Mayor McLallen called the meeting to order at 7:35 P.M.

ROLL CALL: Mayor McLallen, Mayor Pro Tem Crawford, Council Members Clark, Kramer (Sworn in at 11:30 P.M.), Mitzel, Mutch, Schmid

ALSO PRESENT: City Manager Edward Kriewall, Assistant City Attorney Dennis Watson, City Clerk Tonni Bartholomew

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Mayor McLallen added a Memorial Proclamation for former Council Member, Carol Mason after the Approval of Agenda.

Ed Kriewall reported JCK & Associates requested they remove Item 8 from the Consent Agenda.

CM-96-12-416: Moved by Crawford, Seconded by Clark, MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve agenda as amended

COUNCIL DISCUSSION

Councilman Clark amended motion to add the possible nomination to fill the Council vacancy under Matters for Council Action-Part I, Item 11. Councilman Crawford concurred.

Nay: None

PROCLAMATION

Mayor McLallen read the sentiment on the Memorial Proclamation in memory of former Council Member, Carol Mason. Mayor McLallen advised the family will be receiving at the O’Brien Funeral Home Friday, December 6, 1996.

AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION

Chief Lawrence H. Holland - Wixom Police Department, personally addressed the Novi Police Department to thank them for their cooperation in the tragic events that took place at the Wixom Ford Motor Plant on November 14, 1996. Chief Holland reported the event lasted from approximately 11:30 a.m. until past midnight. During that period, he advised they had more than 209 sworn police officers assisting from departments throughout southwestern Oakland County, Wayne County and the State Police. Chief Holland reported the Novi Police Department responded immediately and stayed until the very end. Chief Holland stated it was a great effort by law enforcement and he wanted to appear before Novi’s Council to say he is personally proud of Chief Shaeffer and the Novi Police Department. He also thanked the dispatchers for their assistance.

Chuck Young - stated as a Novi citizen, he believes the appointment to Council is very important. Further, if they appoint the wrong person and that person is not in favor of what the community stands for, it could polarize the community.

Jim Korte - Shawood Lake area, referred to Item 9 under Matters for Council Action - Part 1 and stated he complained when Council gave the liquor license the first time. He reported the building does not meet the proper criteria and he is opposed to the applicant’s request for a years’ extension. For more than five years, Mr. Korte has said that the applicant would never build his building and now he is asking for another year. Mr. Korte does not believe the building is ever going to be constructed and this time, all the applicant did was trash the property. Mr. Korte asked Council to end this project that is long over due to be canceled.

Lynn Kocan - 23088 Ennishore, hoped that the Council appointment could have been Item 1 on the Agenda. She thinks it is important to update the audience about what has been happening regarding this appointment. Ms. Kocan reported there have been special council meetings held on November 25 and December 2 about this matter and it is her understanding that Council will put two names into nomination. Further, because there was not a consensus at last weeks meeting, Council will bring it to the table this evening to try to come to a consensus. If there is no consensus, the City’s attorney advised this would go to special election. Ms. Kocan further explained if Council makes an appointment, that person would be up for election in November 1997 because the appointment is only until they hold the next City election. Ms. Kocan asked if there is an election, wouldn’t that person serve the three year term of Nancy Cassis? That would then mean that person would not be up for election next November. She is also concerned about how much an election would cost. She has heard that it Could cost anywhere from $10,000 to $30,000. She then asked if they would need all seventeen precincts for this election? Ms. Kocan would like to see this go to vote for the citizens input and would have preferred to have seen less secrecy about the candidates. Finally, Ms. Kocan asked Council to consider Nancy Cassis’ record when they fill the vacancy. She reminded Council that Councilwoman Cassis favored controlled development and that is what the City needs because of its rapid growth.

Debbie Koder - 1129 E. Lake Drive, referred to Item 9 under Matters for Council Action - Part 1. Ms. Koder stated that when the first tree on the Andris Romain property was felled in the early fall they decimated the property and the work is still not completed. She reported the crew works sporadically, but the disgusting mess of it lingers on. She said for those that live in the area had to endure this eyesore for more than two months. Further, she believes the request for an extension is preposterous and the condition of the site it is creating a hardship for her family. She explained they have invested tens of thousands of dollars in home renovations, but she is embarrassed to entertain because of the surrounding property. In addition, she is now unable to sell her home without a loss. She asked Council to drive by the site and to hasten this project.

Patricia Hughes - 1241 East Lake Dr., does not think it is fair to the residents that Mr. Andris is allowed to continue to ruin this site.

Deborah Southworth, 41344 Beacon Rd., stated she lives in the most southeastern part of the City so her opposition to the golf course on the tree farm site has nothing to do with it being in her backyard. Consequently, she asked Council to appreciate the fact that there is a city wide opposition to this development. She said if they are going to spend $10,000 to study the feasibility of a golf course, she suggested instead they should add a few more thousand to it so that the people can vote on it. If the public supports the golf course, then at least it is a decision that the citizens of the City have ratified. She then read a quotation from the Sierra Club which supports maintaining the natural beauty of the earth. Ms. Southworth thinks the tree farm park is the only natural, tranquil, big piece of undeveloped land left in the City and asked that it be left that way for everyone to enjoy.

Ruth Hamilton - is back before Council about the golf course issue. She reported the Novi News is still conducting their survey and PARKS (People About Recognizing Kids Space) is still diligently collecting signatures from citizens opposing the golf course. She asked Council to hold a true Public Hearing with proper notification and listen to the public input before they make their decision. Secondly, she believes the filling of Nancy Cassis’ seat is an extremely important issue that can move the City forward or devastate it. Lastly, for Item 9 under Matters for Council Action - Part I, Ms. Hamilton reminded Council that they awarded the applicant a conditional liquor license last year upon receiving final site plan approval. Further, at one point, she stated Councilman Clark asked for ninety days to receive the approval and Councilwoman Mutch stated the problem with that was the Planning Commission could not act fast enough. The applicant asked for another extension in June and received thirty days. Ms. Hamilton does not remember that being part of the condition. She said the applicant received final site plan approval in July and since then he has devastated the community, the site and the residential and commercial properties. Ms. Hamilton said it is time for Council to move on this matter. Further, New Bangkok is still waiting to expand their restaurant, but they can’t because this project is holding up one of the City’s primary liquor licenses.

Chuck Tindall - 2453 Shawood, is opposed to the development of the golf course on the tree farm site. It is Mr. Tindall’s understanding that the Parks Commission began with four different plans for the tree farm. Mr. Tindall said it has now come down to one plan with a golf course with very little public input. Mr. Tindall believes if any further studies are to take place, it should be to find out if the citizens want a golf course on this property. Mr. Tindall began his petition last October and has been bringing it to Council since then. He read the petition to Council that stated the petitioners’ are opposed to the development of a golf course on the tree farm property. Mr. Tindal said until Council seeks public input on its own, he will continue to bring his petition before Council.

Kent Poll - 613 South Lake Drive, LARA President, advised that Councilman Mitzel attended their meeting to address the lake clean up. Mr. Poll stated they made and passed a motion supporting Councilman Mitzel’s proposal to clean up the property. Mr. Poll reported they have removed the parking lot from the plan and Councilman Mitzel indicated a willingness to include signage in the proposal indicating there would be no motorized vehicles, no bonfires and a willingness to work with them further if boat launching becomes a problem. Mr. Poll said the proposal has LARA’s support. Mr. Poll said the second issue is about the golf course. He advised LARA is opposed to the development of a golf course on the tree farm. Mr. Poll said they are looking for some kind of statement with an assurance that there will be public input before the project advances.

John Abdulus - 48980 Nine Mile Road referred to Item 10 under Matters for Council Action - Part I and stated he has received telephone calls today from area residents of the Southwest Association of Novi with concerns about the board and commission appointments. The residents urge Council to take their time and be more creative when they begin to make these appointments. They would like to see a person who is supportive of development for the betterment of the City and more public input.

Tom Harvey - 1603 West Lake Drive, expressed gratitude to Mr. Kriewall and all those who worked on the Novi Road project. Mr. Harvey believes the construction was well orchestrated and hopes future funds will be used equally as well. Further, Mr. Harvey knows there has been some discussion about changing the name of the road, but as a traditionalist, he would like the names to remain the same. He suggested New Novi Road as a name for the existing Decker Road. In addition, he expressed his approval for Councilman Mitzel’s suggestion for the City’s property on Walled Lake and he believes Councilman Mitzel did an excellent job in speaking with the residents. Finally, Mr. Harvey is surprised that many of the fights to retain the natural state of properties like the tree farm are with the City’s own Parks & Recreation Department. He looks to the City to provide those things that private industry and businesses do not provide. He mentioned natural park settings, roads, public safety, schools and libraries as alternatives. He is disappointed that the Parks & Recreation Department has a need to make a profit by developing the open space on the tree farm. Mr. Harvey would not be opposed to a Parks & Recreation millage if there is an actual need for additional funds. He does not believe the City needs to be in the golf course business or any other business that private industry can serve.

