Mayor Clark called the meeting to order at 7:32 PM.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Cub Scout Pack 54-Den 7

ROLL CALL Mayor Clark, Mayor ProTem Lorenzo, Council Members Bononi, Crawford, Csordas, DeRoche-absent excused, and Kramer

ALSO PRESENT Mr. Helwig, City Manager

Mayor Clark introduced and welcomed the new City Clerk Maryanne Cornelius.

Member Crawford added as Item #6, under Matters for Council Action – Part 1 discussion/action on South Lake Drive Issue.

Member Kramer added as Item #4, under Mayor and Council Issues a proposal for study of storm water drainage improvement in the Lakes area.

Mr. Helwig added Item #6, Matters for Council Action – Part 1 the Vista Hills Tree Planting Program.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo asked how intense the South Lake Drive discussion would get? Member Crawford said his intent was a brief discussion and direction on where to go from there.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo requested that instead of closing the Public Hearing on the City Budget that it be continued to the next meeting because of additional information the Council had not seen. Mayor Clark said that could be done.

Member Bononi added Item #5, under Mayor and Council Issues, she would be looking for information concerning the Ten Mile Road traffic situation at Novi High School. She had requested information regarding a potential traffic signal and the implication of the timing of the signal installation improvements at Taft and Ten Mile.

Member Bononi added Item #6, under Mayor and Council Issues, Energy Franchises.

State Representative Nancy Cassis stated she had in the past put on the State Transportation Budget the reconstruction of the Wixom and Beck Intersections and it was proceeding along well. This afternoon Mr. Engler was in Pontiac and revealed some very exciting projects in the Build Michigan #3 Program. This would be a $900 million program and would build on Build Michigan #2 and on Act 51 monies that were partitioned down to local government. Mr. Engler indicated there were two projects to go forward in the 38^th District. She said one would address the missing link between Beck and Novi Roads along Grand River. She would soon find out the start and end points of the project as well as a cost estimate and felt they would be very generous. Mr. Engler said they anticipated the projects to be started very soon.

1. Proclamation-National Association of Letter Carriers Food Drive Day May 13, 2000

Mayor Clark presented a Proclamation to Karen Beck for this event which would be the largest one day food drive in America and all food would remain in the community that it was collected in.

2. South Lake Drive, A Community Concerned-John Pisha

Mr. Pisha spoke on behalf of his neighbors and showed a slide presentation regarding South Lake Drive. He rendered a brief history of South Lake Drive and spoke on their current situation and their desired state.

Mr. Pisha stated cul-de-sacing South Lake Drive would be a permanent and real solution that could be done at either the east or west end of the road. Another possibility would be to close South Lake Drive at Lakeshore Park.

The residents of South Lake Drive requested that Council direct the City Administration to develop preliminary drawings and recommend a road closure solution for South Lake Drive. Also, direct Administration to postpone the resurfacing and the bike path construction project. The residents felt that redesign of that project should not commence until all safety and traffic issues were resolved.

Mr. Brunett was present representing the Novi Public Library Board requesting direction regarding the expansion plans of the Library. Direction was needed regarding the timing of a millage election and the Taft Road Property as the site for construction of a new library.

Brenda Evans, Director of the Library, presented a slide presentation expressing the needs of the library, the benefits of addressing those needs on behalf of the citizens and the cost and timing issues that would be involved.

Ms. Evans said the Library was authorized to collect one mil through the City Charter and that was established through Public Act 164. This delegated to the Library Board the exclusive expenditure of all monies collected for the Library Fund, the construction of Library buildings and the supervision, care and custody of grounds. They were also empowered to purchase and lease property. Future planning was based on population growth, which caused changes in community needs, surveys, workshops and the Memorandum of Understanding of 1999.

Increased space for collection growth was needed and they barely met the requirements of ADA Compliance. Also, the building was not designed to accommodate the technology of today such as data lines, power supplies, computer workstations, etc. There are no quiet browsing, reading or study areas and a separate area for the children was needed along with an outdoor programming area.

The building was not designed for the larger staff they employ and a space designed for one person was now being used by three or four. Since the meeting room is so small programs are shown three or four different times to accommodate the public and parents and interior space can not hold the number of children who want to attend these programs. If small meeting rooms were created for small conferences and outfitted with the kind of technology citizen’s need it would make use of the space more productively.

In talking with residents 77% would like to keep the Library in the Civic Center Area. Ms. Evans showed several renderings of where the Library might be put. The target is an 80,000 sq. ft. building based on population projections and they were looking to raise $16,300,000 in revenue for constructing and operation of that building. The current millage was rolled back to 8/10^th of a mil and they would like to add 1.2 new mils to accomplish the project.

A Citizen Action Group had been formed and recent studies showed 52% of voters would support Library expansion funding now and 87% said the library was important to their community life. Ms. Evans said the Library location needed to be resolved and the election date had to be set.

