(248) 347-0475

Meeting called to order at 7:35 p.m. by Chairperson Weddington.

PRESENT: Members Bononi, Canup, Capello, Churella, Csordas, Hoadley, Chairperson Weddington

ABSENT: None

ALSO PRESENT: Planning Consultant Brandon Rogers, Engineering Consultant Victoria Weber, Traffic Consultant Rod Arroyo, Assistant City Attorney Paul Weisberger, Landscape Architect Linda Lemke, Wetland Specialist Dave Wickens, Director of Planning & Community Development Jim Wahl, and Staff Planner Khanh Pham

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Chairperson Weddington announced that Tasmin Office Park, SP98-17 has been withdrawn from the Agenda as the request of the applicant. She asked if there were any other changes or additions to the Agenda?

Member Bononi added a brief remark from her to the Commission under Matters for Discussion.

Member Hoadley added personal comments under Matters for Discussion.

Member Capello added brief comments on visibility, under Matters for Discussion. In regard to the adjournment of a Public Hearing from an Agenda, he asked if it was the procedure to have the applicant appear before the Commission and ask for an adjournment.

Chairperson Weddington explained that the Tasmin Office Park application had some negative Consultant letters and they initially asked to proceed in spite of the negative review letters, however, because of the extent of the comments, they asked to be able to address the issues and postpone their application. Chairperson Weddington asked the Department to make sure that the applicants appear before the Commission if they withdraw after the notices have been sent out.

Jim Wahl, Director of Planning & Community Development recalled that the Department requested something in writing.

PM-98-06-123 TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED

Moved by Csordas, seconded by Capello, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve the Agenda as amended.

VOTE ON PM-98-06-123 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Yes: Bononi, Canup, Capello, Churella, Csordas, Hoadley, Weddington

No: None

AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION

None

CORRESPONDENCE

Lawrence Otis, 24321 Willow Lane wrote in regard to the Singh Development request for 10 Mile Road entrance. He opposed the extension of North LeBost into the new sub for reasons of traffic. He stated leaving the street a dead end creates security by having only one way out. He hoped the Commission would consider not allowing the extension as it was not good for traffic control.

ANNOUNCEMENTS

Chairperson Weddington announced that Kelly Schuler was the new Planning Assistant.

Jim Wahl, Director of Planning & Community Development announced that Khanh Pham has been promoted to Staff Planner and Heidi Hannan has been promoted to Community Development Coordinator. He stated Heidi would be working on large scale development activity as well as assisting with the Site Plan Process. He announced that Kelly Schuler is the new Planning Assistant, she has a Masters Degree in Planning and a Bachelors Degree in Philosophy from the University of Maryland.

Chairperson Weddington added that this was the last night for Commissioners Hoadley and Bononi. She thanked them for their services and wished them well.

Chairperson Weddington also bid Brandon Rogers farewell. She stated the Commission appreciated everything he has done and presented him with a framed 1908 plat map of Novi. She announced that there would be a reception on Monday, July 06, 1998 at 6:30 p.m. prior to the City Council Meeting and invited everyone to attend.

Brandon Rogers thanked the Chair and the members of the Commission.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

1. BABY & KIDS, SP98-11A

Project is located at 43600 Grand River Avenue, west of Novi Road. Applicant is seeking Preliminary Site Plan and Woodlands Permit approvals.

Steve Farley of Arthur F. Smith Architects represented the client Ed Wormsbacher the owner of Baby N’ Kids. He stated the development was a 14,000 square foot furniture showroom with a small warehouse which will replace the current operation located on Novi Road within the parking lot of Twelve Oaks Mall. He stated he has met repeatedly with the Staff and Consultants and felt he addressed all of their comments. He also met with the Steering Committee and received their input and approval on the project. Mr. Farley was hopeful to break ground in August 1998. He stated the project meets all of the goals of the study in terms of landscaping, sidewalks, lighting, signage, enhancing woodlands and being user friendly. He briefly reviewed his plans and elevations.

Brandon Rogers, Planning Consultant stated the building was slightly reduced from 14,894 to 14,174 to bring it into compliance and give the ability to provide parking. All application data is provided and the building complies with the TC District setback standards. Off street loading and unloading is provided.

Linda Lemke, Landscape Architect stated all of the information has been provided with a few minor items at the time of Final. The proposed site design and landscape plan meets the requirements for the buffering along Grand River Avenue. A serpentine brick wall is provided along Grand River. The applicant is providing Town Center pedestrian lighting standards along the sidewalk on Grand River, there is a brick walk to the arcade and bench and trash receptacles. She approved the conceptual landscape plan.

