The meeting was called to order at or about 7:30 p.m.

Present: Members Cassis, Kocan, Markham, Pehrson, Shroyer

Absent: Members Avdoulos, Gaul, Ruyle, Sprague (all excused)

Also Present: David Evancoe, Director of Planning; Tim Schmitt, Planner; Darcy Schmitt, Planner; Lance Shipman, Landscape Architect; Tom Schultz, City Attorney; Larry DeBrincat, Woodland Consultant; Peter Albertson, Façade Consultant

Member Shroyer led the meeting in the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance.

Member Shroyer asked that "Applicant Response Letters" be removed from Matters for Discussion.

Moved by Member Kocan, seconded by Member Pehrson:

Wayne Hogan, Novi: Noted that the plans to be reviewed at this meeting have eight-foot wide handicapped parking spaces while the other parking spaces are designed at nine-feet. He questioned why this would be an acceptable standard. City Attorney Tom Schultz said that this issue could be discussed with the Building Department.

There was no correspondence.

Member Kocan said that the Implementation Committee will meet on Thursday, February 19, 2004 at 6:00 p.m.

There were no presentations.

There was no Consent Agenda.

Planner Tim Schmitt located the property on an aerial map. The property is zoned RM-1, low density, low rise multiple family and master planned for multiple family uses. To the east of the property are M-5 and Haggerty Corporate Park, zoned OST and master planned for office. To the south is Brightmoor Christian Church, zoned R-A and master planned for Single Family Residential. To the west is Fox Run Retirement Community, zoned RM-1 and master planned multiple family residential with a PD-1 option. To the north are Haverhill Farms subdivision and vacant property, zoned R-2 and master planned for Single Family Residential. There is a quasi-public park to the north as well.

Mr. Schmitt said that a Development Agreement was signed in 2003. There was a limitation on the total number of units (192); the Applicant is requesting 190 units. The setback requirements are consistent with the R-T zoning district. The Applicant was required to preserve a certain percentage of wetlands and woodlands, which they have.

The Planning Review indicated that units 101/102 are currently designed to sit on a "flag lot" that would require a variance. The Applicant could redesign the site to add a cul-de-sac but that would further impact the natural features on the site.

The Wetlands Review and Woodlands Review indicated there are items to be addressed at the time of Final Site Plan submittal. The Landscape Review indicated that the plan meets requirements with minor items to be addressed at the time of Final Site Plan submittal. The Traffic Review indicated that the proposed road to Fox Run Drive is in excess of the required length permitted under the interim road policy; therefore a T-turnaround would be required. Because this is an emergency access and the connection is actually made (as opposed to being a cul-de-sac or stub) the Engineering Department would not necessarily require the T-turnaround. The Engineering Review and Fire Department Review both indicated minor items to be addressed at the time of Final Site Plan submittal.

Mr. Schmitt said that these duplex buildings must conform to the commercial façade requirements of Section 2520. The Applicant will work with the Façade Consultant on two remaining issues. The roof pitch creates a higher percentage of asphalt shingles than what is allowed by the Ordinance. The trim calculations also exceed the allowable percentages.

Mark Kassab of PT Commerce, LLC represented the Applicant. He said they acquired 2.5 acres from MDOT that allowed the Applicant to further preserve the natural features of the property. The Applicant has preserved about 25 acres of wetlands and woodlands, although the Development Agreement states that they only had to preserve twenty acres. They did not design all 192 units allowed because it would further jeopardize the woodlands.

Mr. Kassab said that examples of the proposed homes can be seen down the road at Oakbrook Pointe at Maple and Welch roads. They offer both a hip and gable roof pitch. He showed the color samples to the Planning Commission.

Chair Markham asked whether anyone from the audience wished to speak:

Member Kocan asked about the northeast emergency road access. Mr. Schmitt replied that the road goes into the proposed church site. He said that it is not advantageous to connect a non-residential use to a residential use. If this road were to be opened for regular travel it would bring unwanted traffic into the subdivision. If the church does not develop and a residential use is planned for the adjoining property, they would have to open this road up for their secondary access. Member Kocan thought it should be noted that the road may need to be widened someday if in fact it becomes a regular road.