Mr. Brunette said they wanted to put this ballot question on the August 8^th election and had attached a copy of the proposed ballot language. The message of the 52% of residents that supported library expansion funding was that 62% of those wanted the roads dealt with and they would like to wait but if asked to vote on August 8^th for this they would.

Mr. Brunette requested Council consider August 8^th but if they thought August 8^th was premature they were suggesting Council give them a time they thought would be more effective for the citizens, Council and the Novi Library Board.

They would like to build on the Taft Road site and felt it would work for them. However, they knew it needed access onto Taft Road and that was controversial so their current request was that Council indicate to them whether they were willing to transfer that property to the Library Board with the understanding that there would have to be access on Taft road. If not, the fall back position was the current site they are on. He requested a response as soon as Council had time to consider this.

Mayor Clark said they would respond by the next meeting on May 15^th.

Ms. Smith-Roy reviewed their summary of issues that seemed of importance during the budget process. Some of the maintenance areas and replacement equipment items had been reduced and they would be postponed until next year. Instead, they added items that seemed to be important during the process that revolved around the roads, pavement management program, and irrigation system for 12 Mile. Some of the planning programs relating to the roads was left in as highlighted items. Also added were the in car video police computers and $177,000 was added to the budget process which they proposed would be put towards park development. Another highlight was Lakeshore Park, the #1 priority for the C.I.P. Committee. In working with Dan Davis and Ian Vernon they thought development could be handled through the H.C.D.B.G. funds.

Mr. Helwig stated the shaded areas represented areas that had changed. The Judgement Trust Fund transfer went to $325,000 from a concept of $300,000 last week. They also included a vehicle schedule for replacement summary on one page.

Mayor Clark asked Mr. Helwig to comment on local street maintenance for Lakewood Homes and Village Oaks.

Mr. Helwig said their intention was to include information in the next packet to facilitate the deliberation so that on the next Council agenda they could put together the neighborhood street resurfacing focus for this year’s commitment. This week Council would receive a condition analysis of the streets and a further review of the bids that were taken and just about to come to Council. The hope would be that following the May 15^th Council meeting and review of this information they could then award a contract to have a significant neighborhood street resurfacing program underway in a short time period.

There was no audience participation and the Public Hearing was closed. This item would be continued at the May 8^th meeting.

Member Kramer said one more work session needed to be set to do the budget wrap up.

Mr. Helwig said that had already been set up for May 8^th at 8 PM.

Mr. Klaver said four more positive Customer Reply Cards were received on behalf of Angie Moncrief and Ramona Benton of Assessing and one for the entire Parks & Recreation Department regarding the kids sports program and Heather Peiri.

Paul Sherbeck, 24547 Fairway Hills Drive, was present to urge the citizens of Novi and Council to reject the notion of giving any business or individual targeted tax abatement. If businesses were not efficient enough to do business in Novi without subsidies then it would be in their own best interest to find other locations they could afford. He asked Council and the citizens in a free society should not all taxpayers be treated equally. If one wished to attract new businesses and to have all businesses grow more profitably why doesn’t Council work to reduce local, State and Federal regulations on businesses?

Toni Nagy thanked Council on behalf of Lake Park Homes and Village Oaks for considering the residential streets in the budget.

Ms. Nagy expressed environmental concerns regarding NOVAPLEX. In Michigan developers are systematically destroying wetlands and woodlands. It is the Planning Commission and Council’s responsibility to uphold the laws and ordinances. The City had compromised its wetlands and woodlands enough and it was time to strictly adhere to the ordinances.

She asked why this City was turning its back on Mr. Chen. He is the only quality developer we have. She believed it was our obligation and duty to support him and his current projects. She stated Novi did not need another brewery.

Margaret Beller, James Korte, Diane Stepinski, Dorothy Duchano, Sarah Gray, Mike Kelly, Barth Plowman, and Harry Zach all had concerns regarding the closing of South Lake Drive. They were concerned about emergency vehicle access, access of trash companies, school busses and that residents living on side streets off of South Lake Drive were not included in the informational meeting. They felt the City had no choice but to put into effect and stringently enforce traffic calming measures and that the Beck Road Interchange should be completed as soon as possible to help alleviate this problem.

Chris House, 1341 South Lake Drive said he and his wife were in favor of closing the road and felt emergency access was extremely important. The residents of South Lake Drive do have a proposal to close off the road at the park and provide emergency access gates that would be activated by sirens; emergency access would be preserved and it would completely eliminate cut through traffic.

Vic Pfeffer, Sarah Gray and Pat Holt addressed the library issue. Their concerns were traffic and infrastructure, total traffic plan for the Civic Center location, possibly building a structure around and over the existing library and setting up a task force to examine the needs of the high school and the library.

