|
View Agenda for this meeting REGULAR MEETING - ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Proceedings had and Testimony taken in the matter of the ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, at City of Novi, 45175 West Ten Mile Road, Novi, Michigan, on Tuesday, January 10, 2012 BOARD MEMBERS ALSO PRESENT: REPORTED BY: Jennifer L. Wall, Certified Shorthand Reporter 1 Novi, Michigan. 2 Tuesday, February 14, 2012 3 7:00 p.m. 4 ** ** ** 5 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Good evening 6 everybody. Welcome to the February 14th, 7 2012 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. We are 8 going start off by saying our Pledge 9 Allegiance. 10 If Member Gerblick can start us 11 off, please. 12 (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.) 13 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Thank you. 14 Next, Ms. Pawlowski, can you please call the 15 roll. 16 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Gedeon, 17 absent excused. Member Gerblick? 18 MR. GERBLICK: Here. 19 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Chairman Ghannam? 20 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Here. 21 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Ibe? 22 MR. IBE: Present. 23 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Krieger? 24 MS. KRIEGER: Here. 25 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Sanghvi?
4 1 MR. SANGHVI: Present. 2 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Skelcy, 3 absent excused. 4 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Next is our 5 public hearing format and rules. We do have 6 rules in the back. I will go over a few of 7 them. 8 First you need to turn off your 9 pagers and cellphones during our meeting so 10 we don't have any disruptions. 11 When your case is called, the 12 applicant or their representative will be 13 asked to come forward, state their name and 14 addresses and be sworn by our secretary. 15 You will be allowed five minutes to 16 address the Board, or that can be extended at 17 the discretion of the Chair. 18 The public will also be invited to 19 make a comment on the particular cases that 20 comes up before us. 21 Next is our approval of the agenda. 22 Are there any additions or modifications to 23 the agenda? 24 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Yes. ZBA Case 25 12-003 at 46290 Nine Mile has asked to be
5 1 withdrawn. 2 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Anything else? 3 MS. PAWLOWSKI: No. 4 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Seeing none, 5 anything from the members in terms of the 6 modification to the agenda? 7 Seeing none, I will entertain a 8 motion to approve the agenda as modified. 9 MR. SANGHVI: So moved. 10 MR. IBE: Second. 11 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Seeing a motion 12 and a second, all in favor say aye. 13 THE BOARD: Aye. 14 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Any opposed? 15 Seeing none, our agenda is approved as 16 modified. 17 Next is our approval of the 18 minutes. We have two sets. The first one 19 will be the December 13th, 2011 minutes. Are 20 there any additions or modifications to that? 21 Seeing none, I will entertain a 22 motion. 23 MR. SANGHVI: Can I make a motion 24 to approve the minutes as presented. 25 MS. KRIEGER: Second.
6 1 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Okay. So any 2 further discussion on the December 13th, 2011 3 minutes? 4 Seeing none, all in favor say aye. 5 THE BOARD: Aye. 6 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Any opposed? 7 Seeing none, our December 13th, 2011 minutes 8 are approved. 9 Next is our approval of the January 10 10, 2012 minutes of the meeting. Any 11 corrections or modifications to that? 12 Ms. Kudla -- or I'm sorry. 13 Ms. Saarela? 14 MS. SAARELA: Just page 109, line 15 three, it was said consider a date certain. 16 It says certainly, but it was a date certain. 17 That's it. 18 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Anything else? 19 If not, I will entertain a motion to approve 20 these minutes. 21 MR. SANGHVI: I make a motion to 22 approve the minutes as amended. 23 MR. IBE: Second. 24 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Seeing a motion 25 and a second, all in favor say aye.
7 1 THE BOARD: Aye. 2 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Any opposed? 3 Seeing none, our January 10, 2012 minutes are 4 approved as amended. 5 Next is our public remarks section. 6 Is there anybody in the public who would like 7 to make a comment not on a case before us 8 tonight for any reason? 9 Seeing none -- actually, before I 10 close the public remarks section, I will make 11 a comment, at this point, as you can see, for 12 the applicants, we have five members here 13 today. Our full board consists of seven 14 members. 15 In either event, regardless of how 16 many members are here, you do need four votes 17 to pass any type of request. If there is 18 anybody at this point who would like to 19 adjourn or table their matter until a 20 different session or a different month, when 21 we have a full board, I will allow those 22 people or applicants to come forward and make 23 that request at this point. 24 Is there anybody who would like to 25 make that request instead of waiting
8 1 throughout the evening? 2 Okay. Seeing none, I will then 3 close the public remarks section and move 4 into our first case. 5 We have Case No. 11-047 for 43155 6 Main Street, the Mixx Sports Bar. The 7 applicant here? Please come forward, sir. 8 Even though you have been sworn 9 before, we are going to swear you in again. 10 By the way, Ms. Saarela, do we need 11 to appoint a new secretary because Member 12 Skelcy is not here? 13 MS. SAARELA: Yes. 14 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Should we do by 15 motion? 16 MS. SAARELA: Just by motion. 17 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: I move that we 18 have Member Ibe act as our temporary 19 secretary for today's meeting. Any seconds? 20 MS. KRIEGER: Second. 21 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Seeing a motion 22 and a second, all in favor say aye. 23 THE BOARD: Aye. 24 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Any opposed? 25 Seeing none, Member Ibe is our temporary
9 1 secretary for today's meeting. 2 So if our secretary can swear you 3 in, sir. Can you raise your right hand. 4 MR. IBE: In Case Number 11-047, 5 for 43155 Main Street, Suite 502, Mixx Sports 6 Bar. Do you swear or affirm to tell the 7 truth? 8 MR. JOHNSON: Yes. 9 MR. IBE: Thank you. 10 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: I know you were 11 on the previous month, so do you have 12 anything additional to present to us today? 13 MR. JOHNSON: Yes. The owner of 14 Mixx Sports Bar, Timothy Brow (ph), is 15 passing out some information and then also I 16 have -- 17 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: State your name, 18 sir. 19 MR. JOHNSON: Mark R. Johnson, MJR 20 Sign Company. 21 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Just give us 22 your address for the record, please. 23 MR. JOHNSON: Sure, 256 Narrin 24 Street, Ortonville, Michigan 48462. 25 After being here last month, we
10 1 took a look at what we were proposing, and 2 the first step was to take the size of the 3 sign down from the 49 square feet originally 4 requested to the size of the square footage 5 that would be allowed for a single face wall 6 sign. 7 Then we also looked at the site 8 lines involved and looked at foot traffic and 9 other things, if any, that would happen on 10 the property given that they are the 11 southwest corner of the building and 12 basically the last business on the block, so 13 to speak. 14 What you have that was passed out 15 here to you this evening, is the Novi 16 building district, shows that when we were 17 here last month, it was kind commented that 18 there were single-faced flat signs against 19 the building along Main Street, along that 20 south elevation. 21 When, in fact, there is only two 22 other -- a couple other businesses on that 23 entire stretch all the way to the corner of 24 the Post Bar, where you see the Post Bar sign 25 and the BD's Mongolian BBQ sign, that
11 1 actually are even leased. The vast majority 2 of the entire center is vacant. And, in 3 fact, there has been tenants that have moved 4 from the Main Street development across the 5 street, to be in the out buildings 6 surrounding Novi Town Center because of lack 7 of exposure. 8 The type of sign in your sign 9 design review manual that was written for 10 this specific project, lends itself more to a 11 true downtown setting with frequent and large 12 amounts of pedestrian traffic. 13 Unfortunately, obviously, the 14 development as it was originally intended, 15 never came to its full completion, hence the 16 vacant space between this building and Novi 17 Road. 18 In so doing though, you have to be 19 able to take people that are coming to this 20 establishment, from, for instance, radio 21 advertising. They advertise on WJR. 22 When you come down, and I actually 23 did this with my wife a few weeks back when 24 we were shopping, I said, okay, this is where 25 we are going, you drive there.
12 1 She came down Novi Road, she got to 2 Main Street, she took her left, and then as 3 she got down a little ways, because, of 4 course, that's the way the GPS would take her 5 in, the shortest route, Novi to Main and then 6 left and down, finally she saw the -- our 7 mock-up sign that is still up, and she said, 8 oh, that's where it is. 9 And my comment to her was, without 10 that there, what would you have done when you 11 got to that first cross path, that first 12 cross drive there, service drive. I think I 13 went to the wrong place. You know, people do 14 not look and search, if you will, and in this 15 case, this location for this sports bar is 16 almost on an abandoned alley, for lack of a 17 better way to put it. 18 We also looked at the design of the 19 sign. Again, the design review manual 20 basically talks about sand blasted signs. It 21 allows for interior illuminated signs, but 22 not only front interior only, silhouette lit, 23 where the Mixx Lounge sign is. 24 But that also lends itself to a 25 different type of business than what the
13 1 operators are trying to successfully run 2 here. Keeping in mind that they took over 3 Mixx Lounge on the virge -- when Mixx Lounge 4 was on the virge of bankruptcy and closing 5 up. 6 So what they're trying to do is, to 7 be it a destination, and have all that other 8 advertising work, once you get onto the 9 property, you have to be able to find them. 10 If you come in off Grand River, you 11 get to the intersection there, you know, 12 semi-roundabout past the Post Bar, there is 13 nothing that is going to entice you to turn 14 right and head down that way. You have to 15 see something that catches your eye. It's 16 not a matter of necessarily reading it. It's 17 a matter of looking for something and having 18 to be able to get to that corner, look down 19 and say, oh, maybe, that's it, that sort of 20 thing. 21 So while we've taken it down to the 22 square footage, I know there is numerous 23 variances that are being requested, we have 24 taken it down a little bit in square footage, 25 we really feel this what is needed for the
14 1 business to be successful there. 2 Or if all of those business were 3 thriving, you didn't what appears, and I 4 haven't done the math or anything, but what 5 appears to be an 80 plus percent vacancy rate 6 in this building, you would have enough 7 traffic of people going to those adjoining 8 businesses, that they would -- it would help 9 build the word of mouth and help build off 10 the advertising and everything so that the 11 business could be successful. 12 Unfortunately, we really don't have 13 that here. So what we have done is we've 14 taken down the square footage, but 15 respectfully we feel that considering the 16 fact that this is now actually smaller than 17 the BD Mongolian BBQ sign, which is on the 18 same property, I know that that was from a 19 different ordinance, you know, before the 20 revisions were made, it is still in keeping 21 with the type of general signage in the area. 22 You have channel letters on the properties, 23 for instance, where Better Health Market is, 24 which happens to be one of my customers as 25 well.