LaReta Roder - Novi Heights Community Association, advised although her children are grown, she did vote for the park land acquisition because she believed the City needed more play area for the children. However, Ms. Roder did not vote for funding a golf course. She would like to see that park land used for everyone’s enjoyment and not just golfers. She also agrees with the previous comments made about filling the Council vacancy.

Deborah Bundoff - Novi/Twelve Mile Road, stated for the record and let it be known to Council, the Planning Commission, the Parks and Recreation Department, the Water Department, JCK and Finkbeiner and any other City official board or commission that she can be contacted through P.O. Box 7054, Novi Michigan 48376-7054. She said she would appreciate being contacted when the City has a reason to contact her. She added she has an issue with Item 9 on the Agenda. She reported she was present when they gave conditional approval to the proposed restaurant on the lake. She said at the same time, there were other applicants who also applied for the last liquor licenses available. She said one of those applicants, New Bangkok Restaurant, was denied two weeks ago because they did not meet certain criteria. She asked how can someone who has provided a good business for Novi be denied and tonight’s applicant with all its changes continues to receive extensions? She asked Council to give the license to someone who deserves it. In regard to the vacant Council seat, Ms. Bundoff said because Novi is a growing community, it would be a shame not to have the public’s input of an election for such an important position. Finally, Ms. Bundoff has an issue with changing the name of Decker Road. She said that changing the name of a road when people come into the community looking for locations to find different developments is not fair. She believes the name of the road needs to be consistent because it goes into Walled Lake and Commerce.

CONSENT AGENDA

Mayor McLallen reported there are twenty two items and they removed Item 8.

Councilman Mitzel asked to remove Items 5 and 10.

Councilman Schmid asked to remove Items 11 and 21.

Mayor ProTem Crawford asked to remove Item 3.

Nay: None

Mayor McLallen stated all the items listed on the Consent Agenda except those items removed have been approved.

MATTERS FOR COUNCIL ACTION - Part 1

Mayor McLallen advised Items 1-6 are related, but Council will vote on them separately because they involve individual resolutions.

Mr. Kriewall reported Items 1, 2 and 3 are format resolutions for the expenditure of funds prior to the sale of the bond issues. In other words, if there are any expenses incurred on these projects that lead up to the eventual bonding for financing, the expenditures would be reimbursable once Council has passed this resolution. Mr. Kriewall advised the bonding attorneys have recommended that Items 1, 2 and 3 be approved so they can reimburse the General Fund for expenditures that occurred prior to the sale of the bonds.

Mayor McLallen asked if the recommendation is to approve all three resolutions as a single motion? Mr. Kriewall replied they should vote on them separately.

Mayor McLallen asked that the resolution be corrected to reflect that the meeting time for Council meetings is 7:30.

Councilman Schmid asked if any money spent from the General Fund for any of these programs will be reimbursed from these bonds? Mr. Kriewall replied that is correct. Councilman Schmid asked if the City has done this before? Mr. Kriewall replied the City has done this several times and most recently it was for the City’s road programs.

Mayor McLallen clarified that the ice arena bonds are different in that they are Economic Development Corporation Bonds and the others are General Revenue Bonds.

1. Approval of Resolution Declaring Intent to Reimburse for Ice Arena Expenditures

CM-96-12-418: Moved by Schmid, Seconded by Clark, MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve the Resolution declaring intent to reimburse for ice arena expenditures

Mayor McLallen stated it has been moved and supported to approve the Resolution as presented except for the time change for reimbursement of ice arena expenses. Further, this Economic Development Corporation bond issue will be in the amount of $8M.

COUNCIL DISCUSSION

Councilman Mitzel asked Mr. Kriewall to explain the difference between an Economic Development Corporation Bond and a General Revenue Bond? Mr. Kriewall replied the Economic Development Corporation’s initial intent was to go through the State’s Strategic Fund. The City’s bonding attorney met with the Community Clubs and he is confident there is no market for the bonds as originally proposed. He then recommended to the Community Clubs Organization that they proceed through the City’s Economic Development Corporation and utilize that avenue to sell the bonds as opposed to the Strategic Fund. He feels this is very marketable and there would be as much as a 2% reduction in the interest rate. Mr. Kriewall said this would be more economical to the eventual construction of the ice arena.

Councilman Mitzel asked if the EDC Bond is different from a Revenue Bond going through a Building Authority? Mr. Kriewall replied revenue bonds are at a higher interest rate because there is more risk involved.

2. Approval of Resolution Declaring Intent to Reimburse for Street and Highway Improvement Expenditures

CM-96-12-419: Moved by Crawford, Seconded by Clark, MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve Resolution declaring intent to reimburse for street and highway improvement expenditures

Nay: None

Mayor McLallen reported this bond issue will be in the amount of $17M.

3. Approval of Resolution Declaring Intent to Reimburse for Fire Department Facilities Expenditures

Mayor McLallen reported this bond issue will be in the $2, 225,000.

CM-96-12-420: Moved by Crawford, Seconded by Clark, MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve Resolution declaring intent to reimburse for Fire Department facilities expenditures

Nay: None

Mayor McLallen reported Items 4-6 are bonds the community has voted to support for the purpose of the 1996 road improvements and the fire issue.

4. Approval of Resolution, Re: Bond-Authorizing for the 1997 A Bonds

CM-96-12-421: Moved by Crawford, Seconded by Clark, MOTION CARRIED: To approve Resolution, Re: Bond-Authorizing for the 1997A Bonds

COUNCIL DISCUSSION

Councilman Schmid is surprised and appalled that there is no representation from the City’s Bonding Attorney’s office tonight because they serve to gain thousands of dollars for this action. For that reason, Councilman Schmid will not support this action and asked for an explanation about why they are not present.

Les Gibson replied that this is just the first stage of the process. Councilman Schmid knows that, but believes they attorney should have been present tonight.

Mayor McLallen stated the motion to approve the resolution of sale fixes a time and date for the City Clerk for the publishing of notices for the sale of bonds in the New York Bond Buyer and the Detroit Legal News at least seven days prior to the sale. Further, the sale is done by sealed bids and they will be opened in the City offices on January 27, 1997.

Councilman Clark appreciates Councilman Schmid’s comments, but suggested there may be a good reason why Mr. Neiman is not present tonight. In light of Councilman Schmid’s comments about what they will pay the bonding firm if the bonds proceed, Councilman Clark suggested that the City look closely at any bill that the attorney submits to the City. Councilman Clark does not think they should bill the City for time tonight since there is no representative present.

Items 5 and 6 were deferred until Councilman Mitzel returns to the Chamber.

7. Approval of Conditional Approval of Quota Class C Liquor License - On the Border Mexican Cafe/Brinker Restaurant Corporation

John Carlin, representing the Brinker Restaurant Corporation, introduced Doug Copp as the Development Manager for Brinker in Dallas, Texas. Mr. Carlin advised it is their wish to construct a new On the Border Mexican Cafe at the Haggerty site. He advised it will be approximately a sixty six hundred square foot restaurant and the total investment is approximately $3.5M. Mr. Carlin stated the dining capacity is 202 and the total seating capacity is 304. Mr. Carlin said the plan has been approved by the Planning Commission in the Office Service District. Mr. Carlin explained the restaurant is a casual dining concept and is one of the latest concepts for the Brinker Group. Mr. Carlin reported the Brinker Group owns Chilis, the Macaroni Grill at Seven Mile and Haggerty and they previously owned the Grady Grill. Mr. Carlin advised the average check is from $5.00 to $11.50 and they predict the restaurant will consist of 78% food and 22% alcoholic beverages. Mr. Carlin said they are requesting a Quota Class C Liquor License because that is the only way they can get one under the regulations of the State Liquor Commission.

Councilman Schmid asked why the petitioner does not qualify for another type of liquor license? Mr. Carlin explained under the regulations and the statute, the Liquor Commission cannot give a resort license in a community where there are quota licenses available.

Councilman Schmid asked if the petitioner could purchase a license from someone else and bring it into Novi? Mr. Carlin said they could purchase a resort license if it were available, but he is not aware of any that are available.

Councilman Schmid asked if they intend to build this restaurant and sell it like they sold Grady’s? Mr. Carlin said Brinkers sold all forty of the Grady’s Restaurants to Quality Dining, the largest franchisee of Brinker. Further, Grady’s is the only Brinker restaurant chain they have sold.

Councilman Clark is not supportive of this plan because he is concerned about the location and possible architectural style of the building. He is also concerned about the traffic that it will generate on Haggerty Road. Councilman Clark reminded Council that they just denied a license to a local businessman who has been in business for three years and is unique in that it is the only local Thai restaurant. He believes fundamental fairness would dictate that one of these licenses should go to that restaurant. Further, Councilman Clark reported Council denied the New Bangkok Restaurant another time because they were a month or two behind in the application process which is not unlike Port Papadapallis application. Councilman Clark has serious reservations because he does not believe this petition is unique and if Council chooses to use that as a basis for approval, then he cannot see why they denied a license to New Bangkok. Further, the Police Department has not completed their investigation and this is the first time he has seen this missing from a liquor license application. There is also a comment about the restaurant’s size and how much will be spent to construct it. Councilman Clark believes the existing business community cannot compete with that, but he reminded Council that a liquor license is a valuable commodity that can allow a business to grow. Councilman Clark stated his reservations about this application that have nothing to do with Brinker Corporation or with Mr. Carlin.