Dorothy Duchano, 1191 South Lake Drive, was concerned that residents voted tax money to be used to add bike paths for South Lake to aid the safety of the residents. They were still waiting for a paved path or shoulder access. There are sidewalks everywhere in the City but none that allow you to get to North Novi Park. She asked that when it comes to the reconstruction of South Lake the overhead wires be buried.

James Korte, Shawood Lake, commented that water tap #47 is still not right and should be on Lot 105.

John Thomopaulos, 425 South Lake Dr., said he and his wife are a young couple that had

just moved into the area and they would like to have children and do not want them to get

killed crossing the street.

Sarah Gray, 133 Maudlin, found it morally reprehensible that Council was considering putting in a sprinkler system on Twelve Mile Road for the Boulevard and tree planting. For a City that had water moratoriums and odd/even watering days it was ridiculous; a $117,000 sprinkler system was not needed.

Peter Paisley of Local Color Brewing Co, and Debbie Bundoff commented on the proposed changes to the Ordinance to allow brewpubs in the new RC District. They hoped Council would consider Local Color and the safety issues of it being across from a major park when they considered the new ordinance and vote against the change.

James Chen, Evergreen III/Main Street, announced the Lazy Lizard Restaurant had been open for two months, was very successful and received three out of four stars on the food reports. Also, the Salon Agape’ opened today and soon there would be a submarine shop and the Coffee Trader. Mr. Chen expressed concern about the possibility of future competition with Main Street. He asked for Councils continued support and thanked the citizens for their support.

Glen Bonaventura, Clare Wilson and Debbie Bundoff stated they were opposed to tax abatement and felt a principled decision would be based on doing that which was most fair to those who elected them to office. He presented a petition with 261 signatures against tax abatement policies.

Bruce Heckman, Taubman Company, 200 E. Long Lake Road, Bloomfield Hills, addressed the Brewpub Amendment. He said the Planning Commission recognized that a brewpub was really an enhanced restaurant and was a much more limited type of operation than a full microbrewery. They agreed that Main Street is an important project and should be afforded special consideration. At the same time they thought the proposed amendment maintained that special consideration. It afforded an opportunity for more exciting and diversified restaurant and entertainment facilities in the RC District while preserving the unique distinction of limiting microbreweries to the TC District.

Asa Smith, 1294 E. Lake Drive, spoke about the correct usage of the mitigated property at Nine Mile and Garfield Rd. He said disposition of park land should be the prime concern for residents and no one group should be able to dictate the use of this land for their personal gains. Wetlands and uplands should be preserved but also utilized and developed for use of the residents.

Norma Wagner, Wildflower Rescue Program at Cranbrooke Gardens Auxiliary, stated they were a volunteer group that worked with developers in an effort to save the Michigan woodland wildflowers in sites that would be undergoing construction. They have been working with the Beztak Building Company who are proposing to develop the NOVAPLEX site on Haggerty Rd.

Cranbrooke House is open to the public and invited Council out to see their gardens.

Member Kramer asked if they would be interested in working with the Beautification Commission or Parks and Recreation if a program was created where some of the wildflowers would be relocated in Novi? She said they would. Member Kramer recommended that Administration contact the Beautification Commission and P & R regarding the Cranbrooke Group.

Ferdinand Gomes, 40700 Middle Rd. Ct., spoke about the bike path being proposed for the South side of Nine Mile Road between Novi Road and Haggerty. The bike path was being brought up on top of a berm thirty feet high and right up against his property. People would be able to look right into his bedrooms and living space and it would also offer easy access to the backyards. He felt it would affect the property values as well and if someone were to fall onto their property they could sue them and their subdivision. He had spoken with the Mayor about this issue and requested that the Council Members oppose it.

1. Approve Minutes of:

1 April 8, 2000, Budget Meeting

2. April 17, 2000, Regular Meeting

2. Schedule an Executive Session to follow the meeting, Re: Property Acquisition and Pending Litigation.
3. Ordinance No. 2000-81.18-an Ordinance to amend Sections 33-385 and 33-386 of the Novi Code of Ordinances, to revise the requirements for child restraint and safety belt usage within motor vehicles – I Reading
4. Adoption of Resolution authorizing and supporting the 2000 Memorial Day Parade and submittal to the Road Commission for Oakland County.
5. Award bid for Automated Geographically Based Interactive Community Notification System to Dialogic Communications, the low qualified bidder in the amount of $22,385 (Police Department).
6. Approval to purchase one (1) arrow board from Burke Equipment, the low quotation, in the amount of $4,650 (DPW)
7. Award bid for Billfold Fencing Contract to Dewitt Fence Company, the low bidder, in the amount of $61,922.
8. Approval to purchase one (1)Total Containment Fill Station for Mako Air Packs from Air Source One, Inc., the low quotation, in the amount of $4,689
9. Approval of Resolution Authorizing Michigan National Bank to make payment to Helen Gawronski for Special Assessment Bonds Certificate #128
10. Approve Claims & Accounts, Warrant No. 571