15 1 Even though that's not in that 2 exact building, with its exact zoning, it -- 3 to the general public, Andiamo, all those 4 buildings kind of coincide one, and here you 5 have the sports bar off in the corner 6 struggling in order to gain exposure and for 7 people to be able to find them. 8 Now -- Tim, would you like to say 9 anything? 10 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Raise your right 11 hand and be sworn, sir. 12 MR. IBE: Sir, in Case 11-047, 13 43155, do you swear to affirm to tell the 14 truth? 15 MR. BROW: I do. 16 MR. IBE: Thank you. 17 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: State your name, 18 please. 19 MR. BROW: Timothy Brow. Chairman 20 and Members, what I really wanted to stress 21 here is our true hardship. 22 I have been before the Zoning Board 23 of Appeals in the past. I am a home builder. 24 I wanted to stress a true hardship, 25 in which we have presented to the Zoning
16 1 Board of Appeals in the past. 2 We have got a true hardship in the 3 downtown district. We have got a huge amount 4 of vacancies. We have got streetlights out 5 that we are contending with constant, garbage 6 being thrown in the street, we send employees 7 out to pick up, overgrown weeds. It's a 8 very, very difficult district to work in. 9 So what I'm pleading is, that this 10 is a true hardship that we are trying to work 11 against. That's what I'm trying to plead the 12 case for. 13 What those pictures are is to show 14 almost every business in the area, and there 15 was comments made last time, that the BD sign 16 just looked -- it didn't look like it fit. I 17 think it's the last picture, I think it looks 18 fantastic on our building. I think they did 19 a great job. 20 I think The Post is a little bit 21 overwhelming. But if you look at BD's sign, 22 I think it looks fantastic on the building. 23 There was also a comment in the 24 last meeting, it was due to the fact that 25 they were a single story building. We are
17 1 the exact same. We are identical. The 2 buildings are identical to ours. The BD's 3 building is a two-story building, as it shows 4 in the picture. Is it the exact same 5 architecture as ours. 6 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Thank you, sir. 7 Anything else? 8 MR. BROW: 9 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: 10 Now, at this point, I'm going to 11 open it up to the public. Is there anybody 12 in the public who would like to make a 13 comment on this specific case? 14 Seeing none, I will close the 15 public remarks section and ask our secretary 16 to read any correspondence. 17 MR. IBE: Mr. Chair, there are no 18 changes from the previous readings that were 19 on 1/10/2012. 20 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Any comments or 21 issues with the City? 22 MS. SAARELA: No. 23 MR. BOULARD: The only point I want 24 to bring up was there was some confusion last 25 meeting regarding the previous variances, so
18 1 I had Jeannie Niland research those and some 2 information on those is in your packet. 3 Thank you. 4 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: I will open it 5 up to the Board to for discussion. Member 6 Krieger? 7 MS. KRIEGER: Question, I noticed 8 that -- well, for the Post Bar and the 9 Mongolian BBQ -- I can't remember the name of 10 the other bar that's closed around the 11 corner. 12 MR. GERBLICK: Gus O'Connors. 13 MS. KRIEGER: Yes, thank you. If 14 those two businesses were to leave, what 15 would happen to the signs, if some new 16 business came in? 17 MR. BOULARD: Assuming that a new 18 business wanted to have a different sign, 19 they would be required to have a sign permit 20 and that would be rev viewed, that sign would 21 be reviewed in accordance with the ordinance. 22 MS. KRIEGER: That was my first 23 question. Thank you. 24 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Okay. Anybody 25 else? Actually while we are thinking about,
19 1 I have got a couple questions for you, sir. 2 What's the difference between your 3 original proposal for square footage? I know 4 you mentioned a number. I didn't write that 5 down between your original proposal and 6 today's discussion as to what you needed. 7 MR. JOHNSON: We have gone from 49 8 square feet, which was what the BD's 9 Mongolian BBQ sign was, which is why we 10 patterned it at that size. 11 And we went and we measured the 12 length of the building and determined that 13 the building would be allowed 43.44, just 14 under 43 and a half square feet, of sign area 15 to be placed flat against the building. 16 And since we are looking at this in 17 lieu of the building sign, of course, there 18 would be no building sign for this 19 establishment in the future, we then 20 patterned our new design for that same square 21 footage. 22 In essence, the difference, of 23 course, being it's a projecting sign, so that 24 we can get exposure, so as people come into 25 the property, they actually take the time and
20 1 notice them and find them. 2 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: So your request 3 today is for 43 and a half? 4 MR. JOHNSON: Correct, just under 5 that. 6 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: And, 7 Mr. Boulard, is that a correct statement that 8 he would be entitled to about 43 and a half, 9 if it was a flat sign, does that make sense? 10 MR. BOULARD: I don't have the 11 calculations in front of me. I can do that. 12 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: But they would 13 be entitled to one sign on the building, but 14 just flat against the building? 15 MR. BOULARD: Yes. 16 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: The difference 17 here is that they're simply asking it to be 18 projected away from the building? 19 MR. BOULARD: Right. 20 MR. JOHNSON: Again -- 21 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Hold on, sir. 22 MR. BOULARD: I guess my follow-up 23 question would be if the Board is inclined to 24 consider the revised request, one of the 25 other variances would just be -- I think it
21 1 would be important to note how the other 2 variances change, if at all. 3 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: That's actually 4 a good question. What would be the 5 dimensions of this proposed sign? 6 MR. JOHNSON: This sign a five foot 7 eight inches tall by seven-eight long, so you 8 still have the width, you would still have 9 the overall height variances. But the 10 question, and two of the other variances were 11 to A, that it is a channel letter sign, which 12 is still is, but also the type of 13 illumination. 14 Now, if you go to the -- I don't 15 know if you have been out to the property in 16 the evening, but if you look at the BD's 17 Mongolian BBQ, the sign, the way it 18 illuminates, the entire circle, if you will, 19 lights up, including the background and 20 everything of that nature, has a glow to it. 21 The way this is going to be done, 22 just the word Mixx, the sports bar, and then 23 the beer draft logo will illuminate. 24 The actual copy, the blue that you 25 see on the top and everything of that nature,
22 1 during the night, that will disappear because 2 there is no internal illumination. 3 So what we have done is we have 4 changed it, also from the idea or the concept 5 of a plastic background, if you will, to a 6 metal background, so it's at least a little 7 bit more in keeping with what they call a 8 board sign with raised letters that will 9 actually -- you know, so that there is less 10 lighting at night and hopefully it will be 11 able to have that be enough that people will 12 catch it. 13 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: State the width 14 and the height again, please. 15 MR. JOHNSON: The height is five 16 foot eight inches and the width seven foot 17 eight inches. 18 So we have taken down the length by 19 six inches and we have taken down the height 20 by four inches. 21 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Why am I -- on 22 your original proposal that I'm reading, it 23 says the sign width proposed eight feet two 24 inches? 25 MR. JOHNSON: Correct.
23 1 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: You're proposing 2 five feet eight inches? 3 MR. JOHNSON: No, seven feet, eight 4 inches. 5 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: I'm sorry, okay. 6 I have got them mixed up here. Seven feet 7 eight. 8 MR. JOHNSON: Six inches less in 9 width, four inches less in height, 10 proportionately shrunk. 11 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: And then that's 12 width. Now, the height you said was five 13 foot eight inches? 14 MR. JOHNSON: Correct. 15 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: And the 16 proposal, your original proposal was what? 17 MR. JOHNSON: Our original proposal 18 was for six feet. 19 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Why am I not 20 seeing that on the original proposal? 21 MR. SANGHVI: It's not there. 22 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: On our original 23 proposal it says sign height is 17 feet six 24 inches? 25 MR. JOHNSON: That's the height
24 1 from the top of the sign to grade. 2 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: But you're 3 saying the actual sign would be five foot 4 eight inches? 5 MR. JOHNSON: Eight inches, 6 correct. Which would also lessen that seven 7 feet six. 8 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: You're saying 9 the blue trim around the sign would be 10 basically visible during the day but not at 11 night because it won't be illuminated? 12 MR. JOHNSON: Correct. 13 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: And did you say 14 that the rest of it, the words Mixx Sports 15 Bar and the draft would be internally 16 illuminated? 17 MR. JOHNSON: Correct. 18 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: All right. In 19 general, I mean, originally when you came, I 20 did have issues with this because of our very 21 strict sign ordinance. 22 I understand the difficulties of 23 the center, not that it necessarily applies 24 to every single building or tenant of this 25 property. But I do understand the
25 1 difficulties that the tenant is having, and 2 the applicant. 3 So I think under the circumstances 4 even though it's not perfect, I would be in 5 support of this particular proposal, based on 6 your modifications. 7 Anybody else have any comments or 8 questions? Nothing? 9 Member Gerblick, you want to make a 10 motion? 11 MR. GERBLICK: I think in general I 12 would be in support of it as well, especially 13 with all the businesses on the same street 14 who have similar signs, and I understand for 15 all the reasons that you mentioned it's a 16 difficult location to bring foot traffic. 17 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Anybody want to 18 try a motion, unless there is anymore 19 comments or questions? Member Ibe. 20 MR. IBE: In Case Number 11-047, 21 43155 Main Street, Suite 502, Mixx Sports 22 Bar. 23 I move that we grant the request 24 made by the applicant, as modified by the 25 applicant, that being that the proposed sign
26 1 area would be 43.43 square foot, and seven 2 feet eight inches in width and 5.8 inches in 3 height. 4 And the reasons to grant this 5 proposal as modified by the applicant as 6 follows: One, that the request is based upon 7 circumstances or features that are 8 exceptional and unique to the property and do 9 not result from conditions that exist 10 generally in the city or that are 11 self-created. 12 Although the sign itself is not 13 (inaudible) by Mr. Chairman, however, the 14 conditions that have been described in this 15 locality, in this vicinity itself, present 16 such unique circumstance that this applicant 17 should be given an opportunity to erect this 18 sign. 19 Second, the failure to grant relief 20 will unreasonably prevent or limit the use of 21 the property and will result in substantially 22 more than mere inconvenience or inability to 23 attain a higher economic or financial return. 24 Now, the applicant here is a 25 business that of course is in a very
27 1 distressed area. And distressed in the sense 2 that you have quite a high vacancy in the 3 area, and in order to allow this business to 4 at least give it a chance to thrive, it is 5 best that this sign be given the opportunity, 6 so that the business can be able to attain 7 the required financial return that it 8 desires. 9 Finally, the grant of relief will 10 not result in a structure incompatible or 11 unreasonably interfere with adjacent 12 surrounding properties, will not result in -- 13 will not interfere with other properties and 14 this also consistent with the spirit of the 15 zoning ordinance. 16 MS. KRIEGER: Second. 17 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Seeing a motion 18 and a second, any further discussion? 19 Seeing none, Ms. Pawlowski, will 20 you please call the roll. 21 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Gerblick? 22 MR. GERBLICK: Yes. 23 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Chairman Ghannam? 24 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Yes. 25 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Ibe?