Member Kocan thought the plan had some nice qualities. The lots are bigger than required, there’s approximately 40% open space and the developer has responded to all of the comments cited in the reviews. She thought these duplex homes are an excellent addition to Novi in that they offer an affordable option.

Member Kocan would prefer to recommend the ZBA variance over requesting the cul-de-sac for lots 101/102 because the cul-de-sac would increase the impervious surface.

Member Kocan asked for clarification on the road connecting to Fox Run. Mr. Schmitt said that a ZBA variance is not needed and the T-turnaround is not needed because the road actually provides emergency access only and is not really a dead-end street. Civil Engineer Ben Croy concurred, and said the Fire Department will have the key to unlock the gate.

Member Kocan thought the Development Agreement had the wetland and woodland preservation numbers reversed. City Attorney Tom Schultz said that he would follow through on that issue.

Member Kocan asked about the diseased ash trees. Woodland Consultant Larry DeBrincat of Vilican Leman Associates stated that although the Ordinance requires specific tag numbers for diseased tree removal, the City has recently issued general waivers to address the removal of ash trees affected by the emerald ash borer. He said the Applicant has not provided evidence to support his removal of ash trees yet.

Member Kocan asked about the easement for utilities for the northeast property. Mr. Schmitt responded that he has met with Orchard Grove Community Church, and the Applicant has attempted to contact them so that these reciprocal easements can be procured.

Member Kocan asked about the mountable curbs. Mr. Croy responded that the curbs proposed by the Applicant are an approved form of curb, but if there is a proposed curb in the ADA document then the Engineering Department would review that information. Member Kocan thought the demographic that might purchase in Deeridge are older adults who are affected by things like curbs. Mr. Kassab said that she was correct – buyers of this product are lifestyle-change buyers. He will reconsider the type of curb proposed for this project.

Member Cassis asked about the façade situation. Mr. Schmitt said that neither rendering provided to the Planning Commission depicts façades that meet the City Ordinance. Façade Consultant Peter Albertson of Nordstrom Samson Associates explained that the roof pitch exceeds what is allowed by the Ordinance. He said the Applicant could reduce the roof pitch to something less than six and twelve, but then the trim percentage will exceed 15% which is also not allowed. He said the design was reasonable and appropriate but it conflicts with the Ordinance.

Member Cassis asked about the trim. Mr. Kassab said that it would likely be wood trim. He said that they cannot request a façade waiver as that is a stipulation of the Development Agreement. He said that his company prefers to alternate the two designs throughout the project. Mr. Kassab said that the floor plan is ranch-style and there is a loft option. Many of these units will also feature walk-out basements. They will likely be priced in the middle 200s.

Member Cassis asked about replacing the 101 unit with a deluxe single unit. Mr. Kassab said he would consider reducing the unit down to a single unit instead of a duplex. Mr. Schmitt said that reducing the unit does not change the lot width and therefore the lot is still substantially smaller at the frontage point. Julian Wargo, the engineer from Zeimet Wozniak, addressed the Planning Commission. He said there are complications to trying to remove the need for the ZBA variance for lot width. Mr. Schmitt interjected that Mr. Wargo was correct that the lot width exists on a theoretical lot that will never exist. The requirements of the Ordinance do not allow for flag lots because of the three to one ratio required at the setback line.

Member Cassis said this was a fine development and he believes that if this Applicant must go before the ZBA, those members will have record of the Planning Commission’s approval of this site plan.

Member Shroyer asked what the actual measurement of the additional land was – 2.39 or 2.11 acres. This addition was approved on October 20, 2003. Mr. Kassab said that MDOT advertised the sale of 2.39 acres, but when it was surveyed it was only 2.11 acres.

Member Shroyer asked about the connection of sidewalks to the Fox Run property. Mr. Schmitt said that there is a fence that runs between the two properties. Fox Run considers itself a campus and therefore they preferred to be closed off from the surrounding properties. Member Shroyer did not appreciate that design.

Member Shroyer asked about the sidewalk in the northeast section of the property. He asked about the eastern sidewalk stopping just after the northernmost property and crossing over to the western side of the road. It does not connect to the next street. Mr. Schmitt said that was because of the topography and the wetland.