1. Request for reconsideration of NOVAPLEX Woodlands Permit, SP 99-32, located in Section 12 on the west side of Haggerty Road between 12 and 13 Mile Roads, zoned OST (Office Service Technology)

Matt Quinn said after three meetings with Mr. Helwig, staff, consultants and staff from Beztak and their consultants it appeared they had something to present to Council. New ideas were put forth and the site had been reconfigured so the saving of the trees could be maximized. There are now 4.61 contiguous acres of woodlands being saved. These woodlands are adjacent to the 4 plus acres of woodland on the Magna site. They set aside .51 acres for land banked parking that they believed they could work around during construction. There was compromise on setbacks around the building and the perimeter and a larger detention basin on the Haggerty Road site. The buildings had been pushed forward and the large island at the rear was shortened. The bank had been moved to the building on the south side front, which allowed the buildings on the north side to be pushed to Haggerty saving more woodland.

A variance would be requested to waive the berm requirement along Haggerty Road, which would save about 36 feet of space. It would be heavily landscaped instead of the berm. The detention basin would also have shrubs between it and the parking it abuts. They would use as many trees on site as replacement as possible and either replace trees at the apartment site owned by Beztak or pay additional monies into the tree fund. Another option would be to put all the money into the tree fund itself.

A proposed motion was included in Council packets, put together by Novi staff and reviewed by Mr. Sturing of Beztak; and they were asking Council’s approval.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo asked Ms. Lemke if there would be a permanent conservation easement placed over the property? Ms. Lemke would recommend that.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo asked if the 4.61 acres included the .5 acres requested for land banking? Mr. Quinn said it did. She would like a finite number of years regarding the banked space and whether it would be needed or not. He said it could not be until the building was leased and a client mix was known and he agreed to put in a stipulation that said when the building is leased.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo was disappointed they were not able to be more flexible in terms of stories and numbers of buildings and felt this was marginally acceptable. She might support it reluctantly.

Member Crawford commended Mr. Helwig and Ms. Lemke for doing what all of Council could not do for several months. He asked that where it said "the applicant may permit the Cranbrooke Gardens Auxiliary" that it say shall. He also preferred that instead of mitigating potential tree replacement that the money be contributed to the tree fund. If it could be incorporated in the motion, the shall instead of may and the stipulations that the land banking issue be re-addressed when the building was leased, he would be willing to support this.

Member Kramer would support the motion and commended the work done by the parties involved.

Mayor Clark commended the petitioner and the City Manager for resolving a rather complex problem. He would support the motion.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo wanted to know whether a permanent conservation easement was also included on the 4.1 acres that would be preserved.

Mr. Sturing said they had agreed at the last meeting that they had no objections to a conservation easement in the area of 1.66 acres to the west of the property.

Ms. Lemke said a conservation easement would not prevent a walk or trails through the land but it did provide notification to anyone in the future that that particular land was in a preservation easement. In 15 years of woodland preservation there were only 2 cases questioned.

Mr. Watson stated the preservation easement required preservation of the area that would remain woodland requiring that it be preserved in a natural state. The agreement was forever unless modified by agreement of both parties. Member Crawford added this to his motion.

Member Csordas asked Ms. Lemke who the two companies were that resisted the conservation easement? Northern Equities and Mr. Shawnee questioned the preservation easements. Member Csordas asked where Mr. Shawnee’s was and Ms. Lemke said on Novi Road south of Ten Mile on the west side; it was an office development. This would be the third preservation easement. He said he would support that.

Member Bononi asked if Ms. Lemke was recommending support of this proposal? Ms. Lemke said it was the best they would get and in that regard she would recommend Council support.

Member Bononi did not think anyone deserved to be commended. It took two years to get the woodland and wetland maps updated due to, in her opinion, in house resistance to development pressure. Now Council was folding at the sight of a developer who had dug in his heels. She thought it was ironic that Novi had good woodland regulations but did not have the political will to stand up to those who had no caring about environmental stewardship of woodland but only their bottom line. She was acutely disappointed in their lack of commitment to local laws.

Member Bononi said to Administration, up front development meetings are obviously not effective regarding land use perimeters. If they were we would not have people taking these intractable positions. Council Members need to decide where they are going and asked if they had, from their packets, read the document with regard to the Rouge Program Sub-Watershed ranking of priority perimeters for our water quality. Dana McGowan, JCK, ranked our most significant problems with regard to water quality and the environment. Her second concern was the increase of impervious surfaces. She would not support this application.

Member Crawford hoped that staff, consultants and Council realized that the previous remarks were only from one Council Member and other Council Members appreciated the compromise reached. He questioned whether the motion took care of the appeal. It did.