Mayor McLallen saw the plans for this restaurant eighteen months ago and registered her concerns at that time. She explained the site plan where they will construct this building has been approved and the overall development is being done. The Mayor asked where this project is in the specific site plan? Mr. Carlin replied this restaurant will be located where the Macaroni Grill was and they submitted the applications for building permits approximately three weeks ago.

Mayor McLallen’s concerns tonight are the same as they were over a year ago. She agrees that Brinkers has been an excellent investor in the community, but the community has also been extremely supportive of their product. Mayor McLallen is concerned because this is the primary gateway to the City of Novi and signature architecture is on this site. She sited the Novi Hilton as the beacon by which people find the southeast quadrant of the City. She is appalled that after all this time, the architecture they are presenting is still the architecture they showed her over a year ago. She agrees the theme is a lot of fun and well executed, but in her opinion it is not appropriate next to one of the City’s most significant architectural statements. Mayor McLallen stated the only leverage she has over this process is the liquor license and she would like to see a different exterior facade.

In response to Councilman Clark’s concerns about traffic, Mr. Carlin advised that they have submitted the traffic reports which state that the restaurant will not adversely affect the traffic. In fact, the use of the restaurant is probably going to be during the time when the office traffic is not at its peak. In regard to the Police Department report, it is Mr. Carlin’s understanding that the Police Department does not have the office report from the Liquor Commission because this is a new license and is a different procedure from what the City is used to. Mr. Carlin explained in this instance, the petitioner has to first come before the City before they go before the State, so the State has not yet provided any reports to the Police Department to complete. Further, Mr. Carlin knows the facade is different and is one that the Mayor does not care for. However, Brinkers has indicated that they are known by the facade, it is a trade dress issue and it has been successful for their other locations. Mr. Carlin realizes it will not look like the surrounding buildings, but he does not believe it is going to look so offensive that it would insult the community. Mr. Carlin asked Council to have patience with them and asked if there is something they could tone down?

Councilman Clark stated they heard the same arguments from Bob Evans, but noted that the building’s facade is a little bit different from their other restaurants because of the high standards maintained by Novi. Further, Councilman Clark reported he has personally found there are parking problems at Macaroni Grill and Cookers even when the surrounding offices are closed. Councilman Clark moved to deny the request for a conditional approval of a quota Class C Liquor License for On the Border Mexican Cafe.

Mayor McLallen reported the motion died from lack of support.

Councilman Schmid asked if there should be a reason included for the denial? Mr. Watson replied it should, unless the motion indicates it is for the reasons already expressed on the record.

Councilman Clark restated the motion.

CM-96-12-423: Moved by Clark, Seconded by Schmid, MOTION POSTPONED UNTIL JANUARY 27, 1996: To deny the request for a conditional approval of a quota Class C Liquor License pursuant to Section 3-14(j) of the Novi Code of Ordinances for On the Border Mexican Cafe - Brinker Restaurant Corporation for those reasons previously stated

COUNCIL DISCUSSION

Councilman Mitzel asked if the reason for denial has to be based upon the criteria in the ordinance? Mr. Watson replied yes, in Section 3-14a, 1 through 4 and in particular 4 a-d. Councilman Mitzel asked for the full reference. Mr. Watson advised Items 1, 2 and 3 pertain to hotels, convention centers and supper clubs, but Item 4 pertains to other facilities. Councilman Mitzel thought there was another section that stated Council will base their decision on the Police report, moral character, etc., etc. Mr. Watson said that was correct. Councilman Mitzel asked if both sections can be used? Mr. Watson replied that was correct.

Councilman Mitzel is looking at Section A4 which gives four different reasons why they can grant the liquor license under that section. Two of the reasons state that there is no similar restaurant within the area or the applicant would be unique to the area. Councilman Mitzel does not understand how this restaurant is drastically different from Chilis.

Mr. Carlin replied it depends upon what they define as unique. Further, every restaurant is unique or different from another. Mr. Carlin explained this is a casual dining, full service restaurant and in that sense, it is not unique. Mr. Carlin added it is a different kind of restaurant, a different menu, and a different decor. Mr. Carlin believes it is different from what is in Novi or in the surrounding community.

Councilman Mitzel asked what type of restaurant is Chilis? Mr. Carlin replied Chilis is another casual dining, full service restaurant with a different menu. Mr. Carlin reiterated On the Border has a totally different menu than Chilis and most other restaurants.

Councilman Mitzel said he knows that Chilis serves burgers also, but he thought it also has a Mexican style to it. Mr. Carlin said if they would like to say that, then just about every restaurant has some Mexican type dishes. To say a restaurant has to be unique to others would be difficult to do unless they get into fine dining. Mr. Carlin added the building meets all of the building codes, the material meets the requirements of the zoning and building ordinances and they also meet the moral character requirements in terms of criminal convictions and their financial status. Mr. Carlin thinks the problem is that some Council Members do not like the color or design of the building. Mr. Carlin does not know if that is a criterion to deny the license.

Councilman Mitzel asked if the reasons stated so far for denial are sufficient and will they uphold the ordinance? Mr. Watson believes they relate to the criteria expressed in the ordinance. In particular, under 3-14, H - 12 which considers the uniqueness of the proposed facility when contrasted against other existing or proposed facilities. The ordinance goes on to say that the facility should be compatible with the surrounding architecture and land uses. In addition, Council is also concerned under subpart 9 with the effects the issuance of a license would have on the health, welfare and safety of the general public because there have been concerns expressed about the traffic at the location. The ordinance also asks Council to consider under subpart 11 whether the applicant has demonstrated the public need or convenience for issuance of the liquor license at the location proposed.

Councilman Mitzel said when they have tried to approve a liquor license conditional upon the completion of the Police Department review in the past, did the Liquor Commission rejected it because they could not put any conditions on their resolution? Mr. Watson replied that the Liquor Commission will not accept it as conditional. Councilman Mitzel asked how can Council grant an approval when the review is not complete? Mr. Watson replied the applicant would first come back before Council for approval according to subpart M.

Mr. Carlin said the Liquor Commission is willing to accept the conditional resolution from this Council. Mr. Carlin explained the Liquor Commission will approve the liquor license subject to coming back before Council and getting another resolution once the project is completed without the conditions. Mr. Carlin stated they need this before they can purchase the real estate.

Councilman Mitzel doesn’t know what restaurant use could be at that site that wouldn’t generate some of the same concerns this restaurant does. Further, he sees why there is a concern about the architecture, but he doesn’t know what the solution is. He would be willing to support the motion just to see what other possibilities they could propose, but not to the point that it is just another square box with plain brick on it. He also has some concerns about the uniqueness.

Mr. Carlin said if the only issue with Council is about the facade, he asked if they could table this matter so that they can come up with some sort of resolution about the architectural design of the building? Mr. Carlin said they would really like to have this restaurant in Novi. Further, there is a considerable difference in the ingress and egress for this site and the proposed Macaroni Grill.

Mayor McLallen stated the applicant is requesting to table this issue because they are a known entity in the community and have a successful business. Further, the overall concern is the distinction of this particular operation and she asked what is Council’s pleasure in regard to this request?

Councilman Clark would like to proceed with his motion, but his concern is not only with the facade. Councilman Clark has a serious concern about the traffic and safety issues and with its uniqueness. He believes the menu has the same items as Chilis, only under a different name and there is already a Mexican restaurant on Novi Road. Consequently, Councilman Clark does not believe this restaurant is unique to the area.

Mayor ProTem Crawford is also concerned about the uniqueness and he would like to see some more evidence of its uniqueness other than its food. Mayor ProTem Crawford’s major concern is with its architecture because it does not fit in with the surrounding buildings and that is reason enough to deny it. However, he would like to see that explored and suggested they table this item based on those two aspects.

Mayor McLallen asked if that is a motion to table? Mayor ProTem Crawford said he would wait on the motion to hear Councilman Clark’s comments.

Councilman Clark asked if they were to deny the request would that preclude the applicant coming back before Council in thirty to sixty days with a different proposal? Mr. Watson replied it would be a new submittal and the applicant would have to go through the whole process again.

CM-96-12-424: Moved by Crawford, Seconded by Clark, MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To postpone request for conditional approval of quota Class C Liquor License for On the Border Mexican Cafe

Councilman Clark asked if they should include a definite date?

Mayor ProTem Crawford asked the petitioner how soon can they come back before Council? Mr. Carlin said they would like to meet with Council or a committee to resolve this. Mayor ProTem Crawford suggested that they postpone until the second meeting in January because of the upcoming holidays.