Mr. Rogers stated the plan complies with Section 2520 of the Zoning Ordinance for the facade materials. No roof HVAC units are shown on the plan and if any are to be provided, they must be screened and the plan should be returned for review and approval of such screening. Mr. Rogers recommended Preliminary Site Plan approval.

Rod Arroyo, Traffic Consultant stated access is proposed from one driveway onto Grand River. He pointed out that it does not meet driveway spacing standards of the City, due to the location of a number of existing driveways in the area. He stated it is placed in a reasonable location and provides for reasonable ingress and egress. The provision of a deceleration and acceleration taper is shown as required and there is also a provision for left turns to be bypassed on Grand River. Loading and unloading is shown on the plan, however, the access of trucks into the loading/unloading area requires them to run over the area where parked cars would be during business hours. As a condition of approval, Mr. Arroyo indicated if deliveries could be controlled to be made during off hours than the plan would be workable, however, if it cannot be done, there would have to be modifications to delete some of the parking spaces or come up with some other type of provision. Mr. Arroyo stated a furniture store is a low traffic generator, he anticipated generally less than 5 peak hour trips during the morning and less than 10 during the evening rush hour. He recommended approval subject to the driveway spacing waiver and the consideration of the truck access issue.

Victoria Weber, Engineering Consultant stated the applicant is proposing a 5' sidewalk along Grand River Avenue frontage. Extension of sanitary sewer and water service will be provided, storm water will be collected in an on site detention basin and will be discharged at a restricted rate to the rouge river. The basin will have permanent water quality controls and temporary sedimentation controls. The building and parking area is proposed on a 100 year flood plane. The building elevation will be ˝' above the 100 year flood plane elevation, the applicant is required to apply for a local flood plane permit which includes obtaining an MDEQ flood plane permit or letter of no jurisdiction and a map revision of proposed fill to the flood plane. Ms. Weber stated the applicant will need an Oakland County Drain Permit as they are doing work within the Oakland County Drain easement which is a river. She recommended approval.

Chairperson Weddington announced she has received a letter from Michael W. Evans which states that the above plan has been reviewed and approval is recommended with the following items being corrected on the next plan submittal; 1) provide adequate access to the north side of the building within 25' for fire apparatus access; 2) provide separate domestic and fire suppression water mains. The fire line shall be controlled with a post indicator valve or a valve in a well; 3) move the Fire Department connection to be within 100' of a hydrant.

Doug Necci of JCK stated the project was in full compliance with the Facade Chart.

Chairperson Weddington turned the matter over to the Commission for Discussion.

Member Hoadley expressed concern with the land banking and parking. He recommended that the bays be changed to be added at the rear of the building and use the turn radius so the trucks would not have to cross over the parking spaces.

Chairperson Weddington apologized that she overlooked the fact that it was a Public Hearing and asked if anyone would like to address the Public Hearing? Seeing none she closed the Public Hearing.

Khanh Pham, Staff Planner announced there was a Woodlands letter from Dave Wickens regarding Administrative Wetlands approval which was passed out at the table before the meeting.

Ms. Lemke stated there were 0.5 acres of woodlands on the site which are at the northern end. There are woodlands along the river further to the west, however, they are off of the site. Ms. Lemke stated a lot of disturbance has occurred in the woodlands over the year and they are filled with fill and debris from previous disturbance. The quality of the woodlands is low due to the species and the amount of prior disruption. Primary species are Elm, the major benefit is some buffering to the Middle Rouge River but the potential and high quality is the woodlands to the west off of the site. There is limited wildlife habitat value, the area is not on the Wildlife Habitat Map, the diversity of species and health of the trees and under story is low overall. The portion of the woodlands on the site is being preserved and will occur until the land banked parking is constructed. There are a number of missing items and she stated because of the fact that the quality of the site is low, the impact into the woodlands is low and she knows the items can and will be addressed at the time of Final, she only required 12 replacement trees and recommended approval for the Woodlands Permit. She outlined the four conditions; 1) payment of replacement and fence maintenance financial guarantee and woodlands inspection fees; 2) the remaining regulated woodlands be placed into a preservation easement; 3) no construction, including clearing or grubbing can begin until the protective fence has been approved by the City and an environmental pre-construction meeting is held, and furnishing the items in her letter at the time of Final Woodlands Engineering.

