motion 14 regarding this case. Anybody is going with 15 it? Looking around. Go ahead, Ms. Krieger. 16 MEMBER KRIEGER: In case number: 17 09-020 filed by John Reed at 40798 Ladene 18 Lane, I move to approve the request for the 19 variance from the minimum rear yard 20 requirement to allow construction of the 21 sunroom in the rear of the existing 22 residence. And that the Petitioner has 23 mentioned his practical difficulty in that 24 he will not be going -- the concerns of the
54
1 neighbors that he will not do that. And 2 that the maximum variance requested is 12.5 3 feet for the minimum, and this setback will 4 not unreasonably prevent the use of the 5 property for permitted purpose. 6 The variance will provide substantial 7 justice to the Petitioner and surrounding 8 property owners. And these are unique 9 circumstances to this property. It is not 10 self created. The adequate light and air is 11 provided as by the satellite image. And 12 it's in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance. 13 MEMBER BAUER: Second the motion. 14 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: The motion has 15 been made and seconded by Mr. Bauer. Yes? 16 MS. KUDLA: Could we just have a 17 little bit of verification on how it 18 affects -- that it doesn't trespass on the 19 property of the neighbor. Amend the motion 20 to indicate that the variance will not cause 21 any trespassing on the property of 22 surrounding neighbors. 23 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes, I agree. 24 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: And Mr. Bauer
55
1 agrees? 2 MEMBER BAUER: I agree. 3 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Okay, they both 4 agree. Thank you. Any further discussion, 5 comments from anybody? Seeing none, Ms. 6 Martin, will you please call the roll. 7 MS. MARTIN: Member Cassis? 8 MEMBER CASSIS: Yes. 9 MS. MARTIN: Member Ghannam? 10 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes. 11 MS. MARTIN: Member Ibe? 12 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 13 MS. MARTIN: Member Krieger? 14 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 15 MS. MARTIN: Member Bauer? 16 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 17 MS. MARTIN: Member Wrobel? 18 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: Yes. 19 MS. MARTIN: Chairman Sanghvi? 20 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes. Thank you. 21 MR. REED: Thank you very much. I 22 appreciate it. 23 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Good luck. 24 MR. REED: Thank you.
56
1 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Moving along to 2 the next case is case number: 09-021, 44050 3 Twelve Mile Road, Stoneridge Office Park. 4 NorthStar Signs, Incorporated is requesting 5 a variance to install a 20 square foot real 6 estate leasing sign located at 44050 Twelve 7 Mile Road in Stoneridge Office Plaza. The 8 property is zoned 0S-1 and is north of 9 Twelve Mile Road and west of Novi Road. 10 The Applicant is here. Would you 11 please identify yourself, give your name and 12 address and be sworn in by our Secretary. 13 Thank you. 14 MR. ASH: My name is Robby Ash with 15 NorthStar Signs. The address is 1109 East 16 Ten Mile Road and that's Madison Heights, 17 Michigan. 18 MEMBER BAUER: Raise your right hand. 19 Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth 20 regarding case: 09-021? 21 MR. ASH: I do. 22 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you, sir. 23 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Please go ahead 24 and make your presentation.
57
1 MR. ASH: Okay. Really, the only 2 hardship here is the allowable square 3 footage for signage would be to allow a 4 4 foot by 4 four foot square -- yeah, 4 by 5 4 -- 4 foot by 4 foot sign. And my client 6 just wanted to increase it to 4 feet by 5 7 feet giving the sign just a little bit more 8 size due to the overall size of the 9 development. 10 I believe there is 32,000 square feet 11 available in that space right now and unless 12 I'm mistaken, there is also room on that 13 property for additional development. So, in 14 just trying to promote that, my client just 15 thought that a sign a little bit larger for 16 a property that size would be a little more 17 suitable. 18 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you. 19 Is there anybody in the audience who would 20 like to address the Board regarding this 21 case? 22 (No response.) 23 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Seeing none, Mr. 24 Secretary, have you got any correspondence?