COUNCIL DISCUSSION

Councilman Mitzel asked if the ordinance requires that Council act on this within sixty days after receipt of the application? Mr. Carlin stated he asked for the postponement. Councilman Mitzel asked if it is permissible if the applicant requests a postponement? Mr. Watson replied that was correct.

Councilwoman Mutch believes it would be a mistake to assume that the only problem is the architecture. She also believes there is not a significant difference between Chilis and this restaurant. She does not want the applicant to be misled by thinking that if they put a substantial amount of effort into changing the facade that is going to make it more acceptable to everyone who may have been unwilling to support an approval. She added she also shares the concerns of its uniqueness and not just the facade. She characterized the facade as a frontier town facade and because compatibility is part of the ordinance, she would have a problem with it in this location.

Mayor McLallen reminded Council that the issue of expounding upon the uniqueness of this particular presentation is part of the motion.

Mayor ProTem Crawford said that is part of the motion, but he also assumes that the petitioner listened to all of the other comments made and will address those to Council’s satisfaction also.

Councilwoman Mutch believes the applicant is offering a similar service in an area that already has a selection of restaurants. She added there might be more support if it were in an area where people had to drive two miles to get to a restaurant.

Councilman Schmid likes the restaurant, but agrees that being approved at that location will be difficult and he shares Council’s concerns.

Nay: None

Mayor McLallen asked how Council would like to give their input into their request for the facade? Councilman Mitzel suggested that the Mayor and Councilman Schmid meet with the applicant.

Councilwoman Mutch does not want the applicant to think that if they meet the Mayor and Councilman Schmid’s satisfaction, that the rest of Council will automatically agree.

5. Approval of Resolution, Re: Bond-Authorizing for the 1997B Bonds

Nay: Schmid

Councilman Schmid reported he will be addressing Council about changing the bonding company shortly.

8. Approval of a Waiver of the Requirement of Rear Yard Utilities - Vistas of Novi, Lots 32 through and including Lot 54

Mayor McLallen stated this is a request for the approval of a waiver requirement of rear yard facilities for eleven lots due to topography and wetlands. The Mayor added even though Council previously gave its administrative approval, there are some unique circumstances on this particular request and the original change in the ordinance still left the ultimate decision before Council. Further, the Planning Commission recommended it with six yeas and the staff has approved it with conditions.

David Lanciault said they administratively approved the lots under Mr. Nowicki’s jurisdiction and in essence, the lots share a similar condition. Mr. Lanciault explained Phase II is a series of concentric half circles and the last half circle backs up to topography that rolls down. Mr. Lanciault said most of these lots back up to protective wetlands and woodlands which Mr. Nowicki can approve. However, four or five of the lots with the same topography do not abut regulated woodlands or wetlands and they have to be approved by Council.

Councilman Schmid asked what do the markings on Lots 1, 3, 5, 7 and 9 depict? Jerry Witalec of Detroit Edison replied he believes Councilman Schmid is referring to their CAD drawing and reported that those are rear yards. He advised their concern is about the outer perimeter on Lots 32 through 54. Mr. Witalec explained their problem is with the inaccessibility during construction and maintaining reliability to their customers. He explained because there are fifty one foot widths on the front of the lots, there is only an eleven foot spacing between the two envelopes on certain lots which therefore, limits their accessibility. In addition, a nine ton truck cannot drive on a slope with a seven to nine foot drop from front to rear, so there is no access to get to the rear of these lots and once they have built and landscaped the homes, there will be no accessibility. Mr. Witalec reported they also have to maintain their equipment and reliability according to the Public Service Commission. He said they had made some changes to the boxes by reversing the doors so they face the houses which will allow landscaping around three of the sides.

Councilman Schmid said he has heard this before and there are still boxes exposed in some older subdivisions. He understands the current problem and it goes back to why he does not often agree with this developer. Councilman Schmid did not originally vote for allowing administration to waive these.

Mr. Witalec noted they currently have temporary pedestals which they will splice and bury once the houses are built. Further, the only things that they will see on the outer perimeter are six transformers.

CM-96-12-426: Moved by Crawford, Seconded by Clark, MOTION CARRIED: To approve the request for front yard utility variance for Vistas Parkshore - SP 95-32, Lots 32 through and including Lot 54 subject to comments and letters of the Planning Commission, the staff and consultants currently on record

Councilman Clark seconded for purposes of discussion.

Mayor McLallen stated the motion is to approve the request for the waiver for a front yard utility variance for Phase II of Vistas Parkshore - SP 95-32, Lots 32 through 54 subject to all the comments and letters of staff, consultants and the Planning Commission.

COUNCIL DISCUSSION

Councilman Clark asked if there will be six transformers spread between Lots 32 and 54? Mr. Witalec replied yes, they will be on the perimeter and will face the rear.

Councilman Clark asked the maker of the motion if he would accept an amendment that would require that the developer be required to notify any potential buyer that if they purchase the lots, they are subject to have those utility boxes in their front yards? Councilman Clark believes that is a deterrent to some purchasers. Mayor ProTem Crawford accepted the amendment.

Mayor McLallen advised the motion has been amended for disclosure by the developer and builder to notify potential buyers that there will be a utility box in the front yard.

Councilman Mitzel asked if this motion affects the PUD Agreement? Mr. Watson replied it does not. Councilman Mitzel asked if the landscaping around the boxes would have to fully meet the agreement? Mr. Watson replied it would.

Councilman Mitzel referred to Section 2 of the approved PUD book which concerns the residential development code and asked how will the front yard fences work with the front yard pedestals? Mr. Lanciault replied not all of the homes will require fences and they will be based upon individual conditions. Further, Mr. Lanciault reported they put the utilities in early and the pedestals will be in place before they build the homes.

Councilman Clark said a buyer would then know that they have a utility box in their front yard. Mr. Lanciault believes the amendment is a fair request.

Mayor McLallen restated the motion.

Nay: Schmid

9. Approval of One-Year Extension of Conditional approval of Quota Class C Liquor License - Port Papadapallis, Inc.

Mayor McLallen asked the City’s attorney to explain whether Council can grant another conditional approval and has the applicant been moving forward in compliance with the original conditions?

Mr. Watson replied Council is not granting another conditional approval, but the applicant is requesting an extension of the approval they granted. According to Subsection 3-14(k), once Council takes action by granting the initial conditional approval, it is contingent upon completing the site plan, getting building permits and getting other permits within a six month period. Once they get the permits, the ordinance states building must commence within six months and completed within one year. The ordinance then goes on to say that extensions for completion of construction or alteration may be granted by City Council for good cause.

Mayor McLallen asked if Mr. Andris has listened to many of his neighbors’ comments tonight that they believe he is not moving at full speed?

Mr. Andris stated he was not present earlier and did not hear all of the earlier comments. In response to the question of timeliness, Mr. Andris said when they received their approval in December 1995, they anticipated that they were different in that they were being commenced even before they submitted final site plans. He recalled that they were asked to gauge this by a certain period to be able to allow for the submission of the final site plans within ninety days. Mr. Andris reported they did that. Further, during the discussion they stated that three months of the normal six month period was already used and they anticipated that perhaps they should give Mr. Andris time consideration. Mr. Andris said they resubmitted their plans on June 18 and they brought it before the Planning Commission on July 17. Mr. Andris said they approved it, but the Planning Commission advised them that the local residents requested some changes. As a courtesy, they asked that Mr. Andris consider eliminating the ingress and a curb cut from East Lake Drive to appease the neighbors. Mr. Andris was willing to go along with this, but the consultants had to relandscape and change drainage. Consequently, it wasn’t until October 22 before the communications became completed to the point where they could approve them. Mr. Andris applied for the building permit and will meet with the Building Department Friday and Monday. They have advised Mr. Andris that it will take approximately four months for all the appropriate permits to be approved. He believes the construction will begin before June and he has a year to complete it. Mr. Andris is anxious to proceed.

Councilman Mitzel asked when will the site be cleaned up? Mr. Andris replied the only thing he was allowed to do in advance was cut the trees and it was supposed to have been completed Friday of last week.

Councilman Mitzel asked if Council can grant a retroactive extension? Mr. Watson said they could.

Councilman Clark shares Councilman Mitzel’s concerns. The site is deplorable and there is no excuse for it. If it were his property, Councilman Clark would clear it himself to put his neighbors’ minds at ease. Councilman Clark asked if they could grant an extension until June of next year by which time there is substantial construction on the site such as footings, a foundation walls and a rough? In addition, he asked that as a condition of any extension, that within two weeks that the site be cleaned up. Councilman Clark would support a motion like this if the applicant would accept those conditions.

Mr. Watson said conditions such as clean up within two weeks can be imposed. Mr. Watson understands that Councilman Clark not only wants the start of construction by June 4, 1997, but he wants substantial construction. He would ask that they indicate that it was not a year extension. Without something to measure from, there is no date from which to measure when he has to begin construction and have the building permit. If it were a year extension, the applicant would have to have the building permit and begin construction by June 4, 1997, but it sounds as though Councilman Clark would want it earlier than that.