Dave Wickens, Wetland Specialist stated the applicant proposes a single storm water outfall to the Walled Lake branch of the Middle Rouge River, the activity will require a Non-Residential Minor Use Permit. He expected to approve the plan Administratively under future revisions to the plan involving some Best Management Practices at the storm water outfall.

Member Hoadley recommended bringing the delivery trucks in from behind because if the use were to change down the road, the current plan might make it impossible to change the use.

Mr. Farley stated rear loading would be almost impossible based on the distance to the property line, he stated there was no way to get a semi back into that position. He stated the parking in the rear is primarily for the employees who could properly adjust their cars as needed. The amount of parking provided is 18 more than required, it was convenient to lay out the parking. He stated they could be striped off as not to be used or add a few more spaces to the side to make up for spaces that are striped off.

Member Hoadley recommended allowing no parking where the trucks would swing in for deliveries and have employees park in the rear.

Mr. Farley stated it could be done.

PM-98-06-124 TO GRANT PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ALL OF THE CONSULTANTS CONDITIONS AS STATED IN THE REPORTS, INCLUDING THE LAND BANKING FOR PARKING AND THE WAIVER OF THE DRIVEWAY SPACING STANDARD AND ALSO TO GRANT WOODLAND PERMIT APPROVAL TO BABY AND KIDS, SP98-11A

Moved by Canup, seconded by Capello, CARRIED (6-1): To grant Preliminary Site Plan approval subject to all of the Consultants conditions as stated in the reports, including the land banking for parking and the waiver of the driveway spacing standard and also to grant Woodland Permit approval to Baby and Kids, SP98-11A.

DISCUSSION

In regard to the notation on the plan at rim elevation 90880, where it reads, "bulk head for future connection" Member Bononi asked why it was there?

Mr. Farley answered it was a request by the City engineers.

Ms. Weber explained that it was there in case parking area A were to be put in the future, it would pick up any drainage from there.

Member Bononi asked what would be the flood water elevation in the parking spaces during a 100 year storm event?

Mr. Farley believed the flood plane elevation to be 909 which entails approximately 2/3 of the parking, he stated the depth would vary from 0' to less than 2'. He stated in a flood condition, no one would be shopping at the store and Grand River would be completely overcome by water so it was not an issue for the client or the City engineers.

Member Bononi thought it was important to note because it was development in a 100 year flood hazard zone and they were removing quite a bit of earth in order to make the site level enough for the use as a parking area with no compensatory cuts and fills. She said every time an application such as this one comes forward, the City sacrifices water storage which is increasingly important because Novi is a Rouge River Community. She thought the applicant had reasonable and prudent alternatives to make the building smaller, she did not think they needed more parking spaces. From the standpoint of water quality issues that are involved, she asked if the proposal of increased parking spaces proposed by Member Hoadley would affect the woodlands in any way?

Ms. Lemke believed they would be put into the area that is already slated for the land banked parking, therefore it would not have any affect.

Member Bononi stated she would not be supporting the application. However, if the building were smaller and the parking area were cut back, she would. The other concern was in regard to the Engineering letter with regard to the requirements of a map amendment and obtaining an MDEQ Permit, she respectfully asked the Commission to ask them to be conditions of approval because as a member of the Woodlands Board, she has seen many applications that have been required to obtain map amendments that in fact do not.

Mr. Farley stated the map amendment being a condition was no problem at all because it was his intent to do so. In regard to the cutting and filling, he stated it was nearly a balanced cut and fill operation. He stated almost the entire site was being left at existing grade, they were cutting the retention pond in front and filling where the building was to be located. He stated they were not reducing or adding to the flood plane, they were just reconfiguring it.

Member Bononi realized Mr. Farley’s point, she stated she did not think it was good planning practice to approve parking lots that have the propensity to have 2' of water in them during a flood event.

Member Capello asked for clarification of the building elevation and comment #3 regarding the flood plane.

Ms. Weber clarified in the area where the building is to be located, the applicant will have to fill to elevate the building to above the 100 year flood plane elevation which is set at 909. She stated she would need a letter of map revision not a letter of map amendment.

Member Hoadley clarified his comments and asked Member Canup that his comments would be incorporated into the motion. He was not suggesting that the land banking be increased or decreased, he did not disagree with Member Bononi, he only thought it should be relocated so that parking would not occur where the trucks would be driving in and out.

Member Capello asked if "employee only" parking signs could be put in the back?

Chairperson Weddington asked in the event that Grand River was widened, was there adequate existing setback space?

