Meeting called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairperson Weddington

PRESENT: Members Canup, Capello, Churella, Csordas, Koneda, Mutch, and Chairperson Weddington

ABSENT/EXCUSED: Members Piccinini and Watza

ALSO PRESENT: Planning/Traffic Consultant Rod Arroyo, Engineering Victoria Weber, Assistant City Attorney Paul Weisberger, Landscape Architect Linda Lemke, Environmental Specialist Debbie Thor, Senior Environmental Specialist Aimee Kay, Director of Planning & Community Development Jim Wahl, and Staff Planner Khanh Pham

Chairperson Weddington asked if there were any additions or changes to the Agenda? Seeing

none she entertained a motion to approve the agenda.

Moved by Csordas, seconded by Koneda, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve the Agenda as presented.

Yes: Canup, Capello, Churella, Csordas, Koneda, Mutch, Weddington

No: None

None

None

Chairperson Weddington announced there was one item on the Consent Agenda, the approval of the minutes of the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of April 07, 1999. She asked if there were any corrections to the minutes. Seeing none she entertained a motion to approve the Consent Agenda

Moved by Mutch, seconded by Csordas, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve the Consent Agenda consisting of the minutes of the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of April 07, 1999.

Yes: Canup, Capello, Churella, Csordas, Koneda, Mutch, Weddington

No: None

None

1. IKON SP98-64A

 

Project is located in Section 13, north of Eleven Mile, east of Meadowbrook Road and south of I-96. The 8.87 acre-site is zoned Light Industrial (I-1). Applicant is seeking Preliminary Site Plan and Wetlands Permit approvals.

 

Randy DeBoer, President of IKON Michigan Operations gave a brief summary about IKON.

 

Chris McQuail of Arcus Design Group introduced Tom Sovel, Engineer with Spalding DeDecker Associates and Jack Morris, Landscape Architect with Johnson Hill. Mr. McQuail gave a quick overview of the site plan. He stated the property is bounded by I-96 on the north, Eleven Mile Road on the south, there is an on-ramp for I-96 on the eastern part of the site. The site is currently accessed on the western part of the site through an existing commercial development as well as Bridge Street. The eastern part of the site is currently covered with woodlands and wetland areas. Access is off of Bridge Street and an entrance drive off of Eleven Mile Road. The building is a three story office building totaling about 63,000 square feet.

 

In regard to storm water management for the site, it is being consolidated and a new basin is to be created in the corner of the site.

 

In regard to the building design, the base is proposed to be two toned brick with some accent banding. The upper portions of the building are proposed to be of panelized EIFS. The applicant is proposing to use a greenish tinted glass with a colored framing system. The masonry base starts at the building entrance, which is on the western side of the building, and wraps around to the end of the building. Mr. McQuail requested a Section 4 Waiver for the facade materials. He stated currently proposed is a roof screen, it shown to be possible of EIFS and a metal panel system. He clarified that he would like the roof screen to be a metal panel system.

 

Rod Arroyo, Planning and Traffic Consultant did not recommend approval of the site plan due to the need for several variances. In the event that the variances are received from the ZBA, he would then be in a position to recommend approval. The applicant is seeking a variance on 1) the maximum building height; 2) the minimum requirement of loading spaces; 3) front yard parking; 4) landscape treatment along Eleven Mile Road regarding the berm requirement.

 

In regard to traffic, Mr. Arroyo stated he was pleased with the revisions and stated his previous comments have been addressed. He stated a positive site related design component is the connection of Bridge Street down to Eleven Mile Road to provide for a connection to serve the project and other development that currently exists along Bridge Street. He felt it was a positive asset that would enable the project site circulation. The applicant is making some minor modifications to the center left turn lane on Meadowbrook Road, to extend it by 75’ to account for the additional demand caused by the development. He stated there were some minor comments regarding circulation that could be addressed at the Final. Mr. Arroyo recommended approval from a traffic perspective, subject to the items in his letter being resolved and also receiving a ZBA variance on the loading bay.