28 1 MR. IBE: Yes. 2 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Member Krieger? 3 MS. KRIEGER: Yes. 4 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Sanghvi? 5 MR. SANGHVI: Yes. 6 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Motion passes five 7 to zero. 8 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Congratulations, 9 sir. 10 MR. JOHNSON: Thank you. 11 May I ask that the temporary sign 12 remain in place until the permanent sign is 13 placed within the next three weeks at most? 14 Is that -- 15 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Is that your 16 estimation? 17 MR. JOHNSON: Yeah, it's March 18 Madness, I have no choice. 19 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: We would need a 20 formal motion on that? 21 MS. SAARELA: Correct. 22 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Anybody would 23 like to make a motion on that 24 particular issue. 25 MR. IBE: Sure. I will move that
29 1 in Case No. 11-047, that we move that the 2 temporary mock-up sign remain in place for 21 3 days until the new sign is put in place. 4 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Maximum of 21 5 days. 6 MR. IBE: Maximum of 21 days. 7 MR. GERBLICK: Second. 8 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Seeing a motion 9 and a second, all in favor say aye. 10 THE BOARD: Aye. 11 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Any opposed? 12 Seeing none, that motion passes also, sir. 13 MR. JOHNSON: Okay, thank you. 14 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Next on our 15 agenda is Case No. 11-048, 41014 Scarborough. 16 Is the applicant here? 17 Good evening. Can you raise your 18 right hand, sir, and be sworn. 19 MR. IBE: In Case No. 11-048, 41014 20 Scarborough, do you swear or affirm to tell 21 the truth? 22 MR. CLARK: I do. 23 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Thank you. 24 First of all, state your name, sir. 25 MR. CLARK: Robert Clark.
30 1 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: I know you have 2 been here before. What has changed since the 3 last time you have been here? 4 MR. CLARK: We have association 5 approval. I do have a packet for each of you 6 that will -- something that got, I think, 7 confused in the last one, did the customer go 8 around and talk to neighbors. So we have 9 three documents from neighbors that have 10 approved in this general area, along with the 11 association approval. 12 We explained to the association 13 that we had no intent of side-stepping the 14 approval. It was just a misunderstanding of 15 the order of approval. 16 Nothing has changed in the layout. 17 I didn't really see any negative comments in 18 the first meeting. 19 There was the one neighbor that 20 brought up the trees and there was -- it was 21 talked back and forth. Of course, the 22 association approval really, you know, kind 23 of took a stronghold on whether we would 24 either proceed at that point. 25 It's not that the homeowner is
31 1 against planting the -- well, I shouldn't say 2 he's not. He is against planting the trees, 3 but I guess he just doesn't understand the 4 reason why for the trees, something about 5 privacy. 6 And this is a room that's only 7 coming 10 feet away from the house. And I 8 think we came to the understanding I think, 9 Charles told me if it was an open deck it 10 could go out even much further that what the 11 structure of an enclosed structure is. 12 So I guess I look at it from both 13 sides, you know, from the neighbor side and 14 from the homeowners side. 15 You know, to call it a viewing room 16 or, you know -- short of calling themselves a 17 peeping Tom, I guess, in lack of better 18 words, we would just like to understand the 19 reason what the trees would do, for this 20 client -- or for the homeowner behind him. 21 Other than that, we're willing to 22 listen to anything. 23 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Anything else? 24 MR. CLARK: No, that's it. 25 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Is there anybody
32 1 who would like to make a comment on this 2 particular case? 3 Seeing none, I will close the 4 public remarks section and ask our secretary 5 if there is has been anything different from 6 the last time this case was called. 7 MR. IBE: No, Mr. Chair, nothing 8 different. 9 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Any comments or 10 additions from the City? 11 MS. SAARELA: Nothing. 12 MR. BOULARD: Nothing to add. 13 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Any other 14 questions by the Board? Member Sanghvi? 15 MR. SANGHVI: All I want to make 16 the comment that they have complied with the 17 request of the Board. I don't see any reason 18 why not to approve this anymore. Thank you. 19 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Anything else? 20 I just had a couple of questions, 21 sir. I know the neighbors did want trees 22 planted. You said -- 23 MR. CLARK: It was the neighbor's 24 straight behind, not adjacent to it. 25 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: It was still
33 1 acceptable to the homeowners to do that? 2 MR. CLARK: In a way I would say 3 no. I mean, he would like to understand it 4 better why the reason for trees. I mean, 5 it's, you know, kind of like calling up your 6 landscaping. 7 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: My recollection 8 is the gentleman to the back did show up at 9 the last meeting, and he did express his 10 reasons why he wanted the planting of trees. 11 Ms. Saarela, we can make that 12 contingent on planting some type of 13 shrubbery? 14 MS. SAARELA: You just need to 15 connect it to the reason for the variance. 16 I'm not sure if it was screening at that 17 point, but I think you could look back in 18 your back minutes, if you're unsure. 19 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Personally, sir, 20 I personally have no problems, given the 21 homeowner association approval and the 22 request. 23 I understood the other gentleman 24 who came before us and expressed his reasons 25 for shrubbery. To me, I know it's very
34 1 difficult for us to place that contingency 2 because I mean, I'm not going to sit there 3 and tell you what kind of trees to plant and 4 how high, how far apart. I don't generally 5 like to micromanage those types of issues, 6 but I would be in favor of granting the 7 request without contingencies while keeping 8 in mind the neighbor's sentiments. That's 9 all. 10 MR. CLARK: Very well. 11 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Anybody else 12 have any questions or comments? 13 MR. SANGHVI: Go back to the record 14 and find out the name of that neighbor who 15 had proposed it? I think we have three 16 signatures here of three different people who 17 have approved it separately. 18 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Yes, we do have 19 it as part of correspondence. I think it was 20 the same gentleman who came. 21 MR. IBE: Chris Huang, H-u-a-n-g. 22 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Any other 23 questions, comments? If not, I will 24 entertain a motion at this point. 25 Member Krieger?
35 1 MS. KRIEGER: In Case No. 11-048, 2 41014 Scarborough, I move to approve the 3 applicant's request for the 35-foot required 4 rear yard setback, the variance of 11 feet in 5 order to build their addition, and that the 6 unique circumstances and physical conditions 7 of the property, such as the narrowness, 8 shallowness, shape, water, topography, or 9 similar physical conditions and the need for 10 the variance is not due to the applicant's 11 personal or economic difficulty, that along 12 this line of houses on the Google map you can 13 see that this area is a little more narrow 14 and that the need is not self-created, that 15 the strict compliance with regulation 16 governing area, setback, frontage height, 17 bulk density or other dimensional 18 requirements will unreasonably prevent the 19 property owner from using the property for a 20 permitted use or will render conformity with 21 those regulations unnecessarily burdensome. 22 That the requested variance is the 23 minimum variance necessary to do substantial 24 justice to the applicant, as well as other 25 property owners in the district, except to be
36 1 mindful to neighbor to the rear, per their 2 concerns verbalized in the meeting. 3 The requested variance will not 4 cause an adverse impact on surrounding 5 property, property values or may increase as 6 a result of this, and use and enjoyment of 7 the property in the neighborhood and zoning 8 district. 9 MR. SANGHVI: Second. 10 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Seeing a motion 11 and a second, any further discussion? 12 Seeing none, Ms. Pawlowski, can you 13 please call the roll. 14 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Gerblick? 15 MR. GERBLICK: Yes. 16 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Chairman Ghannam? 17 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Yes. 18 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Ibe? 19 MR. IBE: Yes. 20 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Krieger? 21 MS. KRIEGER: Yes. 22 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Sanghvi? 23 MR. SANGHVI: Yes. 24 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Motion passes five 25 to zero.