Mr. Arroyo answered, yes, particularly if it is a 5 lane configuration. He could not give an exact answer, but he thought a boulevard would not be reasonable in that location because of the number of buildings located so close to Grand River.

Chairperson Weddington suggested incorporating Member Bononi’s suggestion that the DEQ Permits be made a condition of approval.

Ms. Weber stated that was included in her letter.

VOTE ON PM-98-06-124 CARRIED

Yes: Canup, Capello, Churella, Csordas, Hoadley, Weddington

No: Bononi

MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION

1. SIGN ORDINANCE

Reviewed of tabled item from the June 08, 1998 meeting. Amendments to Section 28-1 and Section 28-6 are recommendations to City Council.

Paul Weisberger, Assistant City Attorney stated the Ordinance originated at the Town Center Steering Committee and was an attempt to provide certain placement area and height requirements for signs in the TC-1 District. The intent was based upon the limited setbacks in the TC-1 District and the goal of having a downtown look. As a part of achieving it, a Design Review Committee has been created and a Design Review Manual. The Manual has criteria by which certain signs in the TC-1 District would have to follow. Additionally, the major changes would be pedestrian level projected signs allowed for businesses in the TC-1 District. There would be a provision allowing for upper level projecting signs at a 240' spacing. A rear wall sign would be allowed for those businesses that have both a front and rear entrance.

Member Hoadley stated dozens of meetings have been held to work on the Ordinance. He thought it met the goals of all of the members and their various ideas. He commended Member Capello as he had a lot of input in writing the Ordinance. He recommended that the Commission approve it.

PM-98-06-125 TO SEND A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL TO AMEND SECTION 28-1 AND SECTION 28-6 OF THE EXISTING SIGN ORDINANCE WITH TWO MINOR ADDITIONS WHICH INCLUDE STRIKING POLES AND BRACES FROM THE GROUND MONUMENT SIGN AND TO ADD A NEW SECTION J FOR THE ADDITION OF RESIDENTIAL ENTRANCEWAY IDENTIFICATION SIGNS

Moved by Hoadley, seconded by Churella, CARRIED (4-3): To send a positive recommendation to City Council for their approval of the Novi Sign Ordinance Amendment to Sections 28-1 and 28-6 with two minor additions which include striking poles and braces from the ground monument sign and to add a new Section J for the addition of residential entranceway identification signs.

DISCUSSION

Member Capello stated that Mr. Weisberger worked very hard with the Committee to try and redraft the language. He stated the sizes of the signs came from the Town Center Steering Committee, even though he worked with Mr. Weisberger on the language of the Ordinance, he did not agree with all of the sizes that are permitted. In particular, he expressed concern with the kiosk sign in regard to the square footage and height. He also commented on the allowance for more than one sign for a subdivision entranceway, he thought only for residential subdivisions the allowance for a second sign at the entranceway be permitted because some entrance ways are such that the sign can only be read from one direction.

Member Hoadley commented on the kiosk sign. He was not unhappy with 65 square feet because it could be a four sided sign. He stated the language could be changed to say no advertising, it would be strictly for listing the businesses as a directory.

Member Canup did not see anything wrong with the Sign Ordinance as it was. He thought it was good and thought anytime anyone had a problem with what it says, they have access to the ZBA to seek relief. He saw the Amendment as custom designing an Ordinance to meet the needs or wants for the few business people in the City and he could not support it.

Jim Wahl, Director of Planning & Community Development gave some background as to why the Ordinance was appearing before the Commission. He stated last fall, the Department had done some work with the Main Street developers regarding their sign applications. He became aware that there had been application to the Building Department and they said it did not fit the Sign Ordinance, therefore, the applicant should seek relief from the ZBA. Mr. Chen then appeared before City Council and plead his case that he was not getting cooperation and he requested Council to provide direction to Administration with the issue. Mr. Wahl stated he was then directed by Council to take on the assignment and look at that particular part of the City and provide at a minimum, some recommendations to the ZBA, otherwise they were going to "be faced with 90 sign variance requests". He stated they proceeded to put together a draft series of recommendations that the ZBA used in November and December to deal with Building 100. He stated the Ad-Hoc Committee felt that it was worthy to incorporate some of the design themes into a specialized amendment for the TC-1 Main Street District of the City. One cornerstone through the review was to maintain the integrity of the existing Sign Ordinance. Mr. Wahl stated the final product is a compromise of different views.

