REGULAR MEETING
- ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Proceedings had and testimony BOARD MEMBERS Mav Sanghvi, Chairman ALSO PRESENT: Don Saven, Building Department REPORTED BY: Machelle Billingslea-Moore, Certified Shorthand 1 INDEX 2 Case Number Page 3 06-027 6 4 06-033 27 5 06-034 48 6 06-036 55 7 06-037 65 8 06-038 76 9 06-039 88 10 06-042 96
2
1 Novi, Michigan 2 Tuesday, January 10, 2006 3 7:30 p.m. 4 - - - - - - 5 MEMBER SANGHVI: (Unintelligibl 6 e.) We are in session again. 7 And try to recommend approval 8 of the Minutes of March 7th, 2006. 9 Have you had an opportunity to 10 look at the Minutes? 11 Are there any changes to the 12 Minutes, deletions? 13 MEMBER FISCHER: Motion to 14 approved as submitted. 15 MEMBER SHROYER: Second. 16 MEMBER SANGHVI: All those in 17 favor of approval of the Minutes, please signify 18 by saying Aye. 19 BOARD MEMBERS: Aye. 20 MEMBER SANGHVI: (Unintelligibl 21 e.) 22 All right. Now the Minutes 23 are out of the way. We'll get on with the 24 business.
3
1 Before we do that, this is the 2 segment for the public remarks. If anybody 3 wants to address the Board, which is not 4 pertaining to any case on the agenda 5 tonight, they are welcome to do so at this 6 time. 7 Seeing none -- 8 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Mr. Chair? 9 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 10 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I would like 11 to approach the Board, if I could. 12 MEMBER SANGHVI: (Unintelligibl 13 e.) 14 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Mr. Chairman 15 Sanghvi. 16 Good evening. 17 Such a handsome group. I 18 never saw you guys from this side before. 19 My name is Cindy Gronachan. 20 And as the audience here knows that I've 21 have been on the Zoning Board for five 22 years. And I wanted to officially give in 23 my notice to my fellow Board Members this 24 evening, this will be my last meeting. I
4
1 resigned on Sunday to -- in front of the 2 Council. I'm moving to New York State, 3 which is my home State, and I wanted to take 4 a minute to thank all of you for your 5 camaraderie the years that we had to work 6 together, the friendships that were made. 7 The memories that I take with me -- the 8 boxes are packed, but what went on in front 9 of the Board and in any executive sessions 10 with the attorneys and with Don, and 11 learning with the residents, that will 12 always be in my heart. And I wanted to let 13 you guys know that. 14 And the one thing I don't want 15 you to ever forget is that we're here for 16 the residents, so remember that; and that 17 less is better. 18 So thank you as -- for being 19 my cohorts in crime, and I wish you all the 20 best. And thank you for the reception this 21 evening. 22 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you, 23 Miss Gronachan. 24 I'll reserve my comments about
5
1 your departure at a later time. 2 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. And 3 yeah, because I don't have the oil can, and I'm 4 out of Kleenex. 5 6 MEMBER SANGHVI: All right. 7 Let's call the first case, Case Number: 06-027, 8 filed by Larry D. Craighead, architect 9 representing Sam's Club at 27300 Wixom Road, Novi 10 Promenade. 11 MR. PLUMMER: May I approach, 12 Mr. Chairman? 13 My name is Doug Plummer, and I 14 represent Larry Craighead, architect, for 15 the signage, the five signs that we are 16 applying for. 17 MEMBER FISCHER: Point of order, 18 Mr. Chair, shouldn't he be sworn in? 19 MEMBER BAUER: Would you raise 20 your hand. 21 Do you swear or affirm to tell 22 the truth regarding this case? 23 MR. PLUMMER: Yes, I do. 24 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you, sir.