 

Victoria Weber, Engineering Consultant stated utilities exist on the site. The applicant proposes to extend the watermain. Storm water will be detained in the detention basin, currently there are two basins on the site. In regard to the sidewalk, there is insufficient R.O.W. on the western portion of the site, Ms. Weber requested that an easement be provided for the sidewalk and that it be installed. There are considerable wetlands along the eastern portion of the site, however, there is sufficient R.O.W. for placement of the sidewalk. Ms. Weber requested that the sidewalk be placed there and stated there will be some impacts to the wetlands. The applicant has indicated that they do not wish to place the sidewalk along the Eleven Mile Road frontage, but she still requested it. Any easements that show existing utilities to be removed or vacated will need to be vacated and shown on the Final plans. It appears that there is a potential for the proposed detention basin to dewater existing ground water, Ms. Weber requested that soil borings be provided at the time of Final for that determination. In regard to the watermain, Ms. Weber requested that it be extended along the Twelve Mile Road frontage. In regard to the drive that is proposed between Bridge Street and Eleven Mile Road, since it is a private access, an ingress/egress easement is required. Ms. Weber stated most of the items could be addressed at the time of Final and she recommended approval.

 

Linda Lemke, Landscape Architect recommended approval of the Conceptual Landscape Plan. In regard to the northern parking setback, the applicant is providing extensive plantings in the area of the reduction. Ms. Lemke supported the variance. The applicant is asking for elimination of the berm along the R.O.W. along Eleven Mile Road. Ms. Lemke stated that was an area that contained regulated woodlands trees, therefore, the removal or reduction of the berm would be beneficial and she supported the variance. She stated the wetlands and woodlands were interchangeable on the site and the applicant has minimal impact, they are only removing one tree, therefore, she recommended it.

 

Aimee Kay, Senior Environmental Specialist recommended approval. She reported there were three regulated and three non-regulated wetlands on the site. The primary impacts were to wetland #3 which is the northern most section of the site. West of the proposed sedimentation basin, there is to be a permanent access driveway across the northern wetland. It is an already disturbed area of wetland and it is also through the most narrow section. The modification for the MDEQ Permit was minor because the applicant changed their State Permit with regard to some of the State’s comments. Ms. Kay recommended approval.

 

Doug Necci of JCK recommended a Section 9 Waiver. He stated the building primarily consists of brick and EIFS. He stated there was a small overage of scored CMU which is used as an accent band and is fairly insignificant. Mr. Necci recommended the waiver because he thought it was a nicely designed building, he stated the use of EIFS was consistent with the general proportions of the building. He set two conditions for the favorable recommendation: 1) submittal of a sample board which shows selection of material and colors; and 2) regarding a footnote in the Ordinance that requires that the EIFS areas be delineated with a joint pattern to simulate stonework. He stated this could be a condition of the Commission’s approval. With his comments, Mr. Necci recommended a Section 9 Waiver.

 

Chairperson Weddington announced she has received a letter from Michael W. Evans, Fire Marshal for the City of Novi Fire Department which states that the above plan has been reviewed and approval is not recommended due to the following deficiencies; 1) At least 50% of the building perimeter shall be accessible within 25’ for fire apparatus; 2) The applicant shall show the fire protection watermain into the building. The watermain shall be controlled by either a post indicator valve at least 40’ from the building or a valve in a well; 3) The Fire Department connection shall be shown. The Fire Department connection shall be located on the front address side of the building within 100’ of a hydrant; 4) All weather access roads capable of supporting 25 tons are to be provided for fire apparatus prior to construction above the foundation; 5) All watermains and fire hydrants are to be installed and be in service prior to construction above the foundation; 6) The building address is to be posted facing the street throughout construction. The address is to be at least 3" high on a contrasting background.

 

Chairperson Weddington announced it was a Public Hearing and opened the Matter to the Public.

 

Chairperson Weddington asked the applicant to address the comments of the Fire Department.

 

Mr. McQuail stated he has had extensive conversations with the Fire Marshal and his submission has been revised to reflect all of the issues.

 

In regard to the EIFS and the panel delineation, Mr. McQuail asked the Commission to consider waiving the requirement for the score joints. He believed the requirement called for the joint pattern to be 4’ on center, he thought this would take away from the design intent of the building and would be overpowering with the panel that was being created. He had some options and asked the Commission to consider them.

 

Seeing no one she closed the Public Hearing and turned the Matter over to the Commission for Discussion.

 

DISCUSSION

 

Member Csordas asked the applicant to comment on item #1 of the Fire Marshal’s letter.

 

Mr. McQuail stated the site plan had been revised to reflect those changes. He stated the north end of the building has a service access and a fire lane has been created that extends beyond the service access and is driveable. The building has also been pulled up to be within 25’ on both the west and north sides of the building. He also indicated that all of the lines that were asked to be delineated on the plan were now shown.