In regard to 90 signs, Member Canup stated there were several cases where blanket variances were granted to bigger centers. He did not see why it could not be done in this case.

Member Hoadley stated one thing that is brought into play is a Sign Review Committee which is not in the current Ordinance. He stated the City was trying to create an effect of an early neo-traditional Main Street and thought the Ordinance was attempting this. He stated the ZBA would not be able to architecturally design a sign that comes before it for a variance. Member Hoadley thought the Ordinance was well thought out and stated he would be in support of it.

Chairperson Weddington expressed concern regarding the sizes of some of the signs as well as the number of signs that she feared may proliferate. She stated the elimination of structure from the definition may cause different types of signs to be placed not on buildings, therefore, she could not support the motion. She thought the current Sign Ordinance served the City well.

Member Capello agreed with Chairperson Weddington. He stated he met with Doug Necci for an architectural view of the signs and Mr. Necci convinced him that the projective signs and sizes would not turn it into sign blight. He commented on ground pole signs and stated he was tired of seeing them and tried to get the Town Center Steering Committee to change them to ground monument signs on the foundation not to include poles or braces. He asked to amend the section which allows for more than one sign, to allow for two entranceway signs for residential subdivisions and condominium projects only.

Member Csordas asked Mr. Necci if he was familiar with the two temporary signs hanging on 5th Avenue Billiards?

Mr. Necci answered, yes.

Khanh Pham, Staff Planner added that the applicant was at the ZBA meeting last month asking for three signs, two (2) wall signs larger than approved in the Sign Ordinance and a projection sign. They were asked by the ZBA to put up mock ups to see how it looked. The ZBA was not comfortable with the projection signs and asked that the projection sign be put onto the building.

Member Csordas asked if the temporary sign replica was larger than the scale according to the Ordinance?

Mr. Pham answered, yes, it is larger.

Member Csordas did not think the slightly larger sign than allowed by Ordinance was obtrusive, he thought it fit that particular project. He stated he would be in support of the motion.

Yes: Capello, Churella, Csordas, Hoadley

No: Canup, Weddington, Bononi

2. SPECIMEN TREE NOMINATION

Nomination of 43.9" d.b.h. Oak tree at 21740 Meridian Lane for designation as a Specimen Tree.

Linda Lemke, Landscape Architect stated the owner of the property is nominating the tree. She asked for direction from the Planning Commission to continue with the plaque and certification program for the specimen trees. Ms. Lemke stated the tree was probably a bur oak but it could be a cross between a red and a bur oak, she needed the opinion of an expert and would be asking Dr. Herbert Wagner to make the final decision.

Member Csordas asked if there were any financial reasons to make such a request?

Ms. Lemke answered, not that she was aware of.

PM-98-06-126 TO NOMINATE THE OAK TREE AT 21740 MERIDIAN LANE AS A SPECIMEN TREE AND TO DIRECT THE WOODLAND CONSULTANT TO PRESENT THE OWNER WITH AN APPROPRIATE DESIGNATION

Moved by Canup, seconded by Capello, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To nominate the oak tree at 21740 Meridian Lane as a specimen tree and to direct the Woodland Consultant to present the owner with an appropriate designation.

Khanh Pham, Staff Planner asked what account does the Commission wish to charge the plaque to?

Chairperson Weddington answered the Commission still has some money in its’ budget if it is done this fiscal year.

VOTE ON PM-98-06-126 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Yes: Capello, Churella, Csordas, Hoadley, Weddington, Bononi, Canup

No: None

MATTERS FOR DISCUSSION

1. CLARIFICATION OF MAY 06, 1998 TC-1 TEXT AMENDMENT RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL

Paul Weisberger, Assistant City Attorney stated the language that was found within the Zoning Amendment was incorporated into the Sign Ordinance. He recommended that the Commission set a Public Hearing once he has drafted the language to clarify and codify it.

PM-98-06-127 TO SCHEDULE FOR PUBLIC HEARING TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE DELETING THE REDUNDANT LANGUAGE THAT IS NOW FOUND IN THE SIGN ORDINANCE, TO BE SCHEDULED ONCE THE LANGUAGE IS DRAFTED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY

Moved by Csordas, seconded by Capello, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To schedule for Public Hearing Text Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance deleting the redundant language that is now found in the Sign Ordinance, to be scheduled once the language is drafted by the City Attorney.