6
1 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you. 2 MR. PLUMMER: And it's for the 3 Sam's Club located on Wixom Road. And what 4 we have before you is a -- I think I can put 5 this up for you guys. You've got the 6 photographs there in front of you. And we 7 are looking at having five signs on front of 8 the facade. There is a ten foot by ten foot 9 diamond sign. We have the main sign that's 10 right above the vestibule, which is -- as 11 you're looking at the perspectives, it's 12 right above the exit/entrance sign; which is 13 our main Sam's Club sign located above the 14 vestibule. 15 We are asking for also, in 16 addition to that, a ten foot by ten foot 17 diamond sign, which is, as you're looking at 18 your perspective, it's the front elevation. 19 If you look to the right of that front 20 elevation, is the ten by ten Sam's sign; 21 that's exterior illuminated. 22 We're also asking for a five 23 foot by five foot ancillary sign which has 24 additional characters for the store, for
7
1 optical, pharmacy, and One-hour Photo. And 2 also we're asking for the entrance/exit 3 signs, which you'll also see on the 4 vestibule right below the Sam's sign. And 5 then off to the left of the Sam's Club, the 6 vestibule entry, you'll notice -- it's kind 7 of in light white letters -- it's flatbed 8 loading area. 9 We feel that these signs, 10 particularly the sign that's on the front 11 elevation, the Sam's sign, the ten by ten 12 that's on the right elevation as you're 13 coming down Wixom Road, you really don't 14 even know it's a Sam's Club until you 15 getting to the -- Huntington Bank where we 16 got the traffic light, and also the entry 17 into the Target Store. 18 So we're asking for customers 19 coming down Wixom Road to be able to 20 understand and know that this is a Sam's 21 Club. And obviously, that's going to effect 22 sales for the Sam's Club if that sign is not 23 placed on the front of the building. 24 We also want the ancillary
8
1 signs -- the Optical Pharmacy and One Hour 2 Photo to further enhance what's required -- 3 what's available inside the Sam's Club; and 4 also, that would effect sales if we did not 5 have those signs on the front. In addition 6 to that, the entrance/exit signs merely 7 provide a means for customers as they come 8 around to the front vestibule of the 9 building to be able to know that that's the 10 entry and exit to the Sam's Club. 11 And last, is the flatbed 12 loading area, which, as you can see in the 13 rendering, you can see a car that's parked 14 up underneath that area; that's where 15 customers would be notified by the signage 16 to know that that's where they pull in 17 underneath the canopy to load up their 18 merchandise from the Sam's Club. 19 Again, all these signs, if we 20 don't have these would effect the sales of 21 the Sam's Club and further would enhance the 22 effect the tax that Sam's pays for their 23 merchandise -- the customer would pay for 24 their merchandise.
9
1 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you. 2 Does anyone in the audience 3 wish to address the Board regarding this 4 case? 5 Seeing none, now I will inform 6 the Board that there were 17 notices mailed; 7 zero approvals, zero objections. 8 Building Department? 9 MR. AMOLSCH: Just a point of 10 clarification. I believe the gentleman 11 asked (unintelligible) vestibule sign. They 12 are not -- this sign was already approved as 13 there one sign permitted. They are asking 14 for variances (unintelligible.) 15 MEMBER SANGHVI: Okay. 16 MR. SAVEN: Mr. Chairman, I'd 17 also like to point out that on the front 18 elevation, just below the perspective 19 elevation has given you height requirements 20 or height of the building gives you a little 21 bit better perspective to the facade. 22 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you 23 Mr. Saven. 24 I will open it to the Board
10
1 for discussion. 2 Mr. Shroyer? 3 MEMBER SHROYER: 4 Thank you, Mr. Chair. 5 First of all, sir, would you 6 put your smaller copy rendering on the other 7 side? 8 MR. PLUMMER: Oh, Yes. 9 MEMBER SHROYER: So that way our 10 audience can see what we are discussing, as well. 11 It's a very attractive 12 building. I'd like everybody to see it, or 13 at least part of it. 14 MR. PLUMMER: I'll try to get 15 it. 16 Right there, this is the one 17 that is not (unintelligible) the variances. 18 This is the one that's on the 19 (unintelligible.) 20 MEMBER SHROYER: The first 21 question I would have is in (unintelligible) you 22 stated about the sign to the right that's clear 23 at the end of building. 24 MR. PLUMMER: Yes, sir.