Nays: Bononi

1. Request for approval of Jared Jewelers Preliminary Site Plan SP00-15, proposed demolition of existing building in order to construct a new Jared Jewelers building and revisions to existing parking. Project located in Sec. 15 West Oaks II Shopping Center zoned RC (Regional Center)

CM-00-05-134 Moved by Lorenzo, seconded by Kramer; CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY:

To approve Jared Jewelers Preliminary Site Plan SP00-15, proposed demolition of existing building in order to construct a new Jared

Jewelers building and revisions to existing parking. Project located

in Sec. 15, West Oaks II Shopping Center zoned RC (Regional Center)

 

DISCUSSION

Mayor Clark asked the applicant if there would be a new façade or would it be the same as Star Bucks? The applicant said it would compliment the Star Bucks façade and they would renovate that portion of it so it would look contiguous.

Roll call vote on CM-00-05-134 Yeas: Bononi, Crawford, Csordas, Kramer, Lorenzo,

Clark

Nays: None

Absent: DeRoche

2. Approval of revised Right-of-Way Permit Agreement for Metricom, Inc.

Loren Cato, representing Metricom, said Council authorized the City attorney to negotiate a R.O.W. agreement for Metricom to utilize the City of Novi rights of way to install shoebox size radios on the light poles to provide wireless Internet Service. The City would receive ten free subscriptions for the life of the agreement. The City also, in return for allowing Metricom to utilize the R.O.W. and to compensate the City for maintenance of the R.O.W. based on the minimal impact; Metricom would pay the City 2% of the Adjusted Gross Revenue.

Member Bononi asked if there were no additional pole installations as per the February 28^th meeting? Mr. Watson said that was correct. Member Bononi asked if Metricom opted out was there a condition that they remove all existing equipment placed as a result of this approval? Mr. Watson said yes. She advised him it was not in the agreement and he said he would see that it was. She asked if the agreement could be transferred to another corporation regarding sale or merger? Mr. Watson said it could with approval from Council. Member Bononi asked what "remedy interference" meant? Mr. Watson said there was a provision in the agreement that if there was health or safety problems or radio interference as defined by the F.C.C. Regulations they would have to prevent or stop the interference. She asked what the total fee would be to the City. Mr. Watson said it would depend entirely on what their penetration was into the Novi marketplace.

Ms. Cato said it was an entirely new service so it would be hard to anticipate exactly what the penetration would be. Metricom was estimating 1% to 2% of the population but it would depend on the demographics of each community. Member Bononi asked if it was a publicly held company and if there was a parent company? Ms. Cato said yes the parent company was M.C.I.

Member Bononi asked what was in it for the City to enter into this agreement? Mr. Watson said it was service to the community and whatever limited revenue there was. She asked how much expense was incurred by the City to review this? Mr. Watson said it had not been computed yet but the agreement did provide that they would reimburse the expense.

Member Csordas asked what the estimated first year sales were? Ms. Cato said 1% to 2% within two years. Member Csordas asked what the monthly service fee would be? Ms. Cato said it had not been determined because there would be a secondary provider but it would be around $50.00 a month.

Member Csordas figured it would be around $9,600 for the maintenance of the R.O.W. He asked what adjusted gross income was? Ms. Cato said it was the gross dollar amount received by Metricom for its services provided to subscribers with billing addresses in the City excluding the R.O.W. management reimbursement, if any, payable pursuant to 4.1 which refers to the management reimbursement fee of 2%. Also, any utility users tax, telecommunications tax or similar tax or fee. Local, State or Federal taxes that have been billed to subscribers and separately stated on subscriber bills and revenue uncollected from subscribers such as bad debts with billing addresses in the City that was previously included in adjusted gross

revenues. Member Csordas asked if that would be net or net net. She said net. He asked if that would take the forecast of $9,600 divided by two. She said no.

Absent: DeRoche

Member Kramer stated it was a general notice that Council would direct the administration to use when they wanted to have the public notified about an item. The second sentence read "Verbal comments will be heard at such date and time"; Member Kramer requested it read "Verbal comments will be heard under audience participation".

Member Crawford said this was just to notify people in the immediate area of "whatever" that Council would be addressing that might be of interest to them.

Member Bononi asked how Council would determine which actions impact citizens and require notification?

Member Bononi requested the language of the Resolution be amended beginning at WHEREAS to read as follows. "Whereas, the City Council on occasion considers issues that may specifically impact residents or be of interest to the residents of a particular location within the City, it is prudent and advisable to solicit input from such impacted persons or where greater than 50% are physically abutting potentially impacted property owners request such notification.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby approves the attached form notice for informing interested persons of such meetings, etc.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that such notice shall be mailed by first class mail to the owners (as shown upon the most current tax rolls) and occupants of all parcels of land within 100 feet of the subject property (strike - that is the subject of the) at issue and under consideration by the City Council, or the 30 nearest parcels of land, whichever results in the greater land area of notification.

Member Kramer recommended tabling the item until revisions were brought back to be assessed.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo agreed with additions to the document and suggested adding at City Council’s direction after input at the end of the WHEREAS sentence.