 

In regard to the property along Eleven Mile Road to the west of the site, Member Mutch asked the applicant if he owned it?

 

Mr. DeBoer answered, yes, the applicant does own that piece of property and it is part of the current site.

 

Member Mutch asked if it was intended to be developed?

 

Mr. DeBoer stated it has been set aside for potential future development as a two acre parcel.

 

Member Mutch asked what the nature of the wetland was?

 

Mr. DeBor believed it was deemed to be a fairly insignificant wetland and stated it was being filled as part of the overall site approval process.

 

Ms. Kay clarified that those wetlands were a part of the overall site plan even though they are off the property. She stated they were three non-regulated wetlands.

 

In regard to the remainder of the site which is not to be developed, Member Mutch asked if the applicant intended to clean up the area?

 

Mr. DeBoer stated the demolition plan reflects taking down the existing structures and cleaning up the entire area.

In regard to the parking setback along I-96, Member Mutch asked why there was a need for the variance at this location?

 

Mr. DeBoer explained that part of the need for the variance is for the parking requirement. Also the need to create the two acre parcel and the fact that the wetlands and woodlands are occupying half of the site.

 

In regard to the landscape treatment along Eleven Mile Road, Member Mutch asked if the applicant would be providing any landscaping that they otherwise would provide if there was a berm in that area?

 

Ms. Lemke stated the applicant was providing additional shrubs in that area but basically they are leaving the woodland areas and trees in tact.

 

Member Mutch asked if there would be any benefit to the applicant providing the landscaping that would normally be provided?

 

Ms. Lemke thought the benefit was that the applicant was preserving the existing woodlands and trees whereas if they were to put in the berm, they would not be.

 

In regard to the parking requirement, Member Mutch asked if it were an office zoning, would the parking requirements be different?

 

Mr. Arroyo answered, no. He explained that the parking requirement was based on the use.

 

Member Capello asked who owns the property?

 

Mr. DeBoer answered, IKON has purchased the property.

 

Member Capello understood that there was some litigation on the property in regard to the garbage on the property. He asked the applicant if IKON was aware of that litigation?

 

Mr. DeBoer answered he was not aware of any litigation relative to that issue. He stated the previous owner had a certain date that they were to have the property cleaned up by, however, he was not aware of the date.

 

Member Capello believed the date to be in about ten (10) days. He asked the applicant if IKON was going to honor the court order within the next ten days?

 

Mr. DeBoer answered, it was certainly the intent of IKON. He stated they did not want to see it remain a junk yard, however, he could not answer the question and deferred to someone from IKON.

 

Member Capello asked if the Commission could make approval of the Site Plan subject to the applicant complying with the current court order that affects the property.

 

Paul Weisberger, Assistant City Attorney pointed out that IKON is not a party to the current court order, it was with the previous owner. He suggested that the Commission make approval of the site plan that the site comply with all Ordinances including that they not maintain a junk yard.

 

Member Capello asked Mr. Necci if he had any comments regarding the applicant’s request to waive the scoring?

 

Mr. Necci did not think it was a significant issue. He stated there were some visible joints that simulate the continuation of the vertical elements. Together with the metal roof screen, he did not feel it was an important item. He stated he was satisfied with the colored rendering.

 

Member Canup felt it was an asset to the City and felt the applicant had demonstrated their willingness to work with the City by coming to the table with the modifications that have been requested.

 

PM-99-04-156 TO GRANT PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPROVAL TO IKON SP98-64A SUBJECT TO ALL OF THE CONSULTANTS CONDITIONS, THE ISSUANCE OF A WOODLANDS PERMIT AT THE NEXT MEETING, COMPLIANCE WITH ALL CITY ORDINANCES INCLUDING CLEAN UP OF THE SITE, THE ZBA GRANTING VARIANCES FOR HEIGHT, LOADING DOCK AND FRONT YARD PARKING SETBACK AND TO APPROVE OF A SECTION 9 FACADE WAIVER

 

Moved by Canup, seconded by Churella.

 

DISCUSSION

 

Member Koneda clarified that he two conditions of Mr. Necci regarding the Section 9 Waiver were no longer part of the Consultants requirements.

 

Member Koneda also clarified that the site plan was the approval of the Commission, however, it requires a variance from the City Council for the sidewalk. Therefore, the plan will not go before the City Council, just the variance request.

 

Member Canup amended his motion to include the Wetlands Permit.