Member Shroyer agreed that a single home should be considered for lot 101/102. He encouraged the Applicant to provide a nice landscaping buffer in this area.

Member Shroyer asked why the gazebo and roundabout were removed. Mr. Kassab said that the roundabout was removed due to the realization of the many problems the design created. Mr. Kassab said that his company’s projects always provide ample paths, parks, benches, etc. Mr. Kassab said that they removed the meandering path and replaced it with the sidewalks. Mr. Kassab said that the Brightmoor Church will be purchasing a number of these units, but he did not recall that his development provided a path to the church’s soccer field. He said that the topography may be steep in that area, and there may be a retention area as well. They may be able to add a pathway along the emergency access easement. Member Shroyer supported the plan.

Chair Markham asked how the future homeowners will know that their roads are private. Mr. Kassab replied that they will have to acknowledge their receipt of the Homeowners’ Association By-laws when they purchase their unit, and this will explain that the roads are the Homeowners’ Association’s responsibility.

Chair Markham asked about the wetland mitigation. The Applicant’s wetland consultant, Dave Purdy of Brooks Williamson Associates, said that there are three wetland impacts, two of which are permitted by the MDEQ already. The third wetland is a City-regulated wetland. The impacts are where the loop road crosses the large wetland and a finger of the wetland, totaling about 15/100 of an acre. The City-regulated wetland at the entry is encroached along the property line – about 9/100 of an acre. The total impact is 24/100 of an acre. They proposed mitigation at a 1:1 ratio on the property, and they left a 25-foot setback from the church property. There is limited space on the site to create a wetland without destroying the trees.

Chair Markham asked if the second access point (to the north) has been provided or the water main issue resolved as mentioned by the Fire Chief. Mr. Croy said that it has not been confirmed that the church property owners have granted that connection. Mr. Kassab said he has met with Orchard Grove on a number of occasions and has proposed developing the emergency access easement and running a water main to Fourteen Mile at his cost. The church is not ready to move forward at this time. Mr. Kassab said that the water pressure is apparently sufficient to handle Deeridge, per the Fire Chief through Tim Schmitt. That said, Mr. Kassab would not likely be connecting to the Haverhill water main. Mr. Schmitt said that Fire Marshal Evans is confident that there won’t be a water pressure problem, especially with the water booster station approximately one mile away.

Moved by Member Kocan, seconded by Member Cassis:

Planner Tim Schmitt located the property on an aerial map. He located on the map the location of the clubhouse, Lyon Township and the proposed Oak Pointe Church property. The property is zoned R-A and master planned for Single Family Residential.

Mr. Schmitt said the Planning Review indicated that the Applicant is seeking a waiver for the Napier Road bike bath in an area of protected woodlands. They are willing to work with the Staff and Consultants to determine the best route to take on this issue. There are minor items to be addressed at the time of Final Site Plan submittal.

Jason Rickard, Toll Brothers, addressed the Planning Commission. He asked for input on the bike path.

No one from the audience wished to speak. Chair Markham closed the Public Hearing.

Member Shroyer asked Woodland Consultant Larry DeBrincat about the woodlands that are affecting the placement of the bike path. He said that it is a high quality woodland, and he supported the idea of a meandering trail that did not remain just one foot off the road. He said the ash trees are minor on the north side, but the south side of the property has quite a bit of ash. The trees along Napier Road are not ash. The understory is somewhat light in this area. Mr. DeBrincat could not say at this time where the most appropriate location for the path could be precisely located.

Member Shroyer said that this path needs to be a separate path that travels the entire north-south distance, and that it does not appear to be a private path for Island Lake. He wanted to ensure that the path is contiguous. He thought this was only a minor revision to the RUD. He supported the Applicant working with the City to design the best path.

Member Pehrson asked whether the property at Ten Mile has the same woodland density as Island Lake’s property. Mr. DeBrincat was not sure what that property’s woodlands were like. He pointed to the area where the high density woodlands were located, but maintained that in actuality the whole area is of high quality. Landscape Architect Lance Shipman said that the corner parcel is a regulated wetland, hence the greater number of ash trees in that area. He said the woodlands are of a lesser quality on the corner parcel. Member Pehrson felt that the Consultants should be able to determine the best place of the path, and he agreed that this should only be considered a minor revision.