11
1 MEMBER SHROYER: (Unintelligibl 2 e.) from Wixom Road, traffic northbound, etc. 3 MR. PLUMMER: Yes. 4 MEMBER SHROYER: How is that 5 different than the north side of the building 6 from being viewed from Grand River? 7 MR. PLUMMER: Well, you can 8 get the view of the -- if you're coming 9 southbound on Wixom, you can see the Sam's 10 Club sign that's right above the vestibule 11 as you're headed -- actually if you're 12 headed southbound on Wixom Road. If you're 13 headed northbound on Wixom Road, you can't 14 even -- you can't even tell that it's Sam's 15 Club at all. So, that's the reason that we 16 are asking for the additional signage. 17 In fact, I was there just 18 tonight, and they do have a little banner 19 right now in the location where we're asking 20 for this sign -- this one here -- and this 21 front sign. And if that sign was not there 22 you could -- I mean, it's just a massive 23 building. You can't even tell what it is 24 until you get -- the reason for this is
12
1 that, the vestibule is at an angle. It's at 2 about a 45 degree angle to Wixom Road. And 3 really the only opportunity that you get to 4 see that it's a Sam's Club is after you pass 5 through that traffic light going northbound, 6 past the Huntington Bank. 7 MEMBER SHROYER: I understand 8 that. 9 What I'm trying to ask is, for 10 example, the westbound traffic on Grand 11 River -- 12 MR. PLUMMER: Uh-huh. 13 MEMBER SHROYER: -- are they 14 going to have difficulty seeing the building? I 15 mean seeing the building, obviously. Are they 16 going to be able to see your signage? 17 MR. PLUMMER: Yes, I believe 18 so. I believe they will. 19 MEMBER SHROYER: (Unintelligibl 20 e) I had a little bit of difficulty. I didn't 21 know if perhaps there was another big box 22 building that was going to be blocking the view 23 or -- 24 MR. SCHULTZ: If I may through
13
1 the Chair. I believe that the main part of the 2 center is complete and (unintelligible) out box, 3 sort of closer to the road is what's left. 4 MEMBER SHROYER: Okay. 5 Thank you. 6 I also wanted to ask -- the 7 flatbed loading area sign -- 8 MR. PLUMMER: Yes, sir. 9 MEMBER SHROYER: Help me 10 understand the need for that. I mean, it's 11 obvious when somebody's trying to enter or exit, 12 the need for those signs. But to me, it's 13 obvious that that area is used for loading and 14 unloading. 15 Why do you think there's a 16 need for a flatbed loading sign? 17 MR. PLUMMER: Well, it's a 18 sign that's out on the front canopy, the 19 overhead canopy; and we really designate 20 that area for a drive-thru lane as a canopy. 21 And customers can basically drive through 22 from the rear of the club through going 23 toward the front vestibule. And so we feel 24 that we wanted to designate on the front of
14
1 the building that there is a loading area 2 that customers can use to pull up through 3 underneath the canopy, and put their 4 merchandise in their vehicles. 5 MEMBER SHROYER: Okay. The 6 other part of the question I had regarding that 7 is to me it's a little misleading. I don't have 8 a flatbed. I have a car. To me, it would make 9 more sense to say loading area, than flatbed or 10 any other type of designation (unintelligible) 11 would indicate it's a truck, a straight bed truck 12 or something along that line. I don't know if 13 that can be discussed during this, because the 14 request came in as flatbed loading area. 15 Can we discuss verbiage? 16 MR. SCHULTZ: Any the context of 17 how many words (unintelligible) to meet the 18 purpose of the request. 19 MEMBER SHROYER: Would you be 20 open to changing the wording on that sign? 21 MR. PLUMMER: Something I 22 would have to get with Walmart on and find 23 out from them, through the Sam's Club, get 24 their -- this is typically what they have
15