 

PM-99-04-157 TO GRANT PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND WETLAND PERMIT APPROVAL TO IKON SP98-64A SUBJECT TO ALL OF THE CONSULTANTS CONDITIONS, THE ISSUANCE OF A WOODLANDS PERMIT AT THE NEXT MEETING, COMPLIANCE WITH ALL CITY ORDINANCES INCLUDING CLEAN UP OF THE SITE, THE ZBA GRANTING VARIANCES FOR HEIGHT, LOADING DOCK AND FRONT YARD PARKING SETBACK AND TO APPROVE OF A SECTION 9 FACADE WAIVER

 

Moved by Canup, seconded by Churella, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To grant Preliminary Site Plan approval and Wetland Permit approval to IKON SP98-64A subject to all of the Consultants conditions, the issuance of a Woodlands Permit at the next meeting, compliance with all City Ordinances including clean up of the site, the ZBA granting variances for height, loading dock and front yard parking setback and to approve of a Section 9 Facade Waiver.

 

DISCUSSION

 

Regarding the loading door on the north side of the building, Member Mutch asked if it was permitted by the Ordinance?

 

Mr. Arroyo answered, yes, however, it must be screened.

 

Member Mutch asked Ms. Lemke if she felt it was properly screened from the freeway?

 

Ms. Lemke answered, yes. She stated she worked with the applicant on the issue. It has been dropped down, and there are heavy plantings on the berm, she did not believe it would be visible from the freeway.

 

Member Mutch asked the applicant if IKON was intending to develop the remainder of the parcel for their own use or would it be sold and developed by some other user?

 

Mr. DeBoer thought it had the potential to go either way. Currently, it is being held in reserve for IKON’s future interest.

 

Member Mutch stated if IKON intends to retain the property for their own use, he did not see why the parking requirements could not be met on that parcel. He did not think there was a valid reason for not providing the setback along the freeway. He felt that the applicant could meet the parking requirements and still meet the standards of the Ordinance.

 

VOTE ON PM-99-04-157 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Yes: Canup, Capello, Churella, Csordas, Koneda, Mutch, Weddington

No: None

 

2. CUMMINS MICHIGAN, INC., SP99-02A

Project is located in Section 23, north of Ten Mile Road, east of Novi Road, and south of the CSX Railroad. The 4.31 acre-site is zoned General Industrial (I-2). Applicant is seeking Preliminary Site Plan and Woodlands Permit approvals.

Don Jones, Vice President of Cummins Michigan, Inc. gave some background information regarding the company. He introduced Mike Baker of Schonsheck, designers and engineers for the project.

Mike Baker stated Cummins currently has a diesel repair facility on the site, they have been on the site since 1992. The current facility is about 8,000 square feet, he proposed to add about 20,000 square feet north of the existing building. The facility consists of an office service area and a parts desk in the front of the building and a ten bay repair facility. The north side of the building has a drive-thru service write-up bay. The site is accessed along Novi Road. Truck and trailer storage is proposed in the back for vehicles that are awaiting service or have been repaired and re awaiting pickup. The middle branch of the Rouge River runs along the north and east edges of the site. The existing building is a painted concrete block structure, he proposed to skin the entire surface of the existing building with brick which would be an exact match for the proposed brick on the new additions. The service facility would be faced in a metal panel material. That portion of the facade would not be visible from Novi Road, therefore, he requested a Section 9 Waiver to allow the concrete block in the rear of the building.

Rod Arroyo, Planning and Traffic Consultant recommended approval of the Preliminary Site Plan subject to a minor revision regarding parking calculations. He stated the existing structure does not meet the setback requirements, however, the new construction does meet all of the Ordinance requirements.

In regard to traffic, Mr. Arroyo stated there were two points of access proposed. The primary access is the existing access off of Novi Road. He stated there was currently a gravel drive along the south side of the property which the applicant proposes to pave. It will be appropriately signed for emergency vehicles only. Mr. Arroyo stated he would like to see some minor modifications made to the signage. The applicant proposes to construct a passing lane on Novi Road along with appropriate deceleration tapers, a City and County Driveway Permit will be required. In summary, Mr. Arroyo recommended approval of the Preliminary Site Plan.