Member Cassis confirmed with Planning Director David Evancoe that the Staff would be willing to work with the Applicant to design a path that runs the entire north-south length of the property in the Napier Road area.

Member Kocan has great concern for woodlands. She was concerned about the cul-de-sac for units 406 through 409. She asked the Applicant to consider the quality of trees that will be removed in that area in order to build four lots. She said that by creating only two lots the Applicant would save many trees. Mr. Rickard responded that woodlands are indeed important. He said that in this situation, there is a large pocket of woodlands, and in the scheme of things they are removing very few trees. He noted that they are protecting as many trees as possible.

Mr. Rickard also stated that they are looking to put in the meandering path. He did note that the grade in the area might affect their ability to maintain the exact slope required by the Ordinance in their design of the path.

Chair Markham said she wanted to ensure that the path goes the entire north-south section and that it remains public. Ultimately the other residents in the area should be able to use this pathway to reach Community Sports Park. She also agreed that the Applicant should consider redesigning the cul-de-sac mentioned by Member Kocan. She said that the removal of those trees is not trivial.

Moved by Member Pehrson, seconded by Member Cassis:

Member Shroyer asked Member Pehrson if he would like to add reasons to the motion: "…for the reason that it meets all the requirements for wetlands, woodlands, landscaping, traffic, engineering and fire department." He also asked if he would also like to add to the motion, "…the Developer reconsidering the cul-de-sac housing lots 406 through 409 to help preserve as much of the woodlands as possible." Member Pehrson agreed to the additions, as did Member Cassis.

Chair Markham called for a ten minute break.

Planner Mr. Schmitt located the property on an aerial map. He said the property is surrounded by OST zoning in all directions and master planned for office as well. To the west is Cabot Drive; to the east are the Detroit Edison transmission lines. Further west is M-5. To the south is the Siemans building, and to the north is the existing Cabot North Tech Center.

Mr. Schmitt said that there are two points of access. One point is off of Cabot Drive. The second access is a stub that will connect to the existing Cabot Tech Center. The Planning Review indicated that the Applicant will need to complete the lot split process by the time of Final Site Plan submittal. The Wetlands Review indicated minor items to be addressed at the time of Final Site Plan submittal. The Landscape Review indicated that some changes to the parking lot must be made in order to comply with the Ordinance; the Applicant has stated that this request will be met. The Traffic Review and Engineering Review indicated minor items to be addressed at the time of Final Site Plan submittal. The Façade and Fire Department reviews approved of the plans.

The Woodlands Review does not recommend approval. The Applicant has met with Staff and Consultants on site to discuss this issue. The Applicant has agreed to plant the replacement trees throughout Haggerty Corporate Park and not pay into the tree fund. This will be done within the next year. The wetland mitigation for this park is being done just north of Thirteen Mile on Northern Equities property in order to create a large contiguous wetland as opposed to small pockets of mitigation throughout the park. This same approach will be used for the planting of these trees; the City will work with the Applicant to find suitable locations for these trees.

Mr. Schmitt said that this parcel is 3.79 acres. Because these parcels are made as each project comes forward, the Applicant has been able to meet setback requirements and provide enough parking. Their plan will meet all landscaping requirements. Mr. Schmitt explained that what Northern Equities has agreed to do is make this parcel meet the requirements, and then they will preserve the "leftover" land that runs between this parcel and Siemans as a preservation park in this condominium. This land includes 1.5 acres of upland area that could be built upon. Woodland Consultant Larry DeBrincat can address this further, Mr. Schmitt said. The City is pleased with this outcome, especially because more woodland areas will be saved that are contiguous within the park.

Mr. Schmitt showed on the map how Magna Intier preserved five acres of woodlands and wetlands. Novaplex preserved an area. He said that now a corridor of woodlands is being preserved.

Matthew Sosin, Northern Equities, addressed the Planning Commission. He said that they have already determined locations for several of these trees. There are over 200 acres that they can plant on.

Chair Markham opened the floor to the public.

Wayne Hogan, Novi: Asked for a van-accessible lane to be added to the site plan. He said that another van accessible space has the lane on the wrong side. He asked that the crosswalk be straightened to make it safer.