Mayor McLallen stated the motion is an eleven month request for an extension conditional upon the clean up of the site within two weeks to include the removal of brush, debris, and tree trunks and they should make substantial progress on the building to include footings, foundation, walls, and a shell to the roof by May 4, 1997.

Mayor ProTem Crawford asked if May 4, 1997 is a realistic date because of the limited construction during the next several months? Councilman Clark replied the frost ban will be off and believes the date is realistic. Mr. Andris cannot respond with any assurance, but they have advised him that the average time to get the building permits is four months, which means he would have a month to complete that. Mr. Andris will act in good faith and believes he will be well started by June.

Mayor ProTem Crawford asked for a time frame? Mr. Kriewall replied once they have submitted the actual permit application it should turn around within sixty days maximum. Mr. Kriewall suggested a revised time table of footings in the ground by May 1, walls by June 1 and a roof by July 1. This would give a reasonable three month progression and also allow for the weather.

Councilman Clark appreciates Mr. Andris’ position, but this has been one of the longest lived projects in Novi. However, he will amend his motion to include Mr. Kriewall’s time table.

Councilman Schmid asked if they were to extend this, when would the building have to be started? Mr. Watson said it would have to be started before May 1. Councilman Schmid asked Mr. Watson not to consider the time table. Mr. Watson said if it were a one year extension, he would have to begin construction June 4, 1997.

Councilman Schmid is disappointed and appalled about the condition of the site. Further, he has a problem with putting deadlines on construction because of unanticipated things happening. He believes their intent is to get it built, but believes the time frame condition is asking too much.

Mayor ProTem Crawford agrees their intent is to get the project moving and he doesn’t want to impose unreasonable conditions either. However, he thinks that setting deadlines is important and if there is a strike or catastrophe, he assumes the petitioner would come back before Council to plead his case. Further, they all share the concern about the clean up of the site and he would like a report back by the next meeting from the City Manager.

Mayor McLallen restated the motion.

Councilwoman Mutch believes there are differences of opinion about what the clean up should entail.

Mayor ProTem Crawford said he understood they can remove everything except the stumps that are in the ground. Councilman Mitzel thinks it means all the remnants of the trees and broken pieces from the fences.

Mayor McLallen suggested that the City Administration will review the clean up of the site and make sure there are no ordinance violations on the site.

Councilwoman Mutch believes Mr. Andris missed the perception of the residents in the area during Audience Participation. Their perception is that of an absentee landowner who is making a business investment and doesn’t really care what the site looks like in the interim. They argued that they have to live with it every day. Further, as the project progresses, she believes the residents will be more observant than they might be if it was someone that was right there to whom they could comment more informally.

10. Board and Commission Appointments

Mayor McLallen explained the voting procedure to Council Members.

Mayor ProTem Crawford said Mr. Ward is seeking reappointment to the Community Clubs and added there is one vacancy of the nine members that needs to be filled beyond Mr. Ward’s reappointment. He thought there was a consensus in their discussion about adding a tenth member because of attendance problems or the possibility of losing a member. Consequently, there would really be three vacancies and added that the resolution provides for that.

Councilman Mitzel believes they would have to amend the committee’s charter. Further, it was his recollection was that there was a possible resignation and it would be to replace that resignation, not to add a new member. Mayor ProTem Crawford said that might happen, but it is not as likely as it was before and therefore, they would end up with ten members.

Councilman Mitzel believes they should only vote on the person seeking reappointment and fill the other vacancy. He suggested they should wait to see what happens with the resignation and fill it at that point and then Councilman Crawford could speak with Mr. Watson about amending the committee’s charter to add another member.

Councilman Crawford suggested that they reappoint Mr. Ward and answer the remaining questions about whether the other person is going to be able to attend and what the charge says at the next meeting. He doesn’t believe they need to make this appointment hastily or that two weeks will make a difference.

Mayor ProTem Crawford asked where did Mr. Miner and Ms. Ahrens stand on seeking reappointments to the Hazardous Chemical Committee? Mrs. Bartholomew replied Mr. Miner asked to reup his appointment and Ms. Ahrens did not.

Councilwoman Mutch thought there were five vacancies and only one person for the Board of Review. She now sees there are two and Council did not interview them.

Mayor McLallen said this has been a continual question for Council. She explained they had a Board of Review and an alternate board. However, because of Proposal A, they have less properties to review and there was discussion about not needing the alternate board. The question is, are there really vacancies, can they combine both boards, or should they fill a board that may not be necessary?

Mrs. Bartholomew said the lists showed four vacancies on the main board. Two are due to resignations and two are due to term expirations. Further, an alternate wishes to move forward and one alternate does not wish to be reappointed.

Councilwoman Mutch asked if the term expirations wish to be reappointed? Mrs. Bartholomew replied they do not. Councilwoman Mutch advised there are four leaving the Board of Review and one is an alternate that wants to move up which means there are three to appoint and an alternate spot. Councilwoman Mutch said there are only two people who expressed an interest and they have not been interviewed. Mrs. Bartholomew believes Council interviewed both of them in the past. Councilwoman Mutch asked if they could vote for the Board of Review at another time?

Mayor McLallen asked when does the Board of Review meet? Mrs. Bartholomew believes they meet in February and March. Mayor McLallen said the main issue is how many people will they need for the projected work load. If Council is uncertain about voting, they can resolve these questions and open a further interview for that particular position.

Mayor ProTem Crawford said they had six members on the regular board and three alternates. He believes the Mayor was suggesting that maybe they do not need that many people due to the decrease in the work load. He said there are still two members on the regular board and two alternates. If they find they do not have a large work load, perhaps the board would be sufficient with three or four members. If they moved one alternate up, it would give them a board of three and still leave one alternate. He suggested that they could appoint another one or two as alternates.

Mr. Watson suggested they determine the work load and advised Council that the ordinance currently calls for six board members and four alternates.

Councilwoman Mutch suggested they get further input from the current Board of Review members who are planning to stay with regard to the work load. Secondly, because getting members is difficult, they should recognize that it may be because people do not understand the board’s role. She suggested that they work with the Novi News or Lou Martin to educate people about the opportunities that are available. She thinks they will have to hold another interview and reinterview those candidates they have not recently interviewed at the same time.

Mayor McLallen said there is a consensus to remove those applicants for the Board of Review until they can clarify the work load and the issue of the charge at the next meeting to establish an interview process that will bring this up to a full board in time for this year’s review session.

Councilman Mitzel said they had interviewed one nonresident for the Hazardous Chemical Committee. After the interview, they discovered there was no spot for a nonresident on that board because there are two nonresidents currently serving. Councilman Mitzel asked if the City would send a letter to Mr. Redner expressing their appreciation for his application and regrets that under the ordinance there was no opening. Mayor McLallen agreed.

Councilwoman Mutch said they interviewed Alan Kohring for the Historical Commission and although they did not interview David Lussier, she reminded Council that they had extensive information about him. She reported Mr. Lussier is the man who is completing his term as President of a business historical foundation and she believes his background would be a benefit to the commission.

Councilman Schmid asked if the City has taken a position on people who do not interview? Mayor McLallen said this has occurred in the past and Council still considers them based upon their application.

Councilwoman Mutch reminded Council they have not reinterviewed the reappointment candidates and she or Councilman Clark were not Council Members when they were first appointed.

Mayor McLallen nominated Louis Csordas for the Planning Commission vacancy. Mr. Csordas has been a long time resident of Novi and served on the False Alarm Review Committee. She said this is a very difficult and costly situation and Mr. Csordas has exhibited sensitivity to the public and to the parameters under which the City operates on the Board. Although Mr. Csordas was candid about not being conversant with all of the ordinances, she believes he will offer a balance in personality and a fresh perspective to the Planning Commission. The Mayor is supportive of Mr. Csordas’ commitment to the community and now that his children are grown, he indicated he has the time to serve.

11. City Council Appointment

Councilman Clark asked if Council appointed a person this evening, when would that person have to run for election?

Mr. Watson replied the Charter provides that if Council makes an appointment, it is to be filled at the next regular City election. If they hold a special election, the charter states they shall fill the vacancy for the respective unexpired terms at the special election. In other words, if there is a special election, it would take care of that person for the remainder of whatever that term is. Mr. Watson added that all precincts must be opened for a special election.

Mayor ProTem Crawford said there has been much discussion from Council and residents about a Council appointee. He believes a special election would serve no useful purpose especially when considering the $30,000 cost. Mayor ProTem Crawford explained it is Council’s responsibility to appoint someone by Charter. He also does not believe interviews would serve any purpose at this time and that the process they followed worked.

CM-96-12-429: Moved by Crawford, Seconded by Mutch, MOTION CARRIED: To appoint Ed Kramer to fill the City Council vacancy

Mayor McLallen stated there is a motion and support for the appointment of Edward Kramer to the City Council seat left vacant by the election of Nancy Cassis to the State Legislature. The term will commence immediately and will cease with the General Election with the City of Novi in November 1997.