Victoria Weber, Engineering Consultant stated there is currently water and sanitary service on the site. The applicant proposes to tie in a new service lead to the existing 36" sanitary sewer located toward the rear of the property. The site borders on the Walled Lake branch of the Middle Rouge River which is located on the back of the site. The overall topography of the site tends to slope to the southeast. The applicant proposes a sedimentation basin which will contain permanent water quality controls. She pointed out that there is a flood plane on the property, although there are no proposed impacts to the flood plane. Applicant proposes to pave the existing gravel driveway and parking areas and expand them. Ms. Weber stated the 5’ sidewalk proposed along Novi Road needs to be shifted back to the future R.O.W. as shown on the plans. She requested that the proposed watermain for a hydrant extension be located away from the curb influence at least a minimum of 10’ and this could be addressed at the time of Final. The applicant will need to obtain a permit from Oakland County for tapping into the 36" sanitary sewer. With these comments, Ms. Weber recommended approval.

Aimee Kay, Senior Environmental Specialist recommended approval. The applicant is proposing a single storm water outfall to the Middle Rouge River. There is a large permanent buffer disturbance of 5,960 square feet, for construction of a sidewalk, berm, existing dirt parking to be improved and some temporary disturbance for the installation of a storm sewer. There were a number of other comments relative to the Administrative permit, with these conditions, Ms. Kay recommended approval.

Linda Lemke, Landscape Architect recommended approval of the Conceptual Landscape Plan and also the Woodland Plan. She stated the site has been destructed and eroded over the years by the industrial uses in the area. The applicant has condensed as much as possible to pull everything back as far as possible. They have added additional plant materials. Screening has been added around the detention basin as well as along the southern property line. In regard to the woodlands impact, they need to replace six trees. They are taking out a few trees along the edge at the top of the bank. Ms. Lemke recommended approval.

Doug Necci of JCK recommended a Section 9 Waiver primarily for the use of split faced CMU on the rear portion of the building. He stated the overhead door bays are located toward the rear which the split faced block is proposed. Both walls are screened by front portions of the building from view of Novi Road, therefore, they are regarded as secondary facades and for this reason he was favorable of a waiver for the split faced block on these walls and recommended approval of a Section 9 Waiver.

Chairperson Weddington announced she has received a letter from Michael W. Evans, Fire Marshal for the City of Novi Fire Department 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) The 8" fire protection water main on the north side of the building shall be eliminated and 2) The proposed post indicator valve shall be moved so it is at least 40’ from the building or changed to a valve in a well.

Chairperson Weddington announced it was a Public Hearing and opened the Matter to the Public. Seeing no one she closed the Public Hearing and turned the Matter over to the Commission for Discussion.

Moved by Capello, seconded by Csordas, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To grant Preliminary Site Plan approval and Wetlands Permit approval to Cummins Michigan SP99-02A subject to all of the Consultants conditions and comments and also to grant a Section 9 Waiver.

Member Koneda asked if the City Attorney agreed with the comments of Mr. Arroyo regarding the non-conforming existing building not being required to go to the ZBA but would require concurrence by the City Attorney.

Mr. Weisberger answered that he agreed.

In regard to the outdoor truck storage encroachment into the wetland buffer, Member Koneda asked if it did indeed encroach slightly?

Ms. Kay answered there were major portions that were not in the wetland buffer but in the buffer itself. The wetland itself was located quite a way down the slope. She stated it would probably be an improvement.

In regard to the parking setback along the south side, Member Mutch asked if it was permitted in an I-2 district or would it require a variance?

Mr. Arroyo stated the entire access drive along the south side is an existing condition and there will not be any parking within that area. He stated he could verify this at the time of Final to assure that there are no issues, but he did not think it was an issue.

Member Mutch could not see that the parking setback did not apply if it was decided to be called an access drive. He asked the City Attorney if it needed to go to the ZBA?

Mr. Weisberber stated if it was clear that there was not to be any parking in the area it did not need to go to the ZBA.

Mr. Arroyo stated normally a parking setback should be a greenbelt, however in this case is unusual because it is an existing situation.

Chairperson Weddington asked if any future railroad overpass would have any impact?

Mr. Arroyo stated it may impact it, however, he did not think there was anything to be concerned with because the applicant was providing a generous setback from the future R.O.W. line.

Chairperson Weddington asked if the refuse along the river would be cleaned up?

Mr. Jones answered, yes.

Member Capello asked if the applicant has agreed to dedicate future proposed R.O.W. to the City?

Mr. Jones asked Mr. Arroyo if it needed to be dedicated?

Mr. Arroyo answered, he did not know if it would be necessary at this point. He stated if it was, it would be beyond the 60’ half R.O.W. if the marginal access were required due to the bridge construction.

Member Capello asked if the applicant would dedicate the R.O.W. as part of the site plan application?