Chair Markham closed the Public Hearing.

Member Cassis noted that there is a tremendous amount of trees in this park. He confirmed with Mr. DeBrincat that 332 replacement trees are needed for this project to compensate for the removal of 195 trees. Mr. DeBrincat said the minimum size of replacement trees is a 2½ inch caliper. He assumes the Applicant will submit a plan that outlines where the trees will be planted. An agreement has not been signed for this plan at this time. Mr. Schmitt said there are a variety of options available to the Applicant. The Applicant is encouraged to replace the trees on site. The Planning Department needs the Planning Commission to approve of this replacement concept before they can move forward. Each tree is valued at $325.00.

Member Kocan said that it makes sense to make the area south of this parcel a preservation area. She asked about the landscaping species. Landscape Architect Lance Shipman said that the City and the Applicant have agreed that tree diversity will be addressed at the park based on the entire property. Each parcel will be required to plant a different species. There are no conflicts with the street trees because no trees have been planted yet. He said he would be keeping track of the trees for each parcel.

Member Kocan asked about the parking lot. Mr. Shipman said that the Applicant has stated that they can meet the interior parking lot requirements. He anticipates that the Final Site Plan will meet the requirements. He has looked at a conceptual plan that seems appropriate.

Member Kocan asked whether the requests made by Mr. Hogan could be easily accomplished. Mr. Sosin said that Mr. Hogan’s suggestions are a great idea. The easterly island is not a requirement so it can be removed to provide better access. In the front of the building, the access area can easily be switched to the other side.

Member Kocan asked whether there would be a parking deficiency if the entire building became a medical office. Mr. Schmitt said that was correct. He said that this building will not be considered for medical because it won’t meet the standards; there are other buildings in the park that are designated for medical.

Member Kocan confirmed that mitigation issues will be resolved by Final Site Plan submittal.

Chair Markham commented that she approved of the manner in which the Applicant is preserving large portions of wetlands and woodlands. She also appreciated that the Applicant is not just putting more money in the tree fund. Mr. Sosin said that they always return to their sites and add trees, and he said that the amount they have paid into the tree fund will be reduced to reflect this. He said the preserved park will be documented in the Master Deed of the Condominium that will be coming before the Planning Commission in the near future.

Moved by Member Shroyer, seconded by Member Pehrson:

City attorney Tom Schultz asked that motion make clear that the language of the preservation statement has to be approved by the City Attorney’s office, and that a note is placed on the plan that states that the area is to be preserved. Member Shroyer and Member Pehrson agreed to the change.

The Planning Commissioners turned in their grammatical corrections for incorporation into the minutes.

It was noted that the word "rear" was changed to "side" in the Island Lake motion regarding setbacks.

Moved by Member Cassis, seconded by Member Shroyer:

The Planning Commissioners turned in their corrections for incorporation into the minutes.

Moved by Member Shroyer, seconded by Member Pehrson:

There was no Consent Agenda.

Planner Darcy Schmitt discussed the four major sections of the Master Plan draft. She has been assisting the Master Plan and Zoning Committee in the update of the City’s Master Plan.

Thoroughfare Plan: A problem with circulation around the commercial and office developments was reviewed by the Committee. They cited the area on Twelve Mile near Beck Road as a location that should be pre-planned with a service drive. They cited the need for a pedestrian bridge over I-96 at Taft Road. They cited the need to make Dixon Road and 12 ½ Mile scenic drives in order to preserve the natural beauty of the area.

Discussion: Ms. Schmitt explained that the parallel road proposed would begin at Fountainwalk and would link to Twelve Mile. City Engineer Nancy McClain said that the road is only conceptual, but is proposed to be on the ITC property, which is the real estate arm of Detroit Edison. The City could work with ITC on ROWs, or as the parcels in the area are developed, land could be set aside from those properties to accommodate the road. The concept is meant to minimize the number of curb cuts along Twelve Mile. Member Cassis stated that the land they are discussing has a ROW of about one hundred feet and is private property; he wanted this fact understood. Chair Markham also said that if the road was to line up with West Park at Twelve Mile, this would allow for a nice flow of traffic.