COUNCIL DISCUSSION

Councilman Schmid asked if was Council’s intent to nominate others and then determine by ballot which candidates are selected or if Mr. Kramer does not receive four votes, would Council then vote on the next one? He thought they would bring forth the names they discussed and that they would give a ballot to the Clerk.

Mayor McLallen believed they agreed at meeting that they held at six o’clock that Council would put the issue on this agenda and proceed from there. She doesn’t believe they had voted or achieved a mechanism by which a vote would take place.

Councilman Schmid reminded Council they put forth two names and they voted on them. He would think they would want to follow the same procedure this evening which would allow for Council Members to state their positions and allow the public to hear those comments.

Councilman Clark agreed with Councilman Schmid and it was his understanding if they got to the point where they were going to make nominations, the floor would be open for nominations before they would make a motion.

Mayor ProTem Crawford reminded Council he offered a motion at the six o’clock meeting to nominate two members and vote on them. He reported his motion died from a lack of a second. Consequently, his motion is not to nominate Ed Kramer, but to appoint him.

Councilwoman Mutch believes there was an opportunity earlier to approach this from the perspective which Councilman Schmid mentioned. Further, had Mayor ProTem Crawford made a nomination, she would have seconded the nomination and she would have expected that someone else would have nominated someone else so they could proceed the way they are suggesting.

Councilman Schmid would have supported Mayor ProTem Crawford’s earlier motion, but he thought the intent of their conversation was that the discussion should be before the public. Had Councilman Schmid thought otherwise, he would have quickly nominated an individual for discussion whether they got appointed or not.

Councilman Clark agreed with Councilman Schmid’s comments. He thought Council consensus was because of the residents’ concerns, that they would address the process in the Council Chambers with the benefit of cable. Further, if Mayor ProTem Crawford thought that was a fair way to proceed in the activities room, it should be an equally fair way to proceed in the Council Chamber.

Mayor McLallen thought Councilman Crawford’s motion in the earlier meeting was to bring the nominations to this meeting for a vote and she was surprised there was no support.

Councilman Mitzel believes the entire Council has tried its best to come to a consensus to work through all the issues. He reminded Council they all stated they are looking for someone who is objective, reasonable, will work with Council, do their homework and make a commitment. He believes it sums up everyone they have considered. Further, he believes all the candidates they considered are qualified. Councilman Mitzel said when he looked at experience, the current nomination has experience as the Chairperson for the Planning Commission, has several years as a member of the Planning Commission and therefore, he believes he is qualified for a Council position. He believes they could find someone else, but he doesn’t know if they could ever reach a unanimous consensus. Councilman Mitzel reported he will support the nomination.

Councilman Schmid will not support Mr. Kramer’s nomination. It is not for personal reasons, but because he believes they should select an individual that would more closely fit the philosophical direction of Nancy Cassis. Councilman Schmid encouraged Council to consider this issue when voting and believes Mr. Antosiak would better fit the criteria from a philosophical standpoint.

Councilman Clark concurs with comments made by Councilman Schmid and that Mr. Antosiak would be a better choice.

Councilwoman Mutch considers Mr. Antosiak as a friend and she has work well with him on projects in the community. Further, she knows him far better than she knows Mr. Kramer. She reiterated the criteria she is looking for in making her choice and political philosophies do not enter into it. Councilwoman Mutch said her comments to Councilman Schmid were that she thinks he would be surprised that those who would label Mr. Antosiak for being at one end of the spectrum on specific issues and Mr. Kramer at the other may find that they are at opposite ends of where those who would label them would place them. She believes they are too quick to label people based on superficial information and reminded Council they have not held interviews. Councilwoman Mutch believes both candidates are fine representatives of the community and both have provided public service. However, what helped her to make her decision was that not only did Mr. Kramer serve on the Planning Commission, but he also served two full terms, he was a chairperson and he served during a time when there were several controversial projects. Councilwoman Mutch further described Mr. Kramer’s background.

Councilman Schmid is surprised that Councilwoman Mutch does not believe that philosophy has anything to do with who is elected. Based on the number of votes Ms. Cassis received during the election, he is certain Ms. Cassis was elected based upon a philosophy she felt for the City.

Mayor McLallen restated the motion and asked for a roll call vote.

Mayor McLallen advised Mr. Kramer will be sworn in after the break.

Chuck Young - stated he does not know Mr. Kramer, but knows the decision Council just made was very important. He said one current issue coming forward is the Levy property. Mr. Young stated if Council elects someone who is contrary to what the people think, it will not be good for the City.

David Lanciault - stated he is not familiar with Item 12 under Matters for Council Action - Part II and he would like further information about it.

Mayor McLallen replied the resolution is a request for renaming Decker Road from its old configuration up to Fourteen Mile Road and they would call the entire new road, Novi Road. After research, Mayor McLallen advised they found that Hickory Woods Elementary School is the only site which actually has a Decker Road address. Mayor McLallen said they would like to make it a continuous road name.

Mr. Lanciault believes it makes sense to rename it. Mr. Lanciault asked what will they call the road from Twelve Mile to Twelve ½ Mile? Mayor McLallen replied the entire five lane road will be Novi Road and will travel from Twelve Mile to Fourteen Mile. Further, the old Novi Road is being considered, Old Novi Road.

BREAK

Mayor McLallen introduced the newly appointed Councilman, Edward Kramer and asked the City Clerk to swear him in. Mayor McLallen reported Mr. Kramer has been a resident of the City since 1974, is a native of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and a graduate from Carnegie Mellon. He earned his bachelors in engineering and holds an MBA from Wayne State. Further, he is a thirty year employee of Chrysler as a Platform Development Manager for small cars. Mr. Kramer has been married to his wife Barb for thirty years. His son Steven is a senior at Michigan Tech and son Eric is a senior at Novi High School. Mr. Kramer currently lives in Meadowbrook Lakes.

City Clerk Tonni Bartholomew swore in Mr. Kramer at 11:30 P.M.

Councilman Kramer stated he is ready to work in a constructive manner to further the quality of life for the citizens of Novi.

MATTERS FOR COUNCIL ACTION - PART II

11. Results of Boards and Commission Appointments

Mrs. Bartholomew reported:

Community Clubs - Gary Cipriani (1 - Clark), Douglas Harrington (0), Roger Jaussi (2 - Mitzel, Schmid), Donna Riehl (0), David Ruyle (0), Timothy Senter (2 - Crawford, Mutch), Joseph Thimm (0), L. Graham Ward (6 - McLallen, Crawford, Clark, Mitzel, Mutch, Schmid), Michael Watza (1 - McLallen)

Parks & Recreation Commission Representative - Robert Shaw (6 - McLallen, Crawford, Clark, Mitzel, Mutch, Schmid)

Director of Parks & Recreation Department - Daniel Davis (6 - McLallen, Crawford, Clark, Mitzel, Mutch, Schmid)

Novi City Council Representative - Hugh Crawford (6 - McLallen, Crawford, Clark, Mitzel, Mutch, Schmid)

Economic Development Corporation - Anamaria Kazanis (0), Craig DeRoche (6 - McLallen, Crawford, Clark, Mitzel, Mutch, Schmid)

HCD Committee - Kim Capello (5 - Crawford, Clark, Mitzel, Mutch, Schmid)

Hazardous Chemical Committee - Donald Miner (6 - McLallen, Crawford, Clark, Mitzel, Mutch, Schmid), John Redner - non-resident (0), Nicholas Cosentino (1 - Crawford), Melissa Pettijohn (5 - McLallen, Clark, Mitzel, Mutch, Schmid)

Historical Commission - Daniel O’Connell (0), John Thomson (2 - Clark, Schmid), Alan Kohring (6 - McLallen, Crawford, Clark, Mitzel, Mutch, Schmid) and David Lussier (4 - McLallen, Crawford, Mitzel, Mutch)

Parks & Recreation Commission - Philip Koneda (5 - McLallen, Crawford, Clark, Mutch, Schmid), David Ruyle (1 - Schmid), Harold Wingfield (5 - McLallen, Crawford, Clark, Mitzel, Mutch), Louis Csordas (1 - Mitzel)

Zoning Board of Appeals - James Antosiak (6 - McLallen, Crawford, Clark, Mitzel, Mutch, Schmid), Gerald Bauer (5 - McLallen, Crawford, Clark, Mitzel, Schmid), Gregory Lee Berry (0), Ernest Aruffo (1- Mutch), Michael Watza (0), Connie Mallett (0), Laverne Reinke (0), Richard Zyczynski (0)

Councilman Mitzel asked if a motion is necessary? Mr. Watson replied that he believes the Clerk should include the tallies in the minutes.

12. Approval of Resolution, Re: Street Renaming of Decker Road

Mr. Kriewall believes the street renaming is a good recommendation and that they should either rename it to Decker or Novi Road. However, Novi Road makes the best sense because it seems more appropriate in terms of community identity. Further, the name of the old portion of Novi Road to Old Novi Road seems to make sense in that it will still preserve some nostalgia for the area and from a post office perspective. Mr. Kriewall reported the only address affected by the name change is Hickory Woods Elementary School. He reported the principal thought it was a good idea and will notify the staff and school administration of the change. Mr. Kriewall checked with the Oakland County Road Commission and procedurally, they would pass the resolution once it is submitted to the Commission for their blessing.