Mr. Jones answered, yes.

Yes: Capello, Churella, Csordas, Koneda, Mutch, Weddington

No: None

1. MEADOWBROOK COMMONS SP98-61A

 

Project is located in Section 23 at the southwest corner of Meadowbrook and Cherry Hill. The 18.65 acre-site is zoned High Density Mid-Rise Residential (RM-2). Applicant is seeking Revised Preliminary Site Plan approval.

 

Al Toumaala of Siegal Toumaala Associates Architects and Planners represented the Novi Building Authority regarding the Meadowbrook Commons project. He stated the size of the central building has been reduced and the number of small units around the central building has been increased to change the mix. The amended site plan reduces the length of the central building by approximately 30’, changing it from a double courtyard building to a single courtyard building. The ranch units have been increased from 40 units to 60 units. In doing so, it was necessary to include two additional buildings that exceeded the 180’ length limitation, he stated he would be seeking a variance from the ZBA. Mr. Toumaala stated Building 9 does not have the 45 degree orientation to the parking lot. He asked the Commission for a waiver if possible. The overall density is being reduced from 199 to 175. He pointed out that there was original concern with the retention pond being located next to one of the proposed parks. He reported that the access road has been moved down so the pond is located entirely to the north of the park area.

 

Rod Arroyo, Planning and Traffic Consultant recommended approval subject to a couple of items being resolved and also the consideration of the Planning Commission to waive the 45 degree angle requirement for the structure along the south property line. There is a parking area adjacent to Building 5 that is not set back 25’, he suggested that this change be made on the Final. He stated there are some buildings that exceed the maximum building length which will be required to go to the ZBA. He stated there were minor comments regarding dumpster and loading areas. He noted that the small regulated wetland shown on the City’s Wetland Map does not exist on the site as he verified this with Debbie Thor of JCK. Mr. Arroyo stated there were some accessory non-residential uses that were intended to serve the population of the senior housing which are permitted, however, this would need to be a condition of approval.

 

In regard to the traffic review, Mr. Arroyo stated the project is a fairly low traffic generator, there is some additional information that he would like to see on the Final, showing the proposed driveway access to Willowbrook Farm across from Cherry Hill. He would like to see the entrance off of Meadowbrook Road modified to meet the City standard for a 24’ wide entrance and exit on both sides of the island median. There is an emergency access provided off of Cherry Hill. The applicant proposes right turn deceleration and acceleration lanes. There are some minor modifications regarding end islands, turning radius and sidewalk width adjacent to parking against the building that he would like to see on the Final. Mr. Arroyo recommended approval of the Preliminary Site Plan.

 

Victoria Weber, Engineering Consultant stated the water and sanitary service has not changed since the previous plan. There is now only one detention basin located on the site that will discharge storm water at a restricted rate to the Meadowbrook Road ditch. There have been no changes relevant to the land fill area. She pointed out that Member Mutch previously expressed concern regarding flooding on Cherry Hill Road, and she reported that the DPW has indicated that they have cleaned out the storm sewer pipes, therefore, the situation should be alleviated. She stated she would like to see the applicant enhance the ditch line that runs along Meadowbrook Road. In regard to the sanitary sewer, the applicant is proposing to connect to a sanitary sewer that is to be constructed with the proposed Willowbrook Farms Phase 2 and 3 development, if this development does not go through, there may be some additional construction that will be required. Lastly, Ms. Weber asked that construction access be limited to Meadowbrook Road only to limit the use of heavy construction equipment over the land fill and to limit traffic. With these comments, Ms. Weber recommended approval.

 

Linda Lemke, Landscape Architect recommended approval. She stated the Planning Commission would need to waive the requirement for a berm in lieu of saving the existing vegetation along the southern property. There would also be the condition of supplemental evergreen plantings being placed along the length of the wooded area to achieve the required opacity. With this comment, Ms. Lemke recommended approval.

 

Doug Necci of JCK recommended approval. He stated the project was in full compliance with the Facade Chart. He clarified that with the last revision of new building types, he was not sure that he reviewed every building type.

 

Mr. Toumaala stated there were no new building types other than the fact that the one ranch building in the original plan that exceeded the 180’ in length, there are now three shown on the plan.

 

Mr. Necci stated the letter includes all of the building types, therefore, the recommendation stands.