58
1 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. There was 189 2 notices mailed. Twenty-six returned. One 3 approval conditional and one objection. 4 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: And what's that 5 conditional one? 6 MEMBER BAUER: It says from -- I don't 7 see where it is from. But it says, please 8 note my conditioned approval of this 9 variance request. Comments: As the sole 10 owner of the property within Stoneridge I 11 fully support the placement of the sign on 12 the property. I would very much like to see 13 other occupants in the project. I do not 14 object, however, to the placement of the 15 sign. 16 And the other objection: It may 17 overshadow over business sign. 18 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Who is that 19 from? 20 MEMBER BAUER: That's from Mohamad, 21 A-R-E-S-I-W-A-L-A, doctor. 22 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: All right. 23 Thank you. Building Department? 24 MR. BOULARD: I have nothing to add
59
1 beyond the information in the staff report. 2 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you. I'll 3 open it up to the Board. While you are all 4 deciding I will put in a penny's worth of my 5 comments. 6 And that is I looked at the place, and 7 considering the size of the development this 8 is not a huge sign and I have no problem 9 with the Applicant's request myself 10 personally. Thank you. 11 Go ahead, Mr. Wrobel. 12 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: Thank you. 13 For the length of the sign that will be 14 there is there any time limitations on 15 this? 16 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Usually 18 17 months. 18 MR. BOULARD: I'm not aware of any 19 limitation in the request, although, the 20 Board could certainly put whatever 21 limitations on it. 22 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: I have no 23 problem with the sign given we agree upon a 24 reasonable time limit to keep it up. Thank
60
1 you. 2 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you. Yes, 3 Mr. Cassis? 4 MEMBER CASSIS: Yeah, I agree with 5 you, Mr. Chairman, but why is one side 5 6 feet and the other side 7 feet? 7 MR. ASH: That may not have printed 8 out properly. Seven feet is actually the 9 height of the sign from the top of the sign. 10 MEMBER CASSIS: And the 5 feet there 11 is for -- 12 MR. ASH: That's the size of the 13 actual sign panel itself. 14 MEMBER CASSIS: Oh, the panel. 15 MR. ASH: My apologies. 16 MEMBER CASSIS: Oh, I see. Yeah, I'll 17 go along with that. 18 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you. 19 Anybody else? Seeing none, are you going to 20 entertain a motion? Anybody volunteering? 21 Go ahead. 22 MEMBER KRIEGER: I'll go. In case 23 number: 09-021 on 44050 Twelve Mile Road 24 Stoneridge Office Park I move to approve the
61
1 request for the variance to install a 20 2 square foot real estate leasing sign located 3 at 44050 Twelve Mile Road in the Stoneridge 4 Office Plaza. The Petitioner has made his 5 statements for his practical difficulty or 6 hardship and this request are exceptional 7 and unique to the property. And failure to 8 grant relief will unreasonably prevent or 9 limit use of the property. And grant of the 10 relief will not result in use of the 11 structure that is incompatible with or 12 unreasonably interfering with adjacent or 13 surrounding properties. 14 MEMBER BAUER: Second the motion. 15 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: The motion has 16 been made and seconded. 17 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: Can I make a 18 friendly amendment? 19 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Go ahead. 20 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: That we put 21 a time limit on this. 22 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Eighteen months. 23 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: Eighteen 24 months.
62
1 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes, 18 months. 2 MS. KUDLA: Can I ask a question about 3 the time limit? Sale or lease signs can be 4 up until 30 days after sale or lease of the 5 property. So, are we putting a limit on the 6 size of the leasing sign or the leasing sign 7 all together? 8 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Good question. 9 MEMBER KRIEGER: They can have it up 10 for, the sign that they are requesting for 11 18 months or the sale of the property. 12 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Whichever is 13 earlier. 14 MS. KUDLA: (Unintelligible). 15 MR. BOULARD: (Unintelligible). 16 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Okay. I think 17 we have stipulated a time period of 18 18 months. 19 MEMBER KRIEGER: Or sale of the 20 property? 21 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: For the leasing 22 sign. 23 MEMBER KRIEGER: Okay. 24 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: What do you
63
1 think? 2 MEMBER KRIEGER: Sure. 3 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Any further 4 discussion? Seeing none, will you please 5 call the roll, Ms. Martin. 6 MS. MARTIN: Member Bauer? 7 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 8 MS. MARTIN: Member Cassis? 9 MEMBER CASSIS: Yes. 10 MS. MARTIN: Member Ghannam? 11 MEMBER GHANNAM: No. 12 MS. MARTIN: Member Ibe? 13 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 14 MS. MARTIN: Member Krieger? 15 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 16 MS. MARTIN: Member Wrobel? 17 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: Yes. 18 MS. MARTIN: Chairman Sanghvi? 19 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes. 20 Congratulations. 21 MR. ASH: Thank you very much. 22 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Okay, moving on. 23 The next case is case number: 09-022 for 24 Hickory Corporate Park, 22975 Venture Drive.