Councilman Schmid asked why would they change the name of a road that has been that way for years? Councilman Mitzel replied he forwarded input to Council that someone else had provided to suggest this change. Councilman Schmid asked why would they change thousands of dollars worth of maps because somebody wants a road name change? Councilman Mitzel replied the maps are updated often because of all of the new road projects. Further, they should change the name because the road name currently changes at a bend where there is no apparent change in the road. Councilman Mitzel said the road technically changes names at the light after a gradual curve. Councilman Mitzel reminded Council they renamed Wixom Road when it was straightened.

Mayor ProTem Crawford stated another logical reason for the change is that they never called the portion of the road in Novi, Decker Road until they made the extension, so there is no historical value.

Mayor McLallen stated it has been moved and supported to rename Decker Road to Novi Road and old Novi Road to Old Novi Road pursuant to all the comments in the packet.

Mr. Kriewall said in 1975 they were short for space in the old municipal offices behind the fire station on Novi Road. He said Security Bank offered a free temporary bank facility that they did not need. The City moved the portable office unit behind the old building and it was occupied by several departments. Attached to the rear of the building was a drive-in window module and they thought it would be a good idea to hook it up and use it to collect water and tax bills. To their amazement, it was heavily used by the community and it seemed to be a natural addition to consider as part of the design for City Hall. When they designed the current building, a design alternative included a drive-up window situated behind the treasurers’ office. Mr. Kriewall reported they eliminated it because they had to cut some costs of the building as it began to develop.

Steve Babinchak reported most of the structural components are currently in place for this service. The reason they decided to incorporate the use of an ATM machine was because they were anticipating some help in terms of the cost for the actual grading of the drive-up window in exchange for the placement of an ATM machine at the location. He reported they have spoken with many banking and financial institutions in the community and there seems to be an interest in moving forward with this. Mr. Babinchak reported the conceptual drawing depicts two lanes. The outside lane would be dedicated for ATM use and the inside lane would be used for the drive-up window. Mr. Babinchak believes there is a need because they have received many comments from residents who find it difficult to walk the distance from the parking lot to make their payments. He further believes it will be well worth it considering the fact that their assumption will be that they do not have to pay anything for this development. Mr. Babinchak is not asking them to go out for bids, but for RFP’s (Request for Proposals) to see what kind of real interest there is and what the financial institution would want in exchange for paying for the construction. Mr. Babinchak reported they would evaluate the proposals and then come back before Council with a recommendation.

Councilwoman Mutch asked if the drop box is as convenient? Mr. Babinchak found that most senior citizens have a desire to pay their bills in person. They have recently instituted a lock bock system and other ways to make it more convenient, yet they have a substantial number of people that still insist on making their payments in person. He believes the seniors like to get a receipt, they enjoy the contact with the community and they often pay with cash.

Councilman Kramer asked what impact would this have on parking? Mr. Babinchak replied it doesn’t affect the parking because the only change to the existing parking would be that it would use two of the spots that are currently used for parking for quick business.

Councilman Schmid’s major concern is to the space required and the use by a bank as a commercial entity at the City offices. He believes it would generate increased traffic and increase liability for the City. He is totally opposed to commercializing that part of the operation unless they can demonstrate that they warrant a drive-up window for City business. He would support it if a study showed that it would be used significantly.

Councilman Mitzel stated from a functional and aesthetic standpoint at the Civic Center, he can’t see making a drive-up lane with a canopy, an extra road and losing the green space. If they demonstrate a need for an ATM, he would rather see it placed by the Police Department. He explained they could renovate the entrance to the Police Station to the required ADA standards and for which the failed bond issue is not going to pay for. He believes that would be a more useful and immediate need for the City. Councilman Mitzel would not support a drive-up window at the Civic Center.

Councilman Clark shares the same concerns and most important, the potential liability aspect if someone was injured or worse on City property. One such experience would cost them a lot more than the price of constructing that window even if it did not cost the City a dime.

Mr. Babinchak replied those financial institutions that are interested in responding to an RFP would carry the appropriate insurance. They reported they would name the City in their insurance so that the City would be covered in that particular event. In addition, the whole theme behind a drive-up window would be to make it one of the safest and most convenient ATM machines in the entire City. They would include a twenty four hour monitor connected to the Police Department, in addition to lighting and no blind spots. He added the location of being near the Police Department would also add to the safety. In terms of the need for an ATM machine, there were many independent studies done that show the Civic Center as a prime location for one. There is a demand because there are eight ball parks, there are more than 22,000 cars that pass the Civic Center daily and there are employees who would use this convenience. In terms of commercializing, he doesn’t believe the financial institution is looking for any kind of massive signage or anything that would associate this building with them. He supposes there would be some kind of identification on the ATM and the City could renew their lease on a five year basis so all institutions would have the opportunity to participate.

Mayor McLallen said there seems to be a consensus of nonsupport. A side issue is that there will soon be a vacant bank at the northwest corner of Taft and Ten Mile Road. Perhaps the City may want to acquire the bank and move the entire treasury and finance operation there. The other issue is increased service to the citizens. She stated the City operates on an eight to five schedule and the citizens operate on and eight to five schedule any place but here. She suggested that they explore flex time to allow staff to come in several hours later one day a week and extend City hours to seven or eight o’clock.

CM-96-12-432: Moved by Clark, Seconded by Mutch, MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To extend meeting an additional fifteen minutes

Councilman Schmid said the purpose of this rule was to end the meetings and if Council is going to continue to extend this meeting, they have at least have another forty five minutes on the agenda. He asked whether they are going to continue or keep extending every fifteen minutes?

Mayor McLallen said there is a motion to continue the meeting for fifteen more minutes and asked if there are any further comments.

Councilwoman Mutch suggested after the next item, Council should decide what items they will consider this evening and determine what will happen with the rest.

Mayor ProTem Crawford will vote to extend the meeting because they need to conduct their business. This was precisely his point when they adopted this policy and he concurred completely with Councilman Schmid that they are kidding themselves by extending meetings all the time because the goal is to end the meeting. Further, he asked to revise the policy several months ago and created a monster because it got worse. He asked if there is Council support to look at this again? Mayor McLallen said they would have to look at this another time.

Nay: None

14. Approval of Resolution, Re: Resolution of Support of Pere Marquette Employees’ Credit Union becoming Novi Community Credit Union

Bob Henburn stated he is the Business Development Manager for Pere Marquette Credit Union. Mr. Henburn said they would be in operation for sixty years in 1997 and added they began primarily as a railroad employees credit union. He reported their primary sponsor for members is CSX Transportation. He further reported they have reduced in size due to the merging of CSX and Conrail, the loss of jobs in the Michigan area and transfers to Florida. Mr. Henburn reported they have approximately 900 members in the Detroit metropolitan area and Novi was the most feasible, economical and geographically desirable location for them.

CM-96-12-433: Moved by Crawford, Seconded by Clark, MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To support Proclamation of Support of Pere Marquette Employees’ Credit Union becoming Novi Community Credit Union

COUNCIL DISCUSSION

Councilman Schmid questioned the financial soundness of the credit union. Mr. Henburn replied only three credit unions failed nationwide in 1996 out of 25,000 credit unions.

Mayor McLallen asked if there is any mechanism that they can provide which will give Council a level of confidence on the financial stability on this credit union? Mr. Henburn replied the National Credit Union Administration insures them. They have never completed a year at a loss and their year to date income is at $660,000. Beyond that, he could provide ratings provided by national trade associations and financial entities in terms of their financial. Mr. Henburn advised when they applied with the State of Michigan to change their membership field, the State requested that they see what support they would get from the community. Mr. Henburn reported they received roughly 1,000 signatures from residents and approximately 75 to 100 signatures from businesses. He said all Council is endorsing is the concept that there is a credit union solely for the residents and those people that work in Novi.

Councilman Schmid asked the credit union to submit a financial statement before Council makes its endorsement.

Councilwoman Mutch clarified there are two issues before them. One is a request of support for a community based credit union. If she understands credit unions correctly, they define their membership and Pere Marquette’s basic membership is CSX employees. Further, one can only belong to a credit union if he connects to the membership base. A community based credit union is different because it doesn’t represent an employee group, but represents residents and businesses within a community. Novi doesn’t currently have a community based credit union and she doesn’t know if it would only be limited to one. If this came about, it would provide another opportunity for Novi citizens that they do not already have. She has a problem with the wording, but she sees support for the concept of a community based credit union. She thinks the problem with the wording is that it seems to be too much of an endorsement of a specific entity getting the limited opportunity to be the selected community based credit union. She suggested that they revise the wording so there would be more support for it.

Councilman Kramer asked the applicant if they would satisfy him if they amended the proclamation to indicate that they support a Novi based credit union without naming Pere Marquette Employees’ Credit Union? Mr. Henburn said they would satisfy them with that and although the State would like some reference to Pere Marquette, they are really only looking for support.