 

Chairperson Weddington announced she has received a letter from Michael W. Evans, Fire Marshal for the City of Novi Fire Department 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) Show the location of the Fire Department connection. The Fire Department connection shall be located on the front address side of the building in an accessible location within 100’ of a hydrant; 2) The fire protection watermain shall be provided with either a post indicator valve or a valve in a well; 3) All roads are to be paved prior to construction above the foundation, note, number 4 on the site plan sheet is unacceptable; 4) The proposed car ports in front of the ranch buildings are obstructing the visibility of the fronts of the buildings. This obstruction could hinder fire, EMS or police responses. Relocate the car ports so they do not obstruct the fronts of the buildings.

 

Mr. Toumaala stated he met with the Fire Marshal in regard to the car port issue. The Fire Marshal was to visit another project in Farmington Hills that was built by the applicant to see the type of carports proposed. If he was still unhappy with the situation, Mr. Toumaala stated he had remedies in regard to relocating the carports into the island areas. He felt the matter would be resolved.

 

Chairperson Weddington turned the Matter over to the Commission for Discussion

 

DISCUSSION

 

Member Canup asked if the applicant would be going to the ZBA for the building lengths?

 

Mr. Toumaala answered, yes. He stated he would be going to the ZBA relative to the three ranch buildings as they all exceed the maximum 180’ requirement by 17’

 

Member Canup stated since the project is City sponsored, why could they not find 17’ to live within the Ordinance?

 

Mr. Toumaala stated he originally received a variance for the one ranch building. Since the number of ranch buildings has been increased, they all need their own setbacks, therefore, it is not as consolidated as the central building. In order to meet the mix requirements and the increase of the number of units, they were forced to connect more units into one building.

 

In regard to the tree requirements, Member Mutch understood that the Ordinance required three trees per unit for landscaping and the applicant shows three trees per unit for the cottage units and three trees per unit for the lower level of the multi-level building. He asked if the applicant should be providing three trees per total units overall?

 

Ms. Lemke answered she interpreted it as first floor units. She explained that none of the projects have been able to fit all of the required plant material on their site.

 

Member Mutch asked if this was something that needed to be rewritten in the Ordinance?

 

Ms. Lemke answered it was on the list of amendments.

 

Member Mutch asked for clarification regarding the improvement of a half width of a 5 lane R.O.W.

 

Mr. Arroyo explained that the applicant was setting back the curbs what would be equivalent to the half of a five lane road. He stated this provides for half of a center left turn lane, a full southbound through lane and a full deceleration lane.

 

Member Mutch asked if this would create a problem due to the fact that there is no continuation of it to the north or south.

 

Mr. Arroyo stated the through lane will not be moved. He stated there would be some additional width on the taper until the center left turn lane is extended.

 

Member Koneda agreed with the comments of Member Canup regarding the maximum building lengths on Buildings 6, 9 and 10. He thought a precedent should be set and the waiver should not be granted. He understood the issue with Building 9 not being oriented 45 degrees to the property line and thought the Commission could grant the waiver. In regard to the access road to Cherry Hill, he was opposed to the chain barricaded entrance.

 

PM-99-04-159 TO GRANT PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPROVAL TO MEADOWBROOK COMMONS SP98-61A WITH THE WAIVING OF THE BERM ALONG THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE TO PRESERVE THE EXISTING VEGETATION, WAIVER OF THE 45 DEGREE ORIENTATION FOR BUILDING 9 AND CONDITIONED UPON ZBA APPROVAL OF THE LENGTH VARIANCES FOR BUILDINGS 6, 9 AND 10 AND ALL OF THE CONSULTANTS RECOMMENDATIONS AND TO ELIMINATE THE EMERGENCY SERVICE DRIVE WITH SUBSTITUTION OF A REGULAR 24’ ROADWAY NORTH TO CHERRY HILL

 

Moved by Koneda, seconded by Csordas, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To grant Preliminary Site Plan approval to Meadowbrook Commons SP98-61A with the waiving of the berm along the southern property line to preserve the existing vegetation, waiver of the 45 degree orientation for Building 9 and conditioned upon ZBA approval of the length variances for Buildings 6, 9 and 10 and all of the Consultants recommendations and to eliminate the emergency service drive with substitution of a regular 24’ roadway north to Cherry Hill.

 

PM-99-04-160 TO AMEND THE MOTION TO CHANGE THE ACCESS DRIVE TO CHERRY HILL TO A 24’ DRIVE

 

Moved by Mutch, seconded by Churella, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To amend the motion to enlarge the access drive to Cherry Hill to 24’.