1 put in in a lot of the new Sam's Clubs that 2 they're building across the Country. 3 MEMBER SHROYER: I would have 4 thought it would be to their advantage 5 (unintelligible.) 6 This is the only question I 7 had, Mr. Chair. 8 I am not opposed to any of 9 these variance requests. 10 MEMBER SANGHVI: Member Bauer? 11 MEMBER BAUER: On that flatbed 12 area -- 13 MR. PLUMMER: Yes, sir? 14 MEMBER BAUER: -- you have a car 15 coming out -- 16 MR. PLUMMER: Yes, sir. 17 MEMBER BAUER: (Unintelligible) 18 sign is up there going the other way. You are 19 going to have troubles. 20 MR. PLUMMER: There -- the 21 entrance sign is on the back side of the 22 canopy area. I see what you're saying. We 23 do have arrows -- we do have arrows. 24 MEMBER BAUER: It's very
16
1 confusing. 2 MR. PLUMMER: We do have 3 arrows that would be underneath the canopy; 4 yellow arrows that would be down on the 5 pavement, showing the direction of the flow 6 for traffic going underneath the canopy. 7 MEMBER BAUER: You're going to 8 have them going the other way, too. 9 MR. PLUMMER: Okay. 10 MEMBER SANGHVI: Ms. Gronachan? 11 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Thank you, 12 Mr. Chair. 13 I believe that this request 14 for these signs needs a little more work and 15 some tweaking, if you will. I understand 16 the purpose for your request, and I can 17 support them; but I don't think that we need 18 to conform with the rest of Sam's Clubs and 19 Walmart, with all Due respect. 20 I think that this property is 21 pretty unique and the topography and the lay 22 with Grand River and Wixom given that it is 23 the sole purpose of having this many signs 24 is for identification. However, these signs
17
1 also could increase or decrease safety. 2 And you have confusing writing 3 on that overhang. I think it should be 4 customer pick up, and it should be on the 5 other side. If it's truly identified 6 what -- where you want that customer to go 7 to pick up this thing, flatbed loading is -- 8 I was looking for a truck. I was -- I went 9 through all those pictures. So, if I'm 10 confused, I can just imagine driving -- and 11 if you've never heard about my driving, 12 that's good -- but I was confused. I was 13 worried about a customer going through and 14 trying to figure out where they're going to 15 pick something up. Help your customer out. 16 Let them know what it is. Flatbed pick up 17 just doesn't cut it. So I would have 18 customer pick up, pure, plain and simple. 19 The other thing is, this -- 20 the blue sign with the photo and the 21 Optical, and the One Hour -- the pharmacy, 22 optical, and one hour photo, can you explain 23 to me what the purpose of that sign is? 24 MR. PLUMMER: It's to identify
18
1 in the Sam's Club what the specialty 2 departments are in this particular Sam's 3 Club. 4 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. 5 I will not be supporting that 6 sign, and the reason why is because people 7 that go to Sam's Club are repeat -- return 8 people -- business and they know that you 9 have One Hour photo; you have pharmacy. And 10 anybody that's a Sam's Club fan, they know 11 these things. I don't see a need for that. 12 I thought maybe it was like over a door 13 where -- headed them in where you could do 14 one hour pharmacy, and the one hour -- 15 excuse me, one hour photo and the pharmacy 16 where you could streamline your picking up 17 your prescriptions. 18 I don't see the purpose of 19 this. It's an advertisement sign in that 20 case, and I don't feel that there's a need 21 to duly offer identification. So given the 22 fact that I won't support that, I think you 23 need to work on this customer pick up. And 24 if Walmart needs to approve that, then
19
1 that's fine. But, I don't know if the 2 Board -- what the Board wants to do; but, I 3 do believe that you need some signs, I just 4 need -- I think that you need to do some 5 work. 6 Thank you, Mr. Chair. 7 MEMBER SANGHVI: Mr. Fischer? 8 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 9 Mr. Chairman. 10 I love cases like this. You 11 get five different options and everyone 12 likes something, doesn't like something. 13 The Board's all over the place. 14 As far as sign A, the sign on 15 the right hand side there facing Wixom Road, 16 I can see the need for that. This is a 17 large building. And the same with the exit 18 and entrance sign, (unintelligible) get 19 confused figuring out which are which. I 20 don't think I'm too dumb of a person, but 21 given the size of the building, I can 22 definitely support those. 23 And I echo what Mr. Shroyer 24 said concerning the loading area. We're