37 1 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Thank you, sir. 2 MR. CLARK: Thank you for your 3 time. 4 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Next on our 5 agenda is Item No. 3, Case No. 12-001, 50630 6 Amesburg Drive. Is the applicant ready? 7 Please raise your right hand, sir, 8 and be sworn. 9 MR. IBE: In Case. No. 12-001, 10 50630 Amesburg Drive, do you swear or affirm 11 to the truth? 12 MR. MINOCK: I do. 13 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: State your name. 14 MR. MINOCK: Jason Minock. 15 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Go ahead and 16 proceed. 17 MR. MINOCK: I'm with Toll Brothers 18 I'm the project manager for the Island Lake 19 of Novi community. I have been here before a 20 couple times. 21 As you know, I'm here for the 22 similar, dissimilar issue. 23 And in your packet, my 24 understanding, talking with Doug who handles 25 for the city similar, dissimilar, there has
38 1 to be several items that are large enough 2 that meet the criteria in order to have 3 houses that are near each other, have similar 4 features. 5 In your packet, I believe, there 6 was a drawing that we did, I think Doug 7 actually had an aerial. I can see you guys 8 have it as well. 9 These two houses are from two 10 different streets, and the curvature of the 11 street, I know it says in there that you can 12 see one from the other, but I have stood out 13 there and it's -- I'm pretty sure it's going 14 to be impossible to stand in front of -- on 15 Terre Del Mar looking at the one house and 16 seeing the front of the other house because 17 of the angle of the streets. So that's one 18 thing that I have. 19 There is a park that goes in 20 between the two as well, they're not 21 physically connected. 22 One of the other things that Doug 23 said that if one house is five feet wide -- 24 five feet or more wider than the other home, 25 that that's considered a major structural
39 1 change. This one is four feet. 2 And so it is four feet, it's not in 3 the center of the house. It's actually four 4 feet on the one side. If you look, it 5 doesn't show real well here, but on the front 6 of the this home, there is a little turret 7 that sticks out. 8 The four feet is on the side of 9 that, so it actually, you can notice the four 10 feet, it's not like sort of the center of the 11 house expanded four feet, you may or may 12 notice it actually. It's going to be a 13 fairly prominent change, I believe. 14 The proposed house also has a four 15 car garage. Although that doesn't 16 technically meet in the ordinance in terms of 17 a difference in the front of the house. It 18 does make a very large difference. Other 19 than standing directly in front of the 20 proposed house, if you're offset either way, 21 the house is definitely going to look 22 different from the front, with one sticking 23 out 10 feet further than the other one. 24 And then the rear of the house 25 looks different, not that has anything to do
40 1 with the ordinance, but when it's on a curve, 2 you actually see -- you're driving up 3 Amesburg, you are going to see the existing 4 house, the rear of it. 5 MR. SANGHVI: Can you ask him to 6 put this on the overhead. 7 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Can you put that 8 on the overhead, please, and show everybody. 9 MR. MINOCK: I think you guys have 10 this. 11 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: We do. 12 MR. SANGHVI: People at home need 13 to see it. 14 MR. MINOCK: Is that clear? 15 MR. SANGHVI: Can you point out the 16 two lots that you're referring to? 17 MR. MINOCK: Absolutely. This home 18 right here is an existing home, and it fronts 19 on Terre Del Mar here, the garage comes out, 20 but the front of the home is over here. This 21 is the proposed home over here, which fronts 22 on Amesburg. 23 The difference is, although it's -- 24 again, to scale obviously, this little 25 section here is sticking out four feet
41 1 further than this other one here. The garage 2 here is four feet, so it sticks four feet -- 3 or 10 feet closer to the road than this one. 4 So the garage, looking from the 5 side of the garage, you're going to have two 6 16 foot garage doors, versus 16 and eight 7 foot from the one side. 8 And then, again, I know this has 9 nothing to do with the ordinance, but I'm 10 going to throw it out there anyway, they will 11 have different brick and roof colors. 12 There is one other minor thing 13 that -- there is one difference, there is a 14 vent on one, we have a circle window on the 15 other, on the front of the elevation. 16 One window in itself, from what I 17 understand from Doug, from the other 18 constitutes or change, a major change, but 19 throwing that out there. 20 Doug had mentioned that -- he said 21 in an email that went to several people, 22 including Charles, that, you know, it's 23 possible some creative landscaping, open 24 spaces, houses can be screened from one 25 another. We are open to that.
42 1 You know, he said this isn't 2 something that we can make the call -- 3 unfortunately we cannot make the call, which 4 again, I understand they have to follow the 5 rules. 6 He did say it might make a 7 reasonable argument. Obviously there is no 8 guarantee, like you said, it's your decision, 9 not his. 10 But I feel like there are some 11 extenuating circumstances, with the curvature 12 of the road, and the fact that there are some 13 differences. 14 That's pretty much what I have. 15 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Thank you, sir. 16 Is there anybody in the public who would like 17 to make a comment on this specific case? 18 Seeing none, I will close the 19 public remarks section and ask our secretary 20 to read any correspondence. 21 MR. IBE: Mr. Chair, there were 27 22 mails, three returned mail, one approval, 23 zero objections. 24 The lone one approval we have is 25 from Prier (ph) and Macomb Rogers of 50653
43 1 Amesburg Drive, Novi, dated 2nd 10, 2012. 2 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Thank you. Any 3 comment or questions by the city? 4 MS. SAARELA: No. 5 MR. BOULARD: Nothing to add. The 6 reference was I believe, was to Doug Niche, 7 who is our counsel that reviews all the 8 houses for similar, dissimilar. 9 Other than that, if there is any 10 questions, I would be happy to assist. 11 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: I will open it 12 up to the Board then for discussion. 13 As I do that, sir, I have got a 14 couple of questions for you. 15 Number one, the home that's 16 existing, was there an approval by that 17 particular homeowner whether they had a 18 problem or not with the same facade? 19 MR. MINOCK: No, there wasn't. I 20 actually didn't talk to them. 21 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: I'm saying I 22 assume, they were notified of this particular 23 hearing. Did anybody talk to them? 24 MR. MINOCK: I did not. 25 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Secondly, are
44 1 you going to have trouble with the sale of 2 this particular new home, if this facade is 3 not approved? 4 I know in your paperwork you said 5 you have sold it without realizing that this 6 was a problem. 7 MR. MINOCK: Yes, I mean, something 8 will have to occur. I mean, they really like 9 this particular look of the house, so I'm not 10 sure -- I can't answer that. You know, I 11 definitely think it will be some issue. I'm 12 not sure what we would do. We would have to 13 go back to them. 14 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: What kind of 15 screening -- if this was approved, what kind 16 of screening would you think would be 17 appropriate? 18 MR. MINOCK: It is a park in 19 between there. This is a walking path. The 20 walking -- I don't know if anybody went out 21 there, but currently the walking path is 22 actually in the lot. I'm going to have to 23 move the walking path over a few feet to get 24 it into the common area. 25 I mean, we could put some pine
45 1 trees, which I think probably would be the 2 effective -- we can't put them obviously too 3 close to the road. With the curvature of the 4 road, they have got to be on the homeowners 5 side of the public sidewalk. We could put 6 some pine trees up there, you know. 7 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: You know, I 8 didn't see, but is there like trees in 9 between these two lots? 10 MR. MINOCK: Not -- I think on your 11 aerial, there is -- no. There is some -- 12 further back down the park, it kind of opens 13 up behind there it a little bit more, there 14 is a few here and there, but they're not -- 15 they're only a couple year old small trees, 16 they're not anything significant. 17 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: I don't have any 18 other questions, sir. Thank you. Anybody 19 else have any questions or comments? 20 Member Krieger? 21 MS. KRIEGER: On Terre Del Mar, the 22 house 93 on west side, is there a window and 23 what shape is it, and then the house on 24 Amesburg, same thing, on the north side, is 25 there something distinguishing that makes
46 1 them different? 2 MR. MINOCK: On the north side of 3 one on the Amesburg, which is the rear of the 4 house, yes, there is. I mean, but the one on 5 Amesburg actually has that bump-out, that 6 sort of octagonal bump-out off the back of 7 the home, which is all glass. 8 MS. KRIEGER: I mean, towards where 9 the walking path is. 10 MR. MINOCK: Oh, okay, I'm sorry. 11 So more on the east side then of the Amesburg 12 house, no, there is no windows along that 13 side -- and I'm sorry. The other -- were you 14 looking for 93 on the back of that home, what 15 it would look at? 16 MS. KRIEGER: If I was on 17 Terre Del Mar driving west to east, and I 18 looked to my right, I would see the west side 19 of the 93 and the side of the house of where 20 the walking path is, since there is no 21 landscaping, are they different? 22 MR. MINOCK: Correct. Just so we 23 are -- when you're saying this side of the -- 24 this being the east side, or are you saying 25 this being -- the west side driving out
47 1 Amesburg, the west side here? 2 This is the rear of this home, this 3 is the side of that home. Did I answer your 4 question? I'm not sure I did. 5 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: I think the 6 question is, are there windows facing each 7 other, each of the homes? 8 MR. MINOCK: Yes. The back of this 9 house here has lots of windows. There is a 10 family room, a kitchen area, a breakfast nook 11 and a dining room. And then on this house 12 here, the proposed house, there are no 13 windows there. 14 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: There are no 15 windows. Is that your question, Member 16 Krieger? 17 MS. KRIEGER: Yes. Thank you. 18 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Anybody else 19 have any questions or comments? Member Ibe? 20 MR. IBE: Sir, in line with the 21 question that was asked previously by 22 Mr. Chairman here, regarding the sale of this 23 particular property, is the buyer aware that 24 you're before the Board today? 25 MR. MINOCK: They are. It's
48 1 actually not to go into much detail, it's 2 extended bill, so we can we give people 3 certain amount of time we are going to build 4 the house in, so having this meeting, 5 although it delayed things, we are still 6 going to be hopefully, if we get approval, 7 falling within the time frame for building 8 their house. 9 So they are -- I don't know how -- 10 we haven't exactly expressed -- we just said 11 we have to go before the Board for similar, 12 dissimilar. 13 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Member Sanghvi? 14 MR. SANGHVI: To follow-up on the 15 question is, is the sale contingent upon this 16 variance? 17 MR. MINOCK: I know that this was 18 an extremely -- they really like this house. 19 We have lots of -- this is our model home. 20 And so people really like that look of the 21 model home. 22 Actually, I can't honestly answer 23 that. I mean, I know that talking to my 24 sales manager that -- I mean, if the question 25 is, are they not going to buy a house if they
49 1 can't have this variance, I don't know the 2 answer to that. 3 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Is this house 4 under contract with these proposed buyers? 5 MR. MINOCK: Oh, absolutely, yes. 6 They bought it months ago. As a matter of 7 fact, we submitted for building approval in 8 December, so -- 9 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Member Sanghvi? 10 MR. SANGHVI: Second question. Who 11 is going to maintain this quote, unquote 12 park? 13 MR. MINOCK: The homeowners 14 association maintains the whole park. There 15 is parks throughout the whole community. 16 There is actually -- the walking 17 path is maintained by the homeowners 18 association. They re-woodchip it every so 19 often, get rid of the weeds. The grass is 20 mowed and the irrigation is paid through by 21 the homeowners association. 22 MR. SANGHVI: Is the homeowners 23 association aware of what is going on now? 24 MR. MINOCK: No. But Toll is part 25 of that homeowners association. No.