Nays: Crawford, Kramer

Member Crawford commented the intent of this was just to make a simple resolution that the Council could trigger and notify people of whatever Council wanted them to be notified of. He did not want to table this and did not want additional language because it was simple and straight forward as it was.

18.162 be denied.

Member Crawford’s recommendation was to call for the direction that was suggested by the presentation and to take into consideration the discussion from other residents in the area.

He asked what the possibility of no left turns in certain areas at certain times was?

Mr. Arroyo said there were definitely ways that the amount of traffic on South Lake Drive could be impacted. Discussed this evening was the pending installation of a traffic signal at West Park Drive and South Lake. When installed signal time could be adjusted to maximum and minimum times for certain movements that would restrict the ability of vehicles to turn. Certain movements could be restricted at certain times of the day or the amount of green time allowing left turn movements could be limited. It could be tried on an experimental basis before making a more permanent solution. The signals should be installed within 60 days. They would work with the Road Commission to establish timing and a signing plan so that it has maximum impact.

Member Crawford asked if that would be done at 13 Mile and South Lake? Mr. Arroyo said it could be evaluated and a part of an overall package. Member Crawford felt this could be done as soon as anything could be done because the proposed plan would take several months to accomplish. He asked Mr. Arroyo to speak to the Beck Road Interchange and how it might play out if South Lake Drive was still a through street.

Mr. Arroyo felt it would impact that because of the ability to get onto the freeway and go east bound which can not be done now. By providing for access with an eastbound on ramp an alternative would be provided. Instead of travelling South Lake Drive and down 13 Mile to M-5 they could come down Beck Road or West Park Dr. get on the Beck Road Interchange and go eastbound and it would have a significant impact on traffic patterns.

Member Crawford said there was a west bound exit on Beck Road but still there was westbound traffic on South Lake in the evenings.

Mr. Arroyo said it would because it would likely improve capacity significantly. It would improve the number of vehicles that could actually make the westbound off ramp maneuver and then go north on Beck Road. Even though the Interchange was improved a couple years ago it was still not at its highest capacity. Once it was upgraded it would handle a lot more traffic. The widening of Beck Road was key to the City of Wixom which was adding more lanes for north and southbound traffic so that it could accomplish the full picture of getting the traffic off the Interchange and distributed to the road network.

Member Crawford asked Council to give direction to investigate the traffic signals, timing and no left turns at certain times.

Member Kramer agreed with Member Crawford and suggested the administration be directed to further develop the alternatives. He was asking for more feasibility studies and would look at the cul-de-sac and how to accomplish that in conjunction with what is the appropriate function of the park with Parks and Recreation. Also, look at the alternative of a cul-de-sac on the west end. Emergency vehicle access should be taken into account regarding where they would come from and how and if response time was affected if the roads are closed.

Mayor Clark thought there should be notice of one more informational meeting for the residents to look at the alternatives.

Member Kramer thought the Beck Road Interchange would have an effect in the morning but did not think it would help much in the afternoon.

Mr. Arroyo said M-5 was going to be extended up to Pontiac Trail and that would have an impact on the afternoon traffic, which would open up connections to the west north of Walled Lake.

Mayor Clark asked how long it would take to get preliminary studies of what might be entailed regarding the road closure. Mr. Arroyo said 30-40 days. They would schedule a meeting with the Road Commission to see what they had planned for signal timing and improvements and coordinate that with them and then come up with some recommendations for Council.

Member Crawford asked if the bike path and road improvement suggestions could be implemented? Mayor Clark said right. Member Kramer said the citizens would have to realize in doing that it would take it out of this construction season.

Mr. Nowicki said the administration had put the design on hold pending the resolution of some of the issues regarding the cul-de-sacing and the through traffic. They felt if they moved in the direction being advocated it would be the most cost effective time to do so and both plans could be merged together to come up with something that served the entire community.

Member Csordas thought the solution of cul-de-sacs entering on both sides was an excellent idea and would support it. He was concerned about putting the repaving of the road on hold. If no one was there regulating the no left turn they would be turning left anyway. He asked if it was repaving of the road with the addition of an attached bike path? Mr. Nowicki said that was the concept. Member Csordas said that meant to him they were widening the road to give the drivers a clearer shot to blast down there and possibly hit a pedestrian. He asked if it was possible with the revision of the park site plan and the elimination of the resurfacing of that particular small stretch of road would it possibly end up netting the same?

Mr. Nowicki did not have any idea of the cost associated with that and would have to look at it. He thought Member Csordas’ concerns were accurate with respect to the bike lanes attached to the road. Hopefully, there would be law enforcement efforts out there. However, there was an option to eliminate the five foot bikeways once they got to the concept plan and brought it back to Council. They would have the cost analysis prepared and recommendations from the traffic people regarding those attached bikeways.