64
1 Is the Applicant here? 2 MS. MARTIN: We think it's the same 3 gentleman. He is going to go get him. 4 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Okay. Let's move 5 on to the next one and see if he shows up by 6 the time we are finished. 7 In the meantime we will go on to the 8 next case. The Applicant is here. Case 9 number: 09-023 filed by David Dismondy for 10 1181 West Lake Drive. 11 Come on in, sir. Identify yourself, 12 state your name and address and be sworn in 13 by our Secretary if you are not an 14 attorney. 15 MR. DISMONDY: I am not an attorney. 16 My name is Dave Dismondy. I live at 1181 17 West Lake Road. 18 MEMBER BAUER: Do you swear or affirm 19 to tell the truth regarding case: 09-023? 20 MR. DISMONDY: I do. 21 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Go ahead. Make 22 your presentation. 23 MR. DISMONDY: Okay. I was here in 24 September requesting a very similar
65
1 variance. It's the same plans. And I think 2 we might have jumped the gun because once 3 the builder got involved it was deemed that 4 instead of putting an addition on top of an 5 old foundation it makes sense to replace the 6 foundations all together. So, no -- the 7 size, nothing is changing in terms of size 8 or variance from property lines or height or 9 anything. They just said instead -- the 10 wording changed from a remodel to a new 11 build and so that's why I'm here today. 12 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Very good. 13 Anything else? 14 MR. DISMONDY: That's it. 15 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Is there anybody 16 in the audience who would like to talk about 17 this case? 18 (No response.) 19 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Seeing none, Mr. 20 Secretary. 21 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. There were 69 22 notices mailed. Six were returned. We have 23 three approvals. Geraldine Dismondy: Yes, 24 yes, yes.
66
1 Bruce Simon: I have no objections and 2 requests. 3 David Boyer: Great to see the 4 neighborhood improving. 5 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Very good. 6 Thank you. Building Department, any 7 comments? Oh, he's coming. 8 MR. BOULARD: Nothing other than what 9 I could catch on the monitor out there what 10 the Petitioner put forth. This is pretty 11 typical. Sometimes old buildings have old 12 foundations and it's sometimes better to 13 start from scratch. But since the 14 additions, since the original plan was for 15 additions to the existing building and 16 that's how it was presented to the Board 17 they thought it would be best if it came 18 back to us. 19 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you. I 20 will open it up to the Board. Any comments 21 about this? As you all know some of us will 22 remember we saw this gentleman in September 23 last year and at that time we granted 24 variances for some improvements on the house
67
1 and now he has become smarter and he wants 2 to do (unintelligible), so I have no problem 3 with the arrangement myself. 4 Yes, Mr. Bauer? 5 MEMBER BAUER: Just looking through 6 everything here, he has not made any changes 7 as far as variances requested here and I see 8 no problem. In fact, it would be a great 9 pleasure to see this home built there. 10 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: That's right. 11 Thank you. Yes, Mr. Ghannam? 12 MEMBER GHANNAM: Thank you, Mr. Chair. 13 I am also in agreement, sir. Obviously I 14 think you are doing a little bit better than 15 you did before when you came here, so 16 clearly I think you have met all the 17 standards that you need to, so I'm in favor 18 of it also. 19 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: All right. 20 Would anybody -- Mr. Ghannam, are you 21 willing to make a motion? 22 MEMBER GHANNAM: I will make another 23 motion. In this case number: 09-023 filed 24 by Dave Dismondy for 1181 West Lake Drive I
68
1 move that the four variances requested be 2 approved as requested for a number of 3 reasons. Number one, that the variances 4 will provide substantial justice to the 5 Petitioner and surrounding property owners 6 in this district. 7 This property is unique like a number 8 of them are along the lake and I think we 9 all understand that and we have seen a 10 number of them before. There are unique 11 circumstances to the property. They are not 12 self created. I don't think there are any 13 issues with light, air, public safety, 14 danger, things like that. Certainly, the 15 property values will not diminish in the 16 surrounding areas. I think they will be 17 increased and I think the Zoning Ordinances 18 are being observed. 19 MEMBER BAUER: Second. 20 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: The motion has 21 been made and seconded by Mr. Bauer. Is 22 there any further discussion? Seeing none, 23 Ms. Martin, will you please call the roll. 24 MS. MARTIN: Member Cassis?