50 1 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Member Gerblick? 2 MR. GERBLICK: You had mentioned 3 that five feet is considered a major 4 structural change. How big of an undertaking 5 would it be to change that four foot 6 extension to five feet to meet the 7 variance -- or the major structural change so 8 you wouldn't need a variance? Do you have an 9 understanding of how the ordinance is worded? 10 MR. MINOCK: That was my 11 understanding. 12 To answer your question, well, I 13 would have to have the architects redraw 14 blueprints and do a new plot plan. I believe 15 that there is a foot there, I'm just guessing 16 off this. But I believe there is probably a 17 foot there so it's actually physically fit. 18 So it just be, you know, several thousand 19 dollars to new blueprints. I would have to 20 give it to the homeowners as extra space. 21 MR. GERBLICK: Thank you. 22 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Member Krieger? 23 MS. KRIEGER: So Toll Brothers is 24 part of the homeowners association? 25 MR. MINOCK: Correct.
51 1 MS. KRIEGER: Then aren't there -- 2 like the president of the homeowners 3 association, have they been included in this 4 discussion? 5 MR. MINOCK: No. 6 MS. KRIEGER: I would actually like 7 to see more of their participation in this as 8 well, since in the end they're going to be 9 living with the results of all of this, as 10 well as the homeowners. 11 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Is Toll Brothers 12 a member of the association only because it 13 retains empty lots that are not build upon, 14 is that the reason why? 15 MR. MINOCK: Correct. There is 16 three people on the board and Toll Brother is 17 one of them. 18 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: It's by virtue 19 of the fact that they own lots, that still 20 haven't been sold, is that the reason why? 21 MR. MINOCK: Correct. 22 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Is this 23 something that needs to go through the 24 homeowners association? 25 MR. MINOCK: No, I don't believe
52 1 so, but -- 2 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Are there any 3 restrictive covenants in your -- 4 MR. MINOCK: No, there is nothing 5 in the Island Lake covenants that would 6 dictate that. 7 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Is this part of 8 a site condo? 9 MR. MINOCK: Yes. 10 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Island Lake is a 11 site condo, correct, the entire community? 12 MR. MINOCK: Yes. 13 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: As part of those 14 condo documents, do you know if there is -- 15 does anybody know if there any restrictive 16 issues to this particular issue also? 17 MS. SAARELA: I don't have the 18 documents handy, but if they were, they would 19 be probably be in the bylaws. 20 MR. MINOCK: I'm pretty sure that 21 the bylaws are fairly generic, there is some 22 very minimal restrictions in there. 23 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: I guess that is 24 a matter of what's minimal. I appreciate 25 that. I guess there is a couple of ways we
53 1 can handle it. 2 Certainly it can be granted as 3 requested, denied as requested, or it can be 4 granted with conditions. 5 How long would it take to bring 6 this up before the homeowners association and 7 get approval or denial? 8 MR. MINOCK: I mean, I could email 9 the two others members of the board. 10 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: How long would 11 it take you to -- 12 MR. MINOCK: I mean, couple of 13 days. Everybody is pretty quick with the 14 emails. Smaller items, votes go through via 15 email. 16 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: There is only 17 three votes on the votes is that what you are 18 saying? 19 MR. MINOCK: Correct. 20 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: How about the 21 other homeowners, do they vote? 22 MR. MINOCK: No -- well, not on 23 issues that arise. So there is three 24 members. We just had our annual board 25 meeting, and the two members were reelected
54 1 this last month, so that's how the board -- 2 Island Lake has a subassociation, which is 3 this, is called the Orchards. There is a 4 master association has oversight over the 5 lake and the clubhouse and that. 6 Toll Brothers runs that. We 7 actually oversee that. I have controlling 8 interest in that board. But that board 9 doesn't have anything to do with this board 10 with this specific area. 11 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: This specific 12 area is governed by a subassociation? 13 MR. MINOCK: Yes, there is seven of 14 them within Island Lake. It's kind of 15 confusing. There are some many different 16 condos, and so forth, so they each have their 17 own distinct board for their own distinct -- 18 each one has a little bit different concerns. 19 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: So of this 20 subassociation, there is three people that 21 vote on these type of issues? 22 MR. MINOCK: Yes, correct. They're 23 elected from the body at large. 24 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: I understand. 25 Of this subassociation?
55 1 MR. MINOCK: Correct. I mean, I 2 don't know what the other subassociations, 3 how large the boards are. 4 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: These members 5 are elected by the subassociation? 6 MR. MINOCK: Correct. 7 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: What is your 8 opinion on the screening of the two homes? 9 MR. MINOCK: I don't have a 10 problem. I mean, I don't know -- again, I 11 don't think when you're standing in front of 12 the one, that you can see the other, so I 13 think it's more -- if that would help with 14 the situation, I don't have a problem putting 15 in the pine trees between there. There is a 16 walking path, there are trees throughout the 17 park. They're just -- you know, they have 18 only been planted for a couple years. 19 They're not real big yet. 20 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: If there was a 21 contingency for screening, how many pine 22 trees do you think would be appropriate? 23 MR. MINOCK: Probably like six, 24 maybe eight footers. The road also kind of 25 drops here a little bit. I don't know if
56 1 anybody went out there. It comes around the 2 curve there. I mean, I would think six eight 3 foot pine trees maybe. Which is not, I 4 mean -- 5 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Go ahead and 6 finish. 7 MR. MINOCK: I was going to say, 8 that's not inexpensive, but we could do that. 9 It would be easier of me than going the 10 other. 11 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Mr. Boulard? 12 MR. BOULARD: My only suggestion 13 was if the Board is inclined to consider some 14 trees for buffers that -- I'm not sure with 15 the width of that area, that once you 16 relocated the path and put the trees in 17 there, that as the trees mature, I'm not sure 18 it would necessarily fit on the park portion, 19 or if they might be pushed onto the lot. 20 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: I think he 21 suggested it has to be on the homeowners 22 land, correct? 23 MR. MINOCK: Oh, I was thinking you 24 were thinking the park, but -- 25 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: I thought you
57 1 suggested it has to be on the homeowners -- 2 MR. MINOCK: Oh, no, it could be -- 3 I was thinking more in the park, just so that 4 it's -- I mean, the park -- we let anybody 5 who wants to plant extra trees in the park go 6 ahead and do it, as that subassociation. It 7 seems to benefit everybody. So my 8 inclination would be to put them in the park, 9 but -- 10 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Any other 11 questions, comments or ideas? I'm not sure 12 what the -- 13 MR. SANGHVI: My only concern is 14 the homeowners are not in the loop here, and 15 that bothers me. 16 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: If you're 17 inclined to approve, you can make a 18 condition, instead of him coming back again 19 on approval of their particular board. You 20 can make a condition of screening, anything 21 else you think is appropriate, or you can 22 table it, request to table it. I mean, it's 23 up to you. 24 The only reason why -- I'm 25 listening to all of this, I'm wondering why
58 1 the person next-door is not giving an opinion 2 one way or another. You would think -- I 3 mean, they're the ones who have the similar 4 facade. 5 I mean, they can just simply be 6 disinterested or they weren't -- just didn't 7 see the notice. 8 What the Board inclined to do? 9 Anybody have any suggestions? 10 MR. SANGHVI: The way it stands 11 now, I will not be able to support it. 12 MR. GERBLICK: I would be in favor 13 of the request if we added a contingency that 14 pending approval of the homeowner with the 15 similar facade and approval of the sub-board, 16 both of those conditions. 17 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Anybody else? I 18 mean, I have no problem approving it. The 19 question becomes one of conditions. 20 I don't even have a problem saying 21 no screening. I don't want to say it's 22 really up to the neighbor, but to me the 23 input of the neighbor would be instrumental 24 in helping us because they have the most at 25 stake. If they have no opinion or desire one
59 1 way or the other, I have no problems with no 2 contingency. 3 Anybody else want to make any 4 suggestions before we ask for a motion? 5 Member Krieger? 6 MS. KRIEGER: I would be willing to 7 table it until that information that removes 8 the contingencies for the approval. 9 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: If we tabled 10 this for a month, sir, would that hinder or 11 impede your billing process or no? 12 MR. MINOCK: It tightens it up, but 13 we could do that. 14 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: When did you 15 plan on constructing or beginning 16 construction? 17 MR. MINOCK: As soon as I got a 18 permit. 19 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: When do you 20 expect that? 21 MR. MINOCK: Well, I don't know 22 exactly. I mean, this was in the approval 23 process, then it stopped, so I'm not sure -- 24 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Assuming you had 25 approval tonight, let's just assume that for
60 1 the sake of argument, when would you expect a 2 building permit? 3 MR. MINOCK: I guess, I would think 4 in a week. I'm not sure if everything has 5 been done, or if this whole thing stopped at 6 this. I'm not sure if the other approvals 7 have gone through or not. 8 But if this is the only 9 contingency, I would think it would be fairly 10 quick, I don't know. 11 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Mr. Boulard? 12 MR. BOULARD: I believe that once 13 the initial reviews start, normally what we 14 would do is hold off on reviewing the entire 15 house because sometimes the house will 16 change, a different house will be built on 17 the lot, which would be mean a different sets 18 of reviews as opposed to extending the 19 applicant's funds unnecessarily. 20 It seems that the contingencies 21 that you're considering are fairly cut and 22 dry. There is a not a lot of interpretation. 23 It's either yes or no. 24 And if you're inclined to address 25 the issue tonight, I would be more than
61 1 comfortable, you know, reviewing those to 2 make sure that either yes or no, and then we 3 would -- I can bring a copy back as opposed 4 to holding things up. 5 But I'm -- if you're inclined to -- 6 if you're inclined to approve this, I think 7 the weather is, you know, going to be an 8 issue. Nobody knows what the spring holds. 9 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: I understand 10 that. 11 I would have -- I guess, I would be 12 inclined, if you wanted it done this right 13 away, because of timing, I know timing is 14 always an issue in building and construction 15 and so forth, plus I'm sure the homeowners 16 want to get in as soon as possible, but I 17 guess I would have no problem approving, with 18 the contingency that the sub homeowners 19 association gives approvals. If that 20 association has any contingencies itself, 21 such as a screening, or other issues, that 22 would have to be complied with. 23 I guess I can support something to 24 that effect, just to move the process. 25 Member Sanghvi?