Member Csordas said that was a 60 foot R.O.W. and asked if any of the residents had claimed that and put fence up to the road. Mr. Nowicki said there had been significant encroachments there. One positive thing on the encroachments was it had the perception of being a narrower roadway and it did slow traffic down. As part of the design process they would have to look at all the property lines and advise people of the encroachments. Member Csordas asked the residents to take that to heart and not do any heavy landscaping within that R.O.W. because that could present a challenge in the future.

Mayor Clark asked Mr. Arroyo if he could have this back by the first meeting in July. He said yes and asked if he wanted a meeting with the residents prior to coming back to Council?

Mayor Clark thought he should meet with the residents and advise them of what they would be presenting to Council. Also, get a copy of the sheet from the Clerk that was presented to Council by Mrs. Gray with the other subdivisions and residents so they could be notified.

Mr. Helwig heard a consistent theme that even once the traffic was slowed the residents would like to have a pedestrian way along that lake. He thought it would be in the best interests of everyone, no matter what the traffic, to have a dedicated segregated pedestrian way. There are parks that use post, cable and grass to define that area between the roadway and the pedestrian way. If there were more footage to work with they would have a waterfront pedestrian way that would be a very distinct asset to the community and would help slow traffic down because there would be more people along side there. He asked to add this to their charge to look at how much land was available and what the alternatives ways of doing that might be.

Mayor Clark asked Mr. Arroyo to include Mr. Helwig’s suggestion.

Member Kramer said the initial design was a pathway on both sides of the road but he would look favorably at a pathway on one side. He felt it needed to be offset so that it was not psychologically part of the road.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo asked if South Lake Drive was a major collector. It was designated a major collector but what was it functioning as? Mr. Arroyo said it was designated as a residential collector and minor roads intersected with it and it carried the traffic from the minor roads to the arterial system. Some collectors are different than others. For example, Eleven Mile Road west of Clark St. was also designated as a collector but it was a mile road connector and had a different function. A collector road took traffic from minor local streets and distributed it to the major road network but South Lake went beyond that and carried through traffic.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo asked why the delay with the light at West Park Drive?

Mayor Clark said Kay Schmid was contacting the Oakland County Road Commission to find out why it was not in place by February as promised.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo suggested a resolution be sent to Oakland County Road Commission strongly expressing concern.

Mayor Clark said he would be talking with Ms. Schmid tomorrow and he had already conveyed concern and would have more at the next meeting.

Mr. Helwig said the direction was very clear at the last meeting that should the developer not initiate the tree planting, plans should be prepared to implement the tree planting. This week correspondence was sent that indicated there were some trees available that were not going to be used elsewhere. Mr. Pargoff had worked with Mr. Klaver to come up with a plan, blessed by the Finance Director to get this accomplished this spring. The developer had not done anything. Mr. Helwig brought to Council bids for the planting of 255 trees for $31,875 and two purchase orders for 255 other trees for $20,480 and $14,884. These dollars have all been posted by the developer and are not coming out of the City budget. They recommended action so the planting could be done this week.

1. Discussion of scheduling a Council Meeting for every Monday Night-Mayor Clark

Mayor Clark said additional Mondays, whether every Monday or not, would serve the purpose of presentations and Mayor and Council Issues so that on the Regular meeting night they would deal only with action items. He asked Council to consider this for discussion at the next meeting.

2. Review Tax Abatement Policy draft and schedule Council meeting date-Member Kramer

Member Kramer requested another work session to review the Tax Abatement Policy drafts and updates and then set a date for Council action.

Mayor Clark suggested this be added to the May 8^th Special Meeting Agenda as Item #2.

Council concurred.

3. Reports on Magna Wetlands & Woodlands approvals-Member Lorenzo

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo said the reports were satisfactory. This was a very unfortunate and disappointing situation but she appreciated Mr. Watson’s correction of it. She asked Mr. Watson about the preservation easements and what he found.

Mr. Watson said there were a couple of Supreme Court Cases, Nolan and Dolan dealt with taking issues. Dolan dealt with the requirement imposed upon a developer for an easement. Although it was not a preservation easement, it was an easement that created both a bike path and a second easement that created a green way system that allowed the general public access to the property. That was because there was not a sufficient showing of a relationship between the impact of the project and that requirement. That was considered to be a taking and was a very important case.

The issue of conservation easement was one that the commission had continuing questions on. They had written a letter and provided some law review material and it created more legitimate questions. He wanted to do more research on specific issues they had raised and he would be discussing that with them on Wednesday.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo assumed that he was comfortable with the concept of conservation easements. Mr. Watson said that was correct.

Member Csordas said when he was on the Planning Commission there had always been confusion on the preservation and the issue of paying taxes on a land that could not be used. He asked Mr. Watson if he was confident that he could direct them.

Mr. Watson said when they raise the issues he would put the work in on it and do what he could to explain it to them.

Member Csordas asked if the Planning Commission Chair had asked the developer to set aside a conservation easement if not required?