69
1 MEMBER CASSIS: Yes. 2 MS. MARTIN: Member Ghannam? 3 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes. 4 MS. MARTIN: Member Ibe? 5 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 6 MS. MARTIN: Member Krieger? 7 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 8 MS. MARTIN: Member Bauer? 9 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 10 MS. MARTIN: Member Wrobel? 11 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: Yes. 12 MS. MARTIN: And Chairman Sanghvi? 13 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes. 14 Congratulations. 15 MR. DISMONDY: Thank you. 16 MEMBER BAUER: Good luck. 17 MR. DISMONDY: Thank you very much. 18 Take care. 19 MEMBER CASSIS: Nice looking house. 20 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: May you enjoy 21 your new home. 22 MR. DISMONDY: I will do my best. 23 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Okay. Now, 24 let's go back and see if I may recall the
70
1 Applicant from Hickory Corporate Park, case 2 number: 09-022 for 22975 Venture Drive. 3 The Applicant is here. Okay, all right. 4 Come on. I think you just identified -- 5 MEMBER BAUER: Same rigamarole. 6 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Go ahead with 7 your presentation here. 8 MR. ASH: Okay, my name is Robby Ash 9 with NorthStar Signs. Our address is 1109 10 East Ten Mile Road and that's Madison 11 Heights, Michigan. 12 MEMBER BAUER: Do you swear or affirm 13 to tell the truth regarding case: 09-022? 14 MR. ASH: I do. 15 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you. 16 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Go ahead. 17 MR. ASH: Again, this is another case 18 where based on the overall size of the 19 property my client was hoping to increase 20 the size of the sign by an additional 4 21 square feet just in hopes that it would 22 better represent the property in regard to 23 the size. 24 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Very good.
71
1 Thank you. Is there anybody in the audience 2 who would like to address the Board? I'm 3 sounding like my own record. Thank you. 4 Mr. Secretary, have we got any 5 correspondence in this case? 6 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. Thirty notices 7 sent, no responses. 8 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: No responses, 9 very good. Building Department? 10 MR. BOULARD: A couple of questions if 11 I could for the Applicant. 12 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Go ahead. 13 MR. BOULARD: How far is the -- can 14 you qualify how far the building sits back 15 on Venture Drive from the main road? And I 16 wondered if you could tell us, is there a 17 sign -- there is not a sign out at the main 18 road, correct? 19 MR. ASH: As far as I know there is 20 not. We did put the temporary sign up for 21 the Board's review prior to this hearing. 22 MR. BOULARD: Would I be correct in 23 understanding that the challenge in this 24 case is not the size of the available space
72
1 as the last variance, but here the challenge 2 is that it sits way back off the main road 3 and visibility is an issue? 4 MR. ASH: That would be correct. 5 Visibility for lettering is at the greatest 6 point 25 feet of visibility per inch of 7 letter height. And the letters on this sign 8 although it doesn't show here, I believe, 9 are 5 inches, so that would be about 125 10 feet and that's just the largest for sale at 11 the top and then the phone number. So, the 12 viewing distance for this particular sign at 13 4 feet by 5 feet would be about 125 feet 14 just for the two main lines. And then, of 15 course, any additional graphics or brokers 16 names are about half that size and half that 17 viewing distance. 18 MR. BOULARD: Thank you. 19 Nothing else. 20 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Okay. Yes, Mr. 21 Bauer? 22 MEMBER BAUER: Does it make any 23 difference if it's leasing or for sale? 24 MR. BOULARD: No.
73
1 MEMBER BAUER: Okay. 2 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes, Ms. 3 Krieger? 4 MEMBER KRIEGER: Question. Is this 5 the recommended sign from both, the size 6 sign? I'm just curious, are they both the 7 same from the previous case and this case? 8 MR. ASH: Well, Gruber Ellis is our 9 client and that's their standard leasing 10 and/or for sale sign. 11 MEMBER KRIEGER: Okay. 12 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Very good. 13 Anybody else? Nobody on this side. Nobody 14 on this side. Looks like everybody has 15 already made up their mind. Anybody wants 16 to make a motion regarding this sign? Yes, 17 Mr. Ibe? You have been quiet all evening. 18 MEMBER IBE: Thank you. Save the best 19 for last. In case number: 09-022 for 22975 20 Venture Drive, Hickory Corporate Park, I 21 move that the Applicant's request should be 22 granted by variance to install a 20 square 23 foot real estate sign, a leasing sign 24 actually located at the property. The
74
1 request is based on circumstances or 2 features that are exceptional and unique to 3 the property. Considering the fact that the 4 property is a quite a large property 5 compared to the sign that would have been 6 there, I think the request made here is more 7 appropriate. 8 And also the failure to grant relief 9 will unreasonably prevent or limit the use 10 of the property. The grant of relief will 11 not result in the use of the structure that 12 is incompatible with or unreasonably 13 interfere with the adjacent surrounding 14 properties and will result in substantial 15 justice being done for the Applicant as well 16 as the adjacent or surrounding properties. 17 And this is not inconsistent with the spirit 18 of the Ordinance. 19 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you. 20 MEMBER CASSIS: I will second since I 21 am his neighbor. 22 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you. So, 23 the motion has been made and seconded. 24 Yes, Mr. Boulard?