62 1 MR. SANGHVI: My main concern is, 2 (inaudible), but the rest of people have to 3 live with it for the rest of their lives. 4 And I would have rather stop it now than 5 create a problem in the future for the people 6 who are living in the neighborhood. 7 This is going to change the entire 8 configuration of the neighborhood, not just 9 this house alone, you see. 10 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: So what are you 11 suggesting? 12 MR. SANGHVI: I'm suggesting that 13 they should put these people in the loop 14 before we make a decision. 15 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: You mean all the 16 members of the subassociation? 17 MR. SANGHVI: Yes. 18 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Well, I guess by 19 our notices, would we have -- it's only a 20 foot differential from this particular house 21 that is notified, is that right? 22 MR. BOULARD: Right. The notices 23 go out all the property owners located within 24 300 feet of the border, and I think -- 25 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Do you know how
63 1 many of those would be in this subassociation 2 by any chance? 3 MR. BOULARD: I'm not sure how many 4 houses are occupied. 5 If you look at the map that's in 6 your packet, the dark line is those other 7 buildings or parcels that are within the 8 300 feet, and so then the red points are the 9 addresses where those notices would be sent. 10 So you could see that the adjacent neighbors 11 did receive -- you know, did receive the 12 notice. 13 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: So the homes 14 with the red dots and the lots with the red 15 dots are within the 300 feet? 16 MR. BOULARD: Right. Also the 17 ones -- the houses on the other side of 18 Terre Del Mar, where they extend -- 19 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: How many -- I 20 see there is a lot of empty lots here, sir, 21 on the aerial. How many of those empty lots 22 are still controlled or owned by Toll, and 23 the subassociation? 24 MR. MINOCK: A grand total of 40. 25 Half of those are sold and we're building, so
64 1 there are a large chunk that we actually have 2 in terms of -- 3 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Forty of how 4 many total? 5 MR. MINOCK: 266. 6 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: In this 7 subassociation? 8 MR. MINOCK: Correct. Actually 9 that's not true. It's 57. I'm sorry. It's 10 57 out of 266. 11 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: That's what Toll 12 still owns? 13 MR. MINOCK: Correct. A large 14 chunk of those have been sold, but -- 15 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: But haven't 16 been delivered. 17 MR. MINOCK: But haven't been 18 delivered, so Toll is still in control of 19 them. 20 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: I guess the 21 issue with is that, what he's telling us, 22 what he's advising us, that the 23 subassociation doesn't even vote on it. It's 24 the board that would vote? 25 MR. MINOCK: Correct.
65 1 Subassociations actually don't vote unless 2 there is major changes to the bylaws and 3 those kinds of -- 4 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: So they would 5 have no input as to -- at least according to 6 your condo documents, as to things like this, 7 facade, is that what you're telling us? 8 MR. MINOCK: I believe that's the 9 case, yes. I mean, typically what the board 10 does is they will go and talk to people. You 11 know, kind of to your point of -- they will 12 talk to, you know, people and see if they 13 think it's an issue. 14 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: All right. Any 15 other suggestions? I'm trying to get a 16 consensus because, as you know, we have got 17 five tonight, you need at least four out of 18 five for any action. 19 MR. SANGHVI: My suggestion would 20 be to table this and let them get the people 21 in the loop there and find out what is their 22 input before we make a decision. I'd like to 23 take into account the interest of the people 24 who are already there. 25 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: You're referring
66 1 to all 266 lots? 2 MR. SANGHVI: Yes, in that 3 neighborhood, yes. 4 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Member Krieger, 5 what would be your inclination? 6 MS. KRIEGER: I would be inclined 7 to table it as well. 8 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: You're not going 9 to get approval based upon that alone. We 10 have already -- you got kind of two 11 approvals, maybe three. But you still need 12 four, so -- 13 MR. MINOCK: I was going to say, 14 I'm not sure that there is a mechanism for 15 getting 200 -- all the people to vote. I 16 don't know. We had a board meeting, we only 17 had a quorum because I was there representing 18 57 folks. 19 The board would be very easy, like 20 I said, that's an email, you know, with 21 attachments and so forth. I mean, that is a 22 fairly simple -- and then maybe the -- I 23 don't know the gentleman, or the family that 24 lives in the existing house. They have been 25 there for many years before I was here, but I
67 1 have no problem knocking on their door at 2 least, and, you know, seeing if they have any 3 concerns. 4 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Member Ibe, you 5 have a suggestion? 6 MR. IBE: Absolutely. Sir, if I 7 can make a suggestion to you. I understand 8 you only have a three member board there. I 9 mean, that doesn't seem to fit the majority 10 of people at least in this subassociation. 11 But concerning the fact that we 12 have two and two, I'm the person in the 13 middle, here, I could go either way, you 14 still don't have enough, you need four. 15 MR. MINOCK: I understand. 16 MR. IBE: I think in order to 17 satisfy the other two members who are on the 18 fence, it might be a good idea for you to 19 knock on that neighbor's door because this is 20 a neighborhood who is going to have to live 21 next to this house. 22 MR. MINOCK: Correct. 23 MR. IBE: I can tell you, if I'm 24 the neighbor, I certainly don't want a house 25 that looks like mine across the street from
68 1 me because definitely I'm sure they paid 2 premium dollar for their home, and certainly 3 don't want something that looks identical. 4 This is a custom homes. And when they look 5 the same, it takes away from the beauty of 6 what they have. 7 So I think you can -- while I'm not 8 (inaudible) if you don't do this, I will 9 humbly request that you at least consider 10 getting the word from this three member board 11 that you guys have, that I think is a big 12 monopoly, and go knock on the neighbor's 13 door. The people that really matters. Then 14 come back and tell us, maybe they can even 15 give you something in writing for the board 16 next month. 17 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: What would you 18 suggest, Member Sanghvi, with regard to the 19 other -- they control say 57 lots, there is 20 almost 100 -- maybe 180, 190 plus that may be 21 occupied. 22 What would you suggest they do with 23 those particular homeowners? 24 MR. SANGHVI: (Inaudible) nobody 25 owns them at the present time. But the
69 1 people who are there, who have invested quite 2 large sums of money in this neighborhood, I 3 think they need to know what's going on how 4 it might impact them. 5 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Are you 6 suggesting -- 7 MR. SANGHVI: He hasn't talked to 8 the guy next-door. 9 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: I understand, 10 are you suggesting he somehow, Toll, send the 11 notice out to all these people before the 12 next meeting? 13 MR. SANGHVI: Just let them know 14 what's going on here, how it might impact 15 them. Sometimes ignorance is not bliss. 16 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Okay. Anybody 17 want to make a motion? 18 MR. IBE: I will go ahead and make 19 a motion. I will move that in Case Number 20 12-001, 50630 Amesburg Drive, that this 21 matter be tabled to the March hearing. I 22 don't know, will that impact any notice be 23 given again or can we just -- 24 MR. BOULARD: No, if you table this 25 to a date certain -- March 6th.
70 1 MR. IBE: March 6th hearing, during 2 that March 6th hearing the Board will like to 3 hear from the applicant whether or not they 4 have complied with some of the requests and 5 suggestions made by the members at that time. 6 MR. SANGHVI: Second. 7 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Any further 8 discussion on this particular motion? 9 The only comment I would have, sir, 10 is although you may -- you can choose to do 11 nothing, as you can see from the comments, 12 certainly contacting the neighbor next-door 13 who has the same facade, or will have 14 approximately the same facade and as many 15 people as you can in this particular sub. 16 I would also suggest, even though 17 this is a three member board that you get 18 approval from the board, just to let us 19 know -- because these are elected by the 20 homeowners, so that's their representatives. 21 And bring back as much approvals and 22 comments, whether it be positive or negative 23 that you can, and that could be part of your 24 presentation. That's the only thing I would 25 add.
71 1 Seeing no other discussion, 2 Ms. Pawlowski, can you please call the roll. 3 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Gerblick? 4 MR. GERBLICK: Yes. 5 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Chairman Ghannam? 6 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Yes. 7 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Ibe? 8 MR. IBE: Yes. 9 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Krieger? 10 MS. KRIEGER: Yes. 11 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Sanghvi? 12 MR. SANGHVI: Yes. 13 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Motion passes six 14 to zero. 15 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Sir, you are 16 adjourned until March 6th, in hopes you will 17 bring back that information. 18 MR. MINOCK: Thank you. 19 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Next on the 20 agenda is Item No. 4, Case No. 12-002, 22126 21 Beck Road. Is the applicant here? 22 Can you please state your name, 23 sir. 24 MR. STORM: Michael Storm. 25 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Raise your right
72 1 hand, as you're doing, to be sworn. 2 MR. IBE: In Case Number 12-002, 3 22126 Beck Road. Do you swear or affirm to 4 tell the truth? 5 MR. STORM: I do. 6 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Thank you. 7 MR. STORM: I have some additional 8 information I wanted to give you. I did a 9 petition. 10 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Why don't you 11 pass that before you make your presentation. 12 Are these all the same? 13 MR. STORM: Yes. I purchased this 14 home in 2009 and the fence existed. That's 15 why the pictures that you have show the wear 16 and tear on it, that was to show that it had 17 been placed there for some time. 18 When I purchased the home, I saw 19 the fence in the woods, in the front of the 20 yard, and knowing that it was there, that 21 served a great sense of relief for safety 22 issues and also to deaden the sound of Beck 23 Road because I am at the same elevation as 24 the road. 25 So with that being said, I'd like
73 1 to keep the fence as it's there, and if you 2 review some of the petitions, you can see 3 that petitioners, that it existed, it wasn't 4 something that I erected and put in place, 5 but I did clear all the trees that were 6 growing over it and vines, and then I painted 7 it, and resecured it in areas. 8 And that's why it came to the 9 attention of Maureen from the zoning 10 department. She saw it, and then that's when 11 I -- that's why I am here today. 12 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: You have 13 anything else, sir? 14 MR. STORM: No, that's it. 15 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Is there anybody 16 in the public who would like to make a 17 comment on this particular case? 18 Ma'am, I will recognize you first, 19 if you could step forward. Please state your 20 name and address. 21 MS. CRAWFORD: Good evening. Carol 22 Jean Crawford, 22135 Beck Road. 23 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Before I have 24 you sworn in, can you move the microphone a 25 little bit closer to your mouth.