Member Cassis said that the Grand River Corridor Plan was originated in 1992, modified a few years later and a few years beyond that. He asked what the purpose is of reviewing the plan yet again. Ms. McClain thought that the request was triggered by the fact that the road improvement has been made and the Expo Center is moving to the Taft Road area. Ms. Schmitt concurred that with more known about the growth in the area, the clearer the plan can become.

Member Kocan asked how the proposed road would be paid for. Ms. McClain responded that if the land is purchased by one person, then the road would be put in by that developer. If it is done piece-meal, then the cost may be borne by the City. Again, the plan is just conceptual. Member Kocan said that the Planning Commission just approved a plan that would preclude this road from being built. She applauded the Committee for brainstorming and being proactive.

Member Kocan suggested that a "strike out" version be provided that would assist the reader in seeing where the proposed changes are. Member Kocan said that after the Master Plan is complete, the Implementation Committee can review the changes and make Ordinance revisions to ensure the Master Plan changes are made. Member Kocan noted that the lower the speed limits, the lower the amount of accidents.

Non-Motorized Pathways: The Community routinely cites the gaps in the City sidewalks as an issue they would like addressed. Ms. Schmitt showed the Phasing Plan that breaks the job into five-year sections. This will help prioritize the CIP Plan and will ultimately link the City together. By having this plan the City can proceed with applying for grants.

Discussion: Member Pehrson asked whether Taft Road would be paved in conjunction with the proposed path way as a matter of safety. Chair Markham said it would, and that the intention was to make the bike path lead all the way to the park. She noted that Beck Road would be too hazardous, as would Novi Road, and Meadowbrook is too far east.

Member Cassis said that Wixom went to MDOT and asked for and received a bike path along Wixom Road - over the expressway.

Density Map: Two major changes proposed include an area west of Clark Road where the current density is 3.3 and the Committee has suggested 1.65, and the MSU Extension area, where the density is currently shown as quasi public (0 density) and the Committee is suggesting .8 density.

Discussion: Chair Markham said that the density at Eleven Mile and Taft Road was also being lowered from R-4 to R-1 in response to the school property being on the west side of Taft Road. If the east-side Taft properties all developed as small R-4 subdivisions, there would be too much traffic in the area. She also noted that some Expo Center traffic will travel along Taft Road as well. She said that Taft Knolls has already been approved for a small R-4 subdivision, and the Master Plan and Zoning Committee wanted to ensure that none of the other parcels came forward with a similar request. Chair Markham said that the Master Plan and Zoning Committee tried to maintain the same overall density for the City, which is somewhere between 70,000 and 80,000. She said this was an area that they felt could be rezoned to compensate for some of the other areas in the City where the density increased. She said that some lots on Eleven Mile were also included in this change to the Master Plan.

Future Land Use Map: The Committee has made several recommendations, including the removal of the many subcategories. The quasi public areas will be updated. The Grand River area near Beck has changed to office, which is more fluid and takes advantage of the new interchange. The Grand River area further west has been changed to light industrial. The far west section along Twelve Mile will be changed to multiple family. Ms. Schmitt said that City Council has asked the Master Plan and Zoning Committee to look again at Grand River between Beck Road and Novi Road. They have suggested that the area be considered for entertainment. The Committee is still reviewing the Novi Road Corridor.

Discussion: Member Kocan suggested again that a "strike-out" version be available so that people can see what the changes are. She asked about the rationale for not showing the property at Eleven Mile and Beck Road as educational property. Ms. Schmitt said that because the land has not been used for an educational purpose yet, showing it as residential is a protective measure.

Member Kocan asked about the Novi Corridor Plan. She asked about the "Special Planning Area" at Ten Mile and Novi Road. Chair Markham said that the new plan indicates light industrial for the property because of the adjacency to Catherine Industrial Park, the ice arena, Hickory Corporate Park and the railroad track. Ms. Schmitt said that the summary sheets were included to help the Planning Commissioners with their review of the Master Plan update. She said that they would likely be sent on to City Council as well, and it would be beneficial to the Master Plan and Zoning Committee that other Planning Commissioners are reading them and providing suggestions for clarity.

Member Kocan clarified what the correction to Rotary Park was – there was a small piece along Nine Mile that has now been changed to green.