 

DISCUSSION

 

Member Mutch stated there is on street parking permitted along Cherry Hill, however, it is probably not a good idea and there is parking provided on the site for the park. Secondly, there is no other neighborhood parks in the area so it not only serves Meadowbrook Glens but the new development across the street and other residential developments in the area, therefore, it makes sense to have the access at that point.

 

Mr. Toumaala thought by bringing in outside traffic into a private parking area it would ultimately result in angry residents of the development. He thought the security of the project would be compromised by allowing another point of entry to the site. He did not think it was a good idea.

 

Member Koneda felt if it was going to be called a City-wide park, parking and access must be provided.

 

VOTE ON PM-99-04-160 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

Yes: Churella, Csordas, Koneda, Mutch, Weddington, Canup

No: None

 

VOTE ON PM-98-04-159 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

Yes: Csordas, Koneda, Mutch, Weddington, Canup, Churella

No: None

 

Mr. Toumaala asked if he increased the drive to 24’, provided parking spaces off of the drive and reduced it down to 18 and put the gate at that point. This would eliminate traffic through the site and provide parking for the park.

 

Chairperson Weddington did not think there would be much traffic through the site. She thought it could be controlled through signage.

 

Member Churella thought it might be a good idea. He stated it would give privacy to the elderly and access to the youth. He saw nothing wrong with making it a gated community.

 

Mr. Weisberger stated if this is what the Commission chooses to do, they would have to make a motion to reconsider the motion that was just voted upon.

 

PM-98-04-161 TO RECONSIDER THE MATTER OF MEADOWBROOK COMMONS SP98-61A

 

Moved by Churella, seconded by Csordas, FAILED (2-4): To reconsider the matter of Meadowbrook Commons SP98-61A.

 

VOTE ON PM-98-04-161 FAILED

 

Yes: Churella, Csordas

No: Koneda, Mutch, Weddington, Canup

 

2. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM

Khanh Pham, Staff Planner stated the document is seeking adoption approval from the Planning Commission. He stated the CIP budget recommendations had the most emphasis put on it because this was the top 10 item that the Committee recommended as an advisory document when Council makes their budget adoption.

Member Csordas stated the process is streamlining in that the Departments submit their requests with priorities and rankings. The rankings are entered and combined for the average which sets all of the capital improvements priorities automatically.

Moved by Mutch, seconded by Csordas, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To adopt the Capital Improvement Program as submitted.

Yes: Mutch, Weddington, Canup, Churella, Csordas, Koneda

No: None

Chairperson Weddington announced the Commission would take a short recess.

None

1. MASTER PLAN UPDATE: NOVI 2020 - MASTER PLAN FOR LAND USE

Planning Consultant Rod Arroyo will review highlights of updated Master Plan. A public hearing for the Plan is set for May 05, 1999.

Chairperson Weddington announced that there would be a Public Hearing at the meeting of May 05, 1999, therefore, no action was being taken at this meeting.

Rod Arroyo, Planning and Traffic Consultant gave a presentation regarding the highlights and overview of the Master Plan Update Novi 2020 Master Plan For Land Use.

The Master Plan For Land Use is proposed to be published in two volumes. One is the main document which includes an overview of the background material as well as the plan recommendations. The second volume is labeled an Appendix which includes many of the detailed background studies that were prepared. Rather than lump them into one document, it was suggested that they be separate documents because there is not much demand for the second document, however, it would be made available.

Mr. Arroyo briefly reviewed the outline. The overview is a summary of all of the data collected to date. It provides a resource of various information and statistics. Goals and Objectives provide a general outline and guidance for the plan that occurs. The land use element includes a number of subsections; housing and density plan, commercial office and industrial plan, and community character element which addresses the goals and desires of the community. The Thoroughfare Plan covers the road and transportation planning issues. Parks and Recreation is a summary of the plan. Implementation includes near and long range recommendations that the Commission, community and other components of City Government can implement.

Mr. Arroyo reviewed the benefits of the Master Plan and highlighted some existing conditions and interesting facts that have come out as a part of the update. He stated another primary benefit to the plan is that it is a guide for future development. Mr. Arroyo briefly highlighted each major section.

None

Moved by Capello, seconded by Churella, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To adjourn the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission at 10:00 p.m.

Yes: Canup, Capello, Churella, Csordas, Koneda, Mutch, Weddington

No: None

________________________________

Khanh Pham - Staff Planner

Transcribed by: Diane H. Vimr

May 06, 1999

Date Approved: June 02, 1999