74 1 Raise your right hand and be sworn, 2 ma'am. 3 MR. IBE: In Case Number 12-002, 4 22126 Beck Road. Do you swear or affirm to 5 tell the truth? 6 MS. CRAWFORD: Yes. I didn't get a 7 chance to get the letter back in with our 8 comments. 9 We live directly across the street, 10 and we find all the improvements that are 11 being made there wonderful. 12 The property was in great need of 13 clearing and cutting back and improving and 14 it's beginning to look wonderful. 15 We like the fence there. It adds 16 personality to the property and the dwelling 17 and we would like to support the applicant in 18 his efforts here. Thank you. 19 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Thank you, 20 ma'am. 21 Sir, you were next, please step 22 forward. Go ahead and state your name, 23 please. 24 MR. FAUST: Mike Faust, 23445 Beck 25 Road.
75 1 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: You can raise 2 your right hand, sir. 3 MR. IBE: In Case Number 12-002, 4 22126 Beck Road. Do you swear or affirm to 5 tell the truth? 6 MR. FAUST: Yes. Just to say as a 7 neighbor, I'm a relatively distant neighbor, 8 but that fence, when Mike came by, I 9 developed the subdivision Edinborough on Beck 10 Road. That was back in the early to mid 11 '90s, when we started it. And that fence was 12 there at that time. And I'm just on Beck 13 Road, on the opposite side down a ways. I 14 wouldn't mind having a fence. Beck Road is 15 noisy. I think it probably serves a real 16 good purpose. But I have no objection to it 17 and it certainly was there in the mid '90s. 18 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Okay. Thank 19 you, sir. Is there anybody else that 20 would -- you have something else? 21 MR. FAUST: No. 22 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: You can sit 23 down. Thank you. 24 Is there anybody else in the 25 audience who would like to make a comment on
76 1 this particular case? 2 Seeing none, I will close the 3 public remarks section and ask our secretary 4 to read any correspondence. 5 MR. IBE: Mr. Chair, 26 mails were 6 sent out, zero returns mailed, one approval, 7 and two objections. 8 The sole approval we have is from 9 Joseph Dunnabeck of 21900 Dunnabeck Court, 10 Novi, 48374, dated February 6, 2012. 11 It reads: "I have been a resident 12 of Novi since 1952. I have grown up with 13 fencing along Beck Road mainly to keep the 14 animals enclosed. 15 However, in today's world, a good 16 fence along Beck Road helps to reduce the 17 noise from the vehicles traveling along this 18 road. This fine looking fence is nicer to 19 look at than the remaining farmers fences up 20 and down Beck Road." Signed Joseph Dunnabeck. 21 The first objection is from Edward 22 Wang, address 22099 Barclay Court, dated 23 February 11, 2012. 24 It reads, "Wooden fence will be a 25 major eyesore, as Mr. Storm has it in the
77 1 backyard now. Looks really bad. However, 2 brick wall fence made of cast iron like the 3 one installed two doors south of them may be 4 acceptable. Reason for objection, fence does 5 not blend in with the surrounding wall. It 6 poses the risk of devaluing properties. 7 Thank you for understating, and we do 8 recognize them being a good neighbor." 9 Second objection is from Remond 10 Atie, spelled A-t-i-e, of 22059 Barclay, 11 dated February 3rd, 2001. And it reads, 12 "sets a precedence". Thank you, Mr. Chair. 13 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Thank you. Any 14 comments the City? 15 MS. SAARELA: No. 16 MR. BOULARD: Just a couple of 17 comments, if I could. Actually, questions 18 for the petitioner. 19 Do you -- one of the things when we 20 had contacted you for additional information 21 with that hoped to find out, do you know if 22 the fence is currently in the public 23 right-of-way or not? 24 MR. STORM: No, it is not. It is 25 at the same distance, if you can look at that
78 1 aerial shot, the city sidewalk that the 2 neighboring properties have, it's sitting 3 just behind where a sidewalk would go. 4 MR. BOULARD: Even where it jogs to 5 the driveway? 6 MR. STORM: Right. It would sit 7 right behind that, that's where the fence is 8 that. 9 MR. BOULARD: Then the second 10 question is, the ordinance basically talks 11 about fences not being allowed in the front 12 yard, which would be anywhere between the 13 front of the house at 190 feet back from the 14 road, out to the road. 15 Currently the fences that you have 16 taken the pictures of, I believe, is along 17 Beck Road. 18 Is it your intent or are you 19 requesting permission to put fence back along 20 the side property lines? 21 MR. STORM: I wasn't going to do 22 anything additional than what's already 23 currently in place. 24 MR. BOULARD: Is there -- are there 25 fences -- does the fence extend back along
79 1 the property line? 2 MR. STORM: On one side of the 3 property it does. 4 MR. BOULARD: Which side? 5 MR. STORM: That would be the north 6 side. 7 MR. BOULARD: How far back does it 8 go right now? 9 MR. STORM: I'm going to guess 10 about eight foot sections of fence. 11 MR. BOULARD: 65 feet? 12 MR. STORM: Yes. 13 MR. BOULARD: Thank you. 14 MR. STORM: The people that 15 complained about -- or were in support of 16 this, are both people that live in the 17 neighborhood setting. They live behind the 18 house. 19 Until you live on a road, that's a 20 busy traveled road, you can understand the 21 importance of having the fence. And when you 22 are in a neighborhood setting, it's a 23 different setup. Those are the two people 24 that it sounds like are not supportive of it. 25 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Thank you, sir.
80 1 As I opened the discussion up to the Board, I 2 just have one question for the City. 3 If this thing -- if this fence was 4 already there and existing, why does he need 5 a variance to keep it there, if nothing 6 additional is being done? 7 MR. BOULARD: There is some 8 question as to which portions, or if there 9 were portions of fence that were there. 10 Certainly, we have gone back to the 11 back into the permit system, which is well 12 before the '90s, there is not any permits or 13 any indication that it was ever installed 14 legally, so -- 15 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: This was just 16 recognized recently by someone that -- 17 apparently it never was approved before? 18 MR. BOULARD: There was complaints, 19 I believe, and the ordinance officer, came to 20 her attention that here is this fence, it was 21 not, as far as we could tell, installed 22 legally, so the idea of coming here is to 23 address that issue. 24 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Sir, when did 25 you buy the house?
81 1 MR. STORM: Just a comment on that. 2 There was no complaints, Maureen from the 3 ordinance department drove by and noticed the 4 fence, that's why this has all come to play. 5 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: I appreciate 6 that. When did you buy the house? 7 MR. STORM: 2009, December 29th. 8 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Do we know -- 9 well, first of all, since you bought the 10 house, nothing -- no part of the fencing was 11 added, correct? 12 MR. STORM: No. I just resecured 13 it. 14 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: You resecured -- 15 MR. STORM: It was all there, but 16 even in the ordinance that you have to 17 maintain a fence. So I repainted it and made 18 it more solid. 19 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Okay. It did 20 seem that parts of the fence were still in 21 disrepair, is that a fair statement? 22 MR. STORM: Sure. 23 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: If you're 24 allowed to keep the fence, are you intending 25 on --
82 1 MR. STORM: Doing further repair. 2 That's what I explained to Maureen, I'm in 3 the middle of a project, that's why I started 4 planting the pine trees. I was going to do 5 further landscape. 6 Now, we decided that I come in 7 front of the Board -- you asked that 8 question. This was a ticketed item. I went 9 and talked to Judge Powers, and we decided 10 why don't we just go in front of the Zoning 11 Board and do it this route, instead of going 12 through the 52nd District Court. That's why 13 I'm here today. 14 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: I guess the 15 problem is maybe a previous homeowners or 16 someone else erected the fence without 17 permission, I guess, that's the problem. 18 MR. STORM: It may have been, but 19 the home before was a horse farm, and used to 20 own the other lots around it. So back in the 21 day, it was permitted to have that fence 22 around it because it had the frontage. 23 Because even the bylaws today, if you have 24 200 feet of frontage to a road like that, you 25 could have that fence. But that lot is 110
83 1 or something. 2 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: And you're not 3 proposing to add to the fence, simply to keep 4 the existing fence and obviously maintain it? 5 MR. STORM: Correct. 6 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: I don't have any 7 other questions. 8 Anybody else have any questions for 9 the petitioner? 10 MR. SANGHVI: My only question is, 11 is there a change in the ordinance, or this 12 has been around all along like that and -- 13 MR. BOULARD: I'm not sure. You 14 did some clearing of the vegetation that was 15 there? 16 MR. STORM: Yes. 17 MR. BOULARD: That may have 18 contributed. I drive this at least twice a 19 day, on my way go back and forth to work, the 20 gentleman has done some clearing, you planted 21 some of the pine trees? 22 MR. STORM: I'm trying to -- 23 MR. BOULARD: I can't speak to do 24 the past. 25 MR. SANGHVI: I was there on
84 1 Friday. I looked at the place. I agree, 2 some portions of the fence needs fixing. 3 MR. STORM: Correct. 4 MR. SANGHVI: But personally I have 5 no objection to leaving it as it is. 6 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Okay. Anybody 7 else have any questions or comments? If not, 8 someone want to make a motion? 9 MR. IBE: Absolutely. In Case 10 Number 12-002, 22126 Beck Road, I move that 11 we approve the request as stated by the 12 applicant, for the following reasons: One, 13 that there are unique circumstances or 14 physical conditions of the property, such as 15 the narrowness, the topography, and in fact, 16 the location of the property itself. And the 17 need for a variance is not due to the 18 applicant's personal economic difficulty. 19 The property in question here is 20 located on a very busy stretch of road called 21 Beck Road, and the applicant in this case 22 bought this property as is really, the fence 23 was there prior to the sale. 24 The applicant stated that he bought 25 the property in December of 2009 and
85 1 inherited the fence that was in great need 2 for maintenance and thus, the applicant 3 proceeded to do necessary work in order to 4 improve, like the fence that was there. 5 Second, the need is not 6 self-created. As previously stated, the 7 applicant inherited the problem that was 8 there, and only tried to improve on the 9 condition of the fence. 10 And third, a strict compliance with 11 regulations governing area setback, frontage, 12 high bulk, density or other dimensional 13 requirements, will unreasonably prevent the 14 property owner for using the property or 15 permitted purposes, or will render conformity 16 with those regulations unnecessarily 17 burdensome. 18 The property owner purchased this 19 property obviously as it is, understanding 20 that this fence will probably serve a good 21 buffer for the property as well as the busy 22 stretch of the road known as Beck Road. 23 So enforcing the regulations or the 24 ordinance upon this property owner will 25 unnecessarily be burdensome.