VOTE ON PM-98-06-127 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Yes: Churella, Csordas, Hoadley, Weddington, Bononi, Canup, Capello

No: None

2. CLARIFICATION OF MAY 20, 1998 ETHAN ALLEN SP98-06A MOTION

Paul Weisberger, Assistant City Attorney stated in this case, a PD Option was involved which meant that after comment from the Planning Commission, the site plan was to go to Council and stay at Council per the Ordinance. The motion contained within the minutes show that the Planning Commission gave positive recommendation subject to Consultants comments and that Final be brought back before Planning Commission. At the last Council meeting, Council elected despite that, to approve the Preliminary Site Plan and not send it back to Planning Commission. For future reference, he stated the Commission could respectfully request that Council send it back for input, but it is not required by Ordinance. He stated when the minutes are distributed it could be discussed and then the language of the motion could be changed if it was the true intent of the Planning Commission.

Khanh Pham, Staff Planner suggested waiting until the minutes are distributed so the Commission can have them in hand to make the changes and approve them at that time.

3. PERSONAL COMMENTS BY MEMBER BONONI

Member Bononi stated it was her last night to serve on the Planning Commission and it has been a learning experience for her. She stated it was a pleasure to work with all of the Commissioners. The greatest successes that she experienced was the approval of the OST Ordinance and the Cellular Tower Ordinance. Also, the update of the Wetlands and Woodlands Maps. There were also some disappointments, the ever increasing stream of designer Ordinances and rezonings that seem to benefit single applicants. She stated the Ordinances were supposed to encourage good planning, not specific projects. She thanked the Mayor, Chairperson Weddington and the Commission.

4. PERSONAL COMMENTS BY MEMBER HOADLEY

Member Hoadley shared some of the sentiments of Member Bononi. He thanked the Mayor and stated he has had a very enjoyable four years. He also thanked the Consultants and Mr. Wahl. He hoped to continue to serve the City, he thought it was important for the City to maintain proper traffic management as there are some severe traffic problems today. Member Hoadley stated he appreciated the opportunity to work with and for the City.

5. VISIBILITY

Member Capello stated he had the opportunity to sit in on another City’s meeting of the Council and noted that they had the same problem of the visibility of maps. As a solution, he explained they had a camera from the back, on the map and two large television sets in each corner so the audience could listen and see the maps.

Khanh Pham, Staff Planner explained that Lou Martin, Public Information Director has an extensive budget for 1998-99 which includes video cameras and enhancement for City Council and Planning Commission projection. He explained that there will be a better projection camera so when the camera hits the target, it can be easily seen without dimming the lights and there will also be a better visual from the back. He believed two additional cameras were to be added.

Member Churella thought the idea of a 36" television for the audience to see was an excellent idea.

Rod Arroyo stated he spoke to Mr. Martin about an overhead camera that could project a map or a graphic.

Mr. Pham stated there would also be the addition of a computer monitor that would allow for presentations or Planning Commissioners to access minutes and records at a request, rather than sending staff upstairs to go through a file cabinet.

SPECIAL REPORTS

1. DEMOGRAPHIC STUDY AND PROJECTION

Presentation by Brandon Rogers, Planning Consultant

Brandon Rogers, Planning Consultant reviewed his report in regard to population, school data, building permits, dwelling units, and other background information. He explained that it was another segment of the Master Plan for Land Use document.

Chairperson Weddington stated the Commission would incorporate it as one of the building blocks in the Master Plan.

2. SCHEDULING

Chairperson Weddington announced at the meeting of July 08, 1998, the new Commissioners would be in attendance and asked if they could arrive at 7:00 p.m. so the Commission could meet them prior to the meeting?

Khanh Pham, Staff Planner answered, yes.

Chairperson Weddington announced that notices for the Wetlands and Woodlands Public Hearing being held on August 05, 1998 will be sent out with the tax bills.

Mr. Pham stated because of two very controversial rezonings coming down the line, would the Commission consider meeting at 6:30-7:00 p.m. to discuss one or two of the projects and then at 7:30 have the Wetlands and Woodlands Public Hearing?

Chairperson Weddington suggested waiting to see how the other projects come along. She suggested the possibility of having a Special Meeting.

AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION

None

PM-98-06-128 TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT 9:45 P.M.

Moved by Capello, seconded by Hoadley, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To adjourn the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission at 9:45 p.m.

VOTE ON PM-98-06-128 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Yes: Bononi, Canup, Capello, Churella, Csordas, Hoadley, Weddington

No: None

_____________________________________

Khanh Pham - Staff Planner

Transcribed by: Diane H. Vimr

July 06, 1998

Date Approved: July 15, 1998