Councilman Schmid is not opposed to the credit union, but if Council puts their name on this, they could be putting themselves in a situation which they do not want to be. He reiterated all he is looking for is a financial report for review.

Mayor ProTem Crawford suggested they amend the motion to show support for a community based credit union and not necessarily Pere Marquette. He does not see a need for financial statements and he is assuming that is a State function.

Mr. Henburn reported originally he was just looking for a letter and the City suggested that he present it for a resolution.

Mayor ProTem Crawford amended his motion to state that Council’s proclamation of support reads that they support the concept of a community based credit union. Councilman Clark accepted the amendment.

Mayor McLallen asked if Council is prepared to vote on the amendment which states they are in support of the concept of a community based credit union and will forward a letter to the State.

Nay: None

Mayor McLallen advised Council still has three action items and approximately five consent agenda items. Mr. Watson added that he would like to return to one of their appointments.

Mayor McLallen reported it is twelve fifteen and there has been discussion that they have far exceeded having been here since six o’clock. Of the items for action she suggested they address the Executive Session and scheduling of a joint meeting with the EDC.

16. Schedule an Executive Session to immediately follow Regular Meeting - Property Acquisition

Nay: None

17. Schedule a Special Joint Meeting of the Novi City Council and the Economic Development Corporation for December 16, 1996 at 6:30 P.M., in the Activities Room of the Civic Center

CM-96-12-436: Moved by Crawford, Seconded by Mutch, MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To schedule a Special Joint Meeting of the Novi City Council and the Economic Development Corporation for December 16, 1996 at 6:30 P.M., in the Activities Room of the Civic Center

Nay: None

CM-96-12-437: Moved by Clark, Seconded by Crawford, MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To carry this item earlier in the agenda to the December 16, 1996 Regular City Council Meeting

Nay: None

Mayor McLallen reported the consensus of Council is to move forward with the agenda.

AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION

James Korte - stated they called Mr. Kriewall the day the first tree went down on the Port Papadapallis site. Further, there was an ordinance officer on the site who stated "they tied her hands" and Chris Pargoff said his hands were tied as well. Mr. Korte said this is unfortunate and unacceptable. Mr. Korte suggested that Mr. Kriewall should have called his good friend and said there was a problem, because he knew that when the chain saw hit the first tree. Mr. Korte said Mr. Andris reported everything he did during the last extension was to appease the neighbors. Mr. Korte was at the LARA meeting when they asked him what he was going to do and he said nothing because it is up to the City to do something. Mr. Korte advised there is still a curb cut on East Lake Drive and yet Mr. Andris led Council to believe that he appeased the neighborhood, but he really did nothing. Further, Mr. Andris is not a regular member of LARA and by their charter, he may not be a member. Mr. Korte wanted to clarify that Mr. Andris pulled the wool over Council’s eyes again and it is unacceptable to all of the people who have argued this project. He reminded Council that the residents are not opposed to the restaurant, but they are opposed to how it is happening. Mr. Korte also stated that it makes sense to make Novi Road contiguous, but he believes Old Novi Road should include north and south because Old Novi Road currently connects to Eight Mile Road.

Mayor McLallen reported there has already been a petition submitted to rename Old Novi Road at the southern end of the City.

Mr. Korte believes Councilmen Clark and Schmid’s statements were exactly on the money in regard to the Council seat appointment and he is sure the voters will remember those statements in November.

Deborah Bundoff - Novi/Twelve Mile Road, stated although there were possibly three failed credit unions this year, she reported they usually do not fail but instead they get consumed by larger credit unions. Council should ask the credit union about their rules and regulations instead of asking for financial statements. She asked if the community credit union would have new bylaws to include an equal amount of Novi residents on the board to help make financial determinations? Her second issue is with Novi Road. She believes Novi Road is Novi Road and a green sign with an arrow can show that Novi Road turns at the light. She asked what would happen if someone decided to realign Twelve ½ Mile Road? She asked if that wouldn’t be a better Decker Road which would continue through Dixon? She asked Council to look at other issues before they rename Decker Road. She reminded Council that the people and businesses on the renamed Old Novi Road must change their addresses.

Nay: None

CONSENT AGENDA

3. Schedule a Special City Council Meeting for Monday, October 13, 1997 - City Manager/Clerk Performance Reviews

Mayor ProTem Crawford reported his question has been answered.

CM-96-12-439: Moved by Crawford, Seconded by Mutch, MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To schedule a Special City Council Meeting for Monday, October 13, 1997 - City Manager/Clerk Performance Reviews

Nay: None

Councilman Mitzel removed this item because he does not believe the sixty square foot limit on the American flag is proper for a City ordinance and he will vote no on this.

CM-96-12-440: Moved by Kramer, Seconded by Crawford, MOTION CARRIED: To approve the revised sign ordinance No. 96-100.18 (Town Center Signs) - II Reading

Nay: Clark, Mitzel, Schmid

10. Approval to begin conceptual design and prepare right-of-way documents associated with the 1996 Roadway Bond Program

Councilman Mitzel asked if Council should consider utilizing more than one firm to initiate this program? He thought if they used two or three firms, they can probably do some work simultaneously and complete some projects sooner. He asked if Administration could come back with a listing of which projects could move up if they used more than one firm so the resources of one firm do not limit them.

Councilman Kramer stated if they do this, he would suggest they also determine how many construction projects the City can support at once.

Mayor McLallen suggested they bring this back at the next meeting. Mr. Nowicki concurred.

CM-96-12-441: Moved by Mitzel, Seconded by Mutch, MOTION CARRIED: To postpone item and have Administration report back at the first meeting in January about the possibility of utilizing more than one firm for the 1996 Roadway Bond Program

COUNCIL DISCUSSION

Councilman Schmid asked if this motion is for right of ways? Councilman Mitzel said it is for the preparation of design and right of way.

Councilman Schmid will not support the motion because he doesn’t think it will delay anything and he believes the City has an adequate number of engineers. Further, they cannot build the roads any faster than they design them.

Mayor ProTem Crawford asked if the intent is to get more than one firm to negotiate right of way on different projects? Councilman Mitzel’s intent is to get input from Administration about how certain projects like Meadowbrook Road can be done by a different firm than the Taft Road extension. He thought perhaps one firm could do right of way and another may do the design of the signalization instead of one firm doing everything.

Mayor ProTem Crawford stated the Consent Agenda item is only for conceptual design on the 1996 Roadway Program and to start the preparation of right of way documents. He believes Councilman Mitzel’s proposal is a separate issue. They could go ahead and approve the beginning of the conceptual design of the new Roadway Program, but he doesn’t anticipate changing who does their right of way negotiations in relation to that. He believes Councilman Mitzel is going beyond this, although seeing what Administration might recommend might be worthwhile. He thinks they can approve Item 10 and address Councilman Mitzel’s suggestion.

Nay: Crawford, Clark, Schmid

11. Approval of Design and Construction Standards Ordinance No. 96-124 - II Reading

Councilman Schmid removed this because a member of the Planning Commission was good enough to look at this and Mr. Wahl put it in the packet. He thought it would be worthwhile to review some items that they deleted or not deleted from the ordinance. He suggested that they bring this item back before Council on the next agenda.

CM-96-12-442: Moved by Mutch, Seconded by Schmid, MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To bring back as a discussion item on the next agenda

21. Award bid for laptop computers to Custom Ordered Police Supplies in the amount of $136,000

Councilman Schmid believes the City is spending more than $2-3M for computers and he has previously asked for a detailed account of the money spent in 1996 to date for computers. Councilman Schmid is concerned that they are throwing away millions of dollars away on computers that will only become obsolete within a year or two. The spending for computers seems to be continuous and uncontrolled. Councilman Schmid will support the issue, but he is requesting an account on what has been spent, the purpose and what they anticipate on spending.

Nay: None

Mayor McLallen asked Administration to note that Council would like an update at its next meeting.

COMMUNICATIONS

Dennis Watson stated when the City Clerk gave Council the results of the appointments and there was actually a tie in the second appointment for the Community Clubs. They reappointed L. Graham Ward. However, there was a tie vote between Mr. Senter and Mr. Jaussi. Council can either vote again tonight or they can vote at their next meeting.

Mayor ProTem Crawford suggested that they do what he recommended earlier which was to appoint two additional members and have ten members contingent upon a resolution. Mr. Watson knows that the bylaws and the Articles of Incorporation allow the Community Clubs to have a larger number of members, but he is not sure that is in the particular resolution Mayor ProTem Crawford has.

CM-96-12-444: Moved by Crawford, Seconded by Clark: To appoint two additional members contingent upon adopting the proper resolution

Nay: None

Councilman Schmid asked if the City’s Administration prepared the listing of City vehicles that he requested? Mr. Kriewall replied they have a summary that he can give him tonight.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business before City Council, the meeting was adjourned at 12:40 A.M.

Mayor City Clerk

Transcribed by Barbara Holmes