86 1 Four, the requested variance is the 2 minimal variance necessary to do substantial 3 justice to the applicant as well as to other 4 property owners in the district. 5 The applicant has brought forth 6 petitions signed by several homeowners who 7 live along this stretch the road. 8 With the exception of two the 9 objections that we have this, I think that 10 the property owner has demonstrated that 11 substantial justice will be done to -- by 12 allowing him to maintain the fence. 13 And finally, the requested variance 14 will not cause an adverse impact on 15 surrounding property or property values, or 16 the use and enjoyment of the property in the 17 neighborhood. 18 Again, the applicant has brought 19 forth petitions signed by people who 20 obviously will be impacted by this fence and 21 it appears that they are in support of the 22 fence. 23 So based on all of this, there is 24 really no quarrel as to why this fence 25 shouldn't stand.
87 1 Based on this, I move that we 2 approve the request as stated. 3 MS. KRIEGER: Second. 4 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Seeing a motion 5 and a second, any further discussion? 6 Seeing none, Ms. Pawlowski, can you 7 please call the roll. 8 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Gerblick? 9 MR. GERBLICK: Yes. 10 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Chairman Ghannam? 11 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Yes. 12 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Ibe? 13 MR. IBE: Yes. 14 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Krieger? 15 MS. KRIEGER: Yes. 16 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Sanghvi? 17 MR. SANGHVI: Yes. 18 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Motion passes five 19 to zero. 20 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Congratulations, 21 sir. 22 The next item, Item No. 5 has been 23 withdrawn, is that correct? 24 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Yes. 25 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: So we don't need
88 1 to take any action on that, Mr. Saarela? 2 MS. SAARELA: You don't need to, 3 but I mean, you could make a motion agreeing 4 to take it off the agenda. 5 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Can I can 6 entertain a motion to take Item No. 5 off the 7 agenda tonight? 8 MR. GERBLICK: So moved. 9 MR. IBE: Second. 10 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Seeing a motion 11 and second, all in favor say aye. 12 THE BOARD: Aye. 13 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Any opposed? 14 Seeing none, Item No. 5 is formally 15 withdrawn. 16 Next on the agenda is Item No. 6, 17 Case Number 12-004, Parcel No. 18 5022-09-451-028, Novi Corporate Park. 19 Sir, can you state your name and 20 address. 21 MR. MILLER: Chris Miller. I'm 22 with Amson Dembs Development. 23 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Can you spell 24 that, please. 25 MR. MILLER: A-m-s-o-n, D-e-m-b-s,
89 1 Development. 2 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Raise your right 3 hand and be sworn. 4 MR. IBE: In Case Number 12-004, 5 Parcel 5022-09-451-028, Novi Corporate Park, 6 do you swear or affirm to tell the truth? 7 MR. MILLER: Yes. 8 MR. IBE: Thank you. 9 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Please proceed. 10 MR. MILLER: We are asking that the 11 Board grant us an extension. 12 We have a sales trailer in an 13 industrial park at Twelve Mile Road and 14 West Park, and we are requesting that they 15 grant us an extension. Two years. 16 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Do you have 17 anything else to present, sir? 18 MR. MILLER: No, I don't. 19 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Is there anybody 20 in the public who would like to make a 21 comment on this case? 22 Seeing none, I will close the 23 public remarks section and ask our secretary 24 to read any correspondence. 25 MR. IBE: Mr. Chair, there were 17
90 1 mails send out, three returned mails, zero 2 approval, zero objections. 3 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Any comments 4 from the City, questions? 5 MS. SAARELA: No. 6 MR. BOULARD: Nothing to add. 7 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: I will open it 8 up to the Board for discussion then. 9 Any questions of the applicant? 10 Member Krieger? 11 MS. KRIEGER: How many of the 12 parcels are remaining? 13 MR. MILLER: I don't have that 14 information with me. I'm not positive. 15 MS. KRIEGER: Okay. 16 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Sir, I got a 17 couple of questions. Your original extension 18 went to November 2011, correct? 19 MR. MILLER: Yes. 20 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Why is it that 21 you filed it this year? 22 MR. MILLER: Again, I don't know -- 23 somebody else at our office did the filing 24 for this. I was asked to come out for this. 25 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Because you were
91 1 issued a notice of violation in November, 2 correct? 3 MR. MILLER: I believe so, yes. 4 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: I mean, 5 personally, I didn't get enough information 6 from you on your presentation to grant any 7 kind of request. 8 Explain to us why you need 9 additional time for this trailer and explain 10 how much time you're requesting. 11 MR. MILLER: First of all, it is a 12 temporary sales trailer, not a construction 13 tailer. It is not your typical aluminum body 14 construction trailer on wheels. It's more 15 like a small brick building. It's being 16 maintained and we have interest in properties 17 there. We are working on trying to put more 18 industry into the City of Novi. But 19 everybody knows as far as the economy is 20 right now, industrial property and 21 commericial property is moving slow. 22 So we would like two -- additional 23 two years for the site trailer -- for the 24 sales trailer in hopes that we are going to 25 start moving some more properties.
92 1 We have had some clients looking, 2 we have had some interest. 3 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: You're 4 requesting how much time? 5 MR. MILLER: I'd like to request 6 two more years. 7 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: That is the 8 maximum we can grant in these situations? 9 MS. SAARELA: You can grant 10 whatever you want. I think that's the 11 initial time that they were granted. 12 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: I see what 13 you're talking about. Any other questions by 14 any of the members? 15 If not, I will entertain a motion. 16 Member Krieger? 17 MS. KRIEGER: In Case Number 18 12-004, Novi Corporate Park, I move to 19 approve the request for two years for the 20 temporary sales office. There are unique 21 circumstances and physical conditions of the 22 property such as narrowness, shallowness, 23 shape, water, topography or similar physical 24 conditions, and the need for the variance is 25 not due to the applicant's personal or
93 1 economic difficulty. 2 As you drive down Twelve Mile Road, 3 you look to the right, the sales trailer is 4 maintained, the property is maintained. The 5 landscaping is temporary landscaping to help 6 the facade. That the need is not 7 self-created. Strict compliance with 8 regulation governing the area, setback 9 frontage, height, bulk density or other 10 dimensional requirements will unreasonably 11 prevent property owner from using the 12 property for a permitted use or will render 13 conformity with those regulations 14 unnecessarily burdensome, that this trailer 15 they're using to make sales, somebody that's 16 showing interest can view the area and this 17 is facilitating that for them. 18 The requested variance is the 19 minimum variance necessary to do substantial 20 justice to the applicant as well as the 21 property owners in the district. 22 The requested variance will not 23 cause an adverse impact on surrounding 24 property or property values, and/or the use 25 and enjoyment of the property in the
94 1 neighborhood or zoning district. 2 MR. SANGHVI: Second. 3 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Seeing a motion 4 and second, any further discursion? 5 Seeing none, Ms. Pawlowski, will 6 you please call the roll. 7 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Gerblick? 8 MR. GERBLICK: Yes. 9 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Chairman Ghannam? 10 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Yes. 11 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Ibe? 12 MR. IBE: Yes. 13 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Krieger? 14 MS. KRIEGER: Yes. 15 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Member Sanghvi? 16 MR. SANGHVI: Yes. 17 MS. PAWLOWSKI: Motion passes five 18 to zero. 19 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Thank you, sir. 20 MR. MILLER: Thank you very much. 21 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Any other 22 matters to be brought before the Board? 23 I know there was one issue that we 24 discussed, I want to say last month, that was 25 the election of officers. Typically doesn't
95 1 that occur in February? 2 MS. SAARELA: Just checking the 3 bylaws to see if there is a set time that it 4 has to be done. 5 Yes, Article Four of the rules of 6 procedure says annually at the first regular 7 meeting in February or soon thereafter as is 8 possible. 9 So I'm not sure that -- if you 10 don't want to wait for a full board to do 11 something like that. 12 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Well, because we 13 have two members missing -- I don't know how 14 many are going to show up next month, 15 necessarily, but I would like to see as many 16 people as possible participate, so I would 17 recommend or suggest that we make a motion to 18 adjourn the election of officers until the 19 March meeting. 20 MR. IBE: So moved. 21 MR. SANGHVI: Second. 22 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: We'll make a 23 motion by Member Ibe and seconded by Member 24 Sanghvi. 25 Any further discussion on that
96 1 issue? 2 Seeing none, all in favor say aye. 3 THE BOARD: Aye. 4 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Any opposed? 5 Seeing none, then we will have the 6 election of officers in March, hopefully we 7 will have full participation. 8 Is there any other matters we 9 should discuss? 10 Seeing none, I will entertain a 11 motion to adjourn. 12 MR. SANGHVI: So moved, 13 Mr. Chairman. 14 MR. IBE: Second. 15 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Seeing a motion 16 and a second, all in favor say aye. 17 THE BOARD: Aye. 18 CHAIRMAN GHANNAM: Any opposed? 19 Seeing none, we are adjourned. 20 (The meeting adjourned at 8:34 p.m.) 21 ** ** ** 22 23 24 25
97 1 STATE OF MICHIGAN ) 2 ) ss. 3 COUNTY OF OAKLAND ) 4 I, Jennifer L. Wall, Notary Public within and for 5 the County of Oakland, State of Michigan, do hereby certify 6 that the hearing above, that the statements given by said 7 individuals was stenographically recorded in the presence of 8 myself and others, afterward transcribed by computer under 9 my personal supervision, and that the said statements are a 10 full, true and correct transcript of the statements given by 11 the individuals. 12 I further certify that I am not connected by blood 13 or marriage with any of the parties or their attorneys, and 14 that I am not an employee of any of them, nor financially 15 interested in the action. 16 IN WITNESS THEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand at 17 the City of Walled Lake, County of Oakland, State of 18 Michigan. 19 20 21 ________________ _________________________ Date Jennifer L. Wall CSR-4183 22 Oakland County, Michigan My Commission Expires 11/12/15 23 24 25
|