Mr. Watson said in one of the consultant’s letters and in prior discussion there had been a reference to the fact they did not have a problem with it. He thought the developer was being cooperative in every fashion.

Member Csordas asked if one of our consulting companies overrode a decision of the Planning Commission. Mr. Watson said he did not believe so. Member Csordas asked if the wetland consultant continued the process after the Planning Commission approved this? Mr. Watson would not refer to that as attempting to override the Planning Commission. The wetland consultant called him questioning what happened and asked him to look at it and he did. He felt that was a very appropriate thing for anyone to do whether it was a commissioner, Council Member or Citizen at large.

Member Kramer gave Council a proposal to look at between now and the next meeting. It was a program he and Mr. Nowicki came up with to study implementation of storm water drainage in the lakes area. It was aimed at areas that already have water and sewer. He wanted to package them up into small projects that could be done annually, target HCD funds and other grants. It would compete with the proposal in the budget to use HCD Funds for the park and thought it was an appropriate discussion to have.

He would like to solicit the Council’s support, to review it with the smaller subdivisions and homeowners in the area to gain support for the idea. Then proceed with a small scale preliminary plan with rough cost estimates, identify sources of funding and bring it back to Council. If supported he would recommend a new implementation planning committee with a sizable proportion of homeowners represented in the area to help pick the projects.

Member Bononi had requested from Mr. Arroyo and Mr. Nowicki a date that the Ten Mile and Taft signal would be installed and Mr. Arroyo was to give information with regard to the advisability of installing a traffic signal or some other traffic device at the Novi High School.

This was as a result of an inquiry of a citizen and she was disappointed that there was no information for that citizen.

Mr. Arroyo had left. Mr. Nowicki said it was included in the tracking form what he had done with the Road Commission and it was added to the form on April 13^th. The Road Commission had indicated they were going to design that signal and it would be installed prior to the beginning of the next school year at Ten-Mile and Taft.

Member Bononi was concerned with regard to the Norlight application. She had been under the impression they were looking at a policy where Council would be appraised through the City Manager of these proposals. Her concern was about the process being used with regard to who was entertaining and receiving these proposals, who was determining that ordinances and/or revisions should be composed and who was paying for these costs. She was looking for a way they could be appraised of these proposals as they are received before they are processed. She thought as a result of the discussions regarding the Norlight manner that that was the direction they were heading but they did not seem to be there because these ordinances were already being proposed for Council’s review.

Member Bononi wanted to see a process where they could know that these would be coming forward and Council would have the opportunity to decide whether they wished to become involved with them or not.

Mayor Clark asked Mr. Watson, with reference to the ones from Consumers and DTE, that was part and parcel of the utility deregulation that was going on in the State and was something that they had no control over. Mr. Watson said what was different about these was they would not be putting up any infrastructure within the City. They are essentially electricity brokers acquiring it in bulk and distributing it over the Edison system to the end users.

Member Bononi was not as concerned about the content of these but of a process by which they are addressed by Council. Mr. Watson did not think there was ever a process for franchises because up until recent years they were a rare thing. Cable TV, the gas company and electricity are long term franchisees. It might be logical to bring it through the Ordinance Review Committee whenever an applicant comes in.

Mr. Watson commented that the three particular ones that would be coming up, under the Charter, to be a franchise it had to be published and four weeks passed which would bring this back to Council on the June 19t^h meeting based on when it could be published. The applicants would be there that night and asked if it would make sense to have these people come in and make a presentation prior to that time?

Member Bononi said it was OK with her.

Member Crawford commented under Mayor and Council Issues he saw a couple of "no" water and sewer for Pioneer Meadows. He asked what the status was and if it could be put to bed if there was a majority that did not want it?

Mr. Nowicki agreed it would appear that the majority did not want it but the information they were provided was not accurate. What happened was Council adopted Resolution #1, which authorized the conceptual plans and the development of preliminary cost estimates. Before the engineers had a chance to get into this the Pioneer Meadows Homeowners Association had a meeting. They requested that Mr. Jerome and Mr. Pakala, JCK, attend and they provided some very preliminary cost estimates and the outcome was the residents were not interested in moving forward. He suggested they continue the process and come up with the accurate numbers so the residents could make an informed decision, have an informational meeting and then present it back to Council as Resolution #2. At that time the entire project would either go or fail depending on the input from the residents.

Member Crawford asked if it could be done soon? Mr. Nowicki said he would do that.

Mayor Clark reminded Council they had an executive session after the meeting.

Ms. Cornelius reminded Council a roll call vote was needed to approve the Consent Agenda because they were approving an executive session as one of the Consent Agenda items.

To approve the Consent Agenda A through J.

There being no further business before Council, the meeting was adjourned at 12:32 AM.

_____________________________ ____________________________

Richard J. Clark, Mayor Maryanne Cornelius, City Clerk

Transcribed by: ________________________

Date Approved: June 5, 2000