75
1 MR. BOULARD: Is there a -- 2 MEMBER BAUER: A time limit? 3 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Eighteen months. 4 MR. BOULARD: Eighteen months? 5 MEMBER IBE: Eighteen months, yes. 6 Thank you. 7 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Okay, so the 8 time has been stipulated. The motion has 9 been made and seconded. No further 10 discussion around here, so will you please 11 call the roll, Ms. Martin. 12 MS. MARTIN: Member Bauer? 13 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 14 MS. MARTIN: Member Cassis? 15 MEMBER CASSIS: Yes. 16 MS. MARTIN: Member Ghannam? 17 MEMBER GHANNAM: No. 18 MS. MARTIN: Member Ibe? 19 MEMBER IBE: No. 20 MS. MARTIN: Member Krieger? 21 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 22 MS. MARTIN: Member Wrobel? 23 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: Yes. 24 MS. MARTIN: Chairman Sanghvi?
76
1 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes. Motion 2 passed. 3 MR. ASH: Thank you again. 4 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: There is one 5 more item on the agenda and that is Glenda's 6 Market. We granted a variance to this 7 Applicant some time ago and we maintained a 8 restriction on that. And would you like to 9 (unintelligible) on your latest visit 10 (unintelligible)? 11 MR. BOULARD: Certainly. In your 12 packet there is a copy of a variance from 13 November 15th, 2006. You will notice the 14 last condition on that was that the 15 Petitioner will report back to the ZBA in 16 two years unless any violations are posted, 17 et cetera. 18 We're a little behind the times here 19 since this was November of 2006, but we have 20 requested the Petitioner to come and report 21 to the Board. In addition, there were some 22 violations on the site and the Petitioner 23 has taken care of those and brought the site 24 back into compliance.
77
1 If the Board has any questions or the 2 Petitioner care to report. 3 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: They have not 4 had any more citations or anything now, have 5 they? 6 MR. BOULARD: There were no citations 7 this spring when we contacted the Petitioner 8 to make the report that was required by 9 issuance of the variance. There were some 10 things and those have been taken care of. 11 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Any Board 12 Members have any questions? This was a part 13 of, as I said, a previous variance that we 14 have maintained jurisdiction and we are here 15 if you had any questions. You seem to be 16 doing well. 17 MR. CAGLE: Thank you. 18 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: And I 19 particularly have no specific questions for 20 you tonight. And if there is anybody on the 21 Board? Nobody have any questions? 22 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 23 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: You have, go 24 ahead.
78
1 MEMBER BAUER: Keep up the good work, 2 please. 3 MR. CAGLE: Thank you. 4 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: That's a nice 5 comment. Very good. Thank you for coming. 6 MR. CAGLE: Thank you. 7 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: All right. I 8 will entertain a motion to adjourn. 9 VICE-CHAIRPERSON WROBEL: Motion to 10 adjourn. 11 MEMBER BAUER: Second. 12 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: All those in 13 favor of adjourning say aye? 14 BOARD MEMBERS: Aye. 15 CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: All those 16 opposed same sign? Good night. Thank you 17 very much. 18 (The meeting was adjourned at 19 8:17 p.m.) 20 21 22 23 24
79
1 C E R T I F I C A T E 2 3 4 5 I, Mona L. Talton, do hereby certify 6 that I have recorded stenographically the 7 proceedings had and testimony taken in the 8 above-entitled matter at the time and place 9 hereinbefore set forth, and I do further 10 certify that the foregoing transcript, 11 consisting of (67) typewritten pages, is a 12 true and correct transcript of my said 13 stenographic notes. 14 15 16 17 18 19 _____________________________ 20 Mona L. Talton, 21 Certified Shorthand Reporter 22 23 24 June 19, 2009
|