Member Kocan said that wherever a property is noted by its name (Hummer, Sandstone, etc.), the location should also be given because not everyone who reads the Master Plan will know where these properties are.

Member Kocan also noted that the Novi Road Expo Center has returned to the I-1 designation.

Member Kocan asked about the residential component in the Town Center area, and Chair Markham said that they felt the Gateway East District accommodated the need for residential in the area.

Member Cassis asked City Attorney Tom Schultz for an update on the Paragon property. He responded that it is still in litigation, and there is an action pending in Oakland County Circuit Court. The zoning is an office designation with a PD option, and that is being challenged. The City is meeting with the developer with regard to a settlement, which is becoming easier now that water and sewer is coming closer to that area. He said that master planning the property for multiple family is not inconsistent with the conversations that are being held.

Member Shroyer wished to add that the dirt roads that are in the middle of the City have been discussed, as they take away from the City’s image. He cited Flint Road as one of the roads that the Committee has discussed. He said that the Novi Road Corridor will be revisited before the Master Plan update is complete. He said that they may recommend a change of speed for Novi Road.

Member Shroyer said that Grand River will change in light of the new Expo Center. He is concerned about curb cuts on the south side of the road, and that needs to be reviewed as well.

Chair Markham told the Planning Commission that the bridgework on Novi Road will be completed within the next couple of years, as planned for in the CIP budget. That bridge will have a major effect on Novi Road, and it’s also why the paving of Flint Street is so important since it will act as an alternate route for the area during construction.

Member Cassis thought that the Novi Road project was designed in conjunction with the Main Street project. Ms. McClain said that the Oakland County Road Commission was working on a design that rests heavily on the Gen Mar Drive traffic flow.

Member Cassis asked whether the property owners whose Master Plan designations will change will be contacted that these changes are forthcoming. Director of Planning David Evancoe responded that there is not a notification directed at those property owners, but there will be Public Hearings held on the Master Plan. He said that neighboring entities, the county and the utilities have been notified that the City is updating its Master Plan and that they will be receiving their copy for review in the near future.

Member Kocan said that the Public Notices are sometimes deceiving in explaining what the notification is regarding. She recommended that more description be placed in the Public Notice. Member Cassis noted that he has seen irate people come before the Planning Commission to complain that they were unaware of the changes made to their property. Mr. Evancoe said it is important that property owners understand that a change to their future land use designation is not a change to their zoning.

The Planning Commission encouraged everyone to comment on the plan. Chair Markham said there would be another Master Plan and Zoning Committee meeting on February 18, 2004 at 7:00 p.m.

Chair Markham said that the April 14, 2004 is in the middle of the City’s Spring Break. She asked whether the Planning Commission would consider moving that meeting to April 7, 2004, noting that there would still be a two-week interim between this meeting and the second March meeting.

Moved by Member Kocan, seconded by Member Pehrson:

Member Shroyer confirmed that this wouldn’t interfere with the City Council meeting or the Attorney’s schedule.

There were no Special Reports.

Wayne Hogan, Novi: Asked that the Connectivity Plan show which trails are handicapped-accessible. Mr. Hogan asked that the Planning Commission remember that the ADA is a minimum requirement; for example, the eight foot parking space standard is a minimum. He continued to encourage the City to put the meeting information (plans, review letters, etc.) on line for both the Planning Commission and the City Council.

Moved by Member Kocan, seconded by Member Pehrson:

MON 02/09/04 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7:30 PM

WED 02/11/04 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 7:30 PM

MON 02/16/04 PRESIDENT’S DAY, CITY OFFICES CLOSED

WED 02/18/04 MASTER PLAN & ZONING COMMITTEE 7:00 PM

MON 02/23/04 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7:30 PM

WED 02/25/04 RULES COMMITTEE MEETING 6:30 PM

WED 02/25/04 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 7:30 PM

TUE 03/02/04 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 7:30 PM

WED 03/17/04 MASTER PLAN & ZONING COMMITTEE 7:00 PM

Transcribed by Jane L. Schimpf, February 20, 2004 _____________________________

Date Approved: February 25, 2004 Donna Jernigan, Planning Assistant