20
1 looking at these. We need to see what -- we 2 need to grant relief, but we need to see -- 3 use as little as we can. And I think the 4 loading area avoids confusion, meets the 5 needs of the business. And so I think that 6 nothing more than loading area is needed in 7 that case. And I'll also echo Member 8 Gronachan's comments regarding sign B. 9 This is a membership type of 10 business, correct? 11 MR. PLUMMER: Yes. 12 MEMBER FISCHER: I believe that 13 the pharmacy and the optical or whatever's on 14 that sign, is something that needs to be 15 marketed. People are going to know about it when 16 they sign up to get the membership. I think it's 17 a (unintelligible), if you will. It's definitely 18 not necessary, and I don't see the practical 19 difficulty there. 20 With that said, thank you, 21 Mr. Chair. 22 MEMBER SANGHVI: You're welcome. 23 Ms. Krieger? 24 MEMBER KRIEGER: Mr. Saven has a
21
1 comment? 2 MR. SAVEN: Basically, it'll 3 just be a matter of interpretation on the flatbed 4 issue here. Most of you, including myself, which 5 shop at places like this, we do have a cart. 6 Maybe considered what you they call a flatbed 7 cart. (Unintelligible) load up because you're 8 buying in bulk and things of that nature, that 9 particular cart could possibly be the flatbed 10 loading area they're alluding to, possibly. 11 MR. PLUMMER: It could be. 12 MR. SAVEN: I don't know whether 13 or not we need to make the interpretation 14 (unintelligible) lot of verbiage there. 15 MEMBER SANGHVI: Anybody else? 16 17 MEMBER KRIEGER: (Unintelligibl 18 e) I'm sorry. 19 Another -- if the applicant 20 would be willing to table it, if you want to 21 have a more concise request, or that we 22 could deal with the sign A through D, each 23 one separately. 24 MEMBER SANGHVI: Would you like
22
1 more time to discuss (interposing) 2 (unintelligible?) 3 MR. PLUMMER: No. 4 (Unintelligible) the item five, which is the 5 flatbed loading area, if that were to say 6 customer loading area or loading area, 7 whether or not that would be considered? 8 MEMBER SANGHVI: Okay. 9 Anybody like to make a Motion? 10 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I'll make a 11 Motion. 12 In Case Number: 06-027, filed 13 by Larry D. Craighead, architect 14 representing Sam's Club, I move that we 15 approve the -- Sign A, Sign C, Sign D, Sign 16 E, with the change of customer loading area. 17 MEMBER KRIEGER: Second. 18 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I'm not done, 19 but thank you for your support. 20 MEMBER KRIEGER: I'm sorry. I 21 still second. 22 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Given that 23 the Petitioner's testimony indicated that 24 this is an unusually shaped building, the 23
1 size of the building, and the topography, 2 along with the safety concerns. 3 MEMBER KRIEGER: Second. 4 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you. 5 The Motion has been made and 6 seconded. 7 Any further discussion? Any 8 comments? 9 MR. SAVEN: Just a question to 10 Alan any regard to the change (unintelligible) 11 square footage within that particular realm of, I 12 believe it was 14.19 feet. That would be okay, 13 correct? 14 MR. AMOLSCH: (Unintelligible) 15 sign, yes. 16 MR. SAVEN: (Interposing.) 17 (unintelligible.) 18 MR. AMOLSCH: Just don't make 19 it any bigger. 20 MEMBER SANGHVI: Pretty good. 21 Any further discussion? 22 MEMBER FISCHER: Is this a 23 denial of Sign B (unintelligible) separately? 24 MEMBER SANGHVI: Move it
24
1 separate. 2 MEMBER FISCHER: Okay. 3 MEMBER SANGHVI: Okay. Motion 4 has been made; seconded. 5 Please call the roll, please. 6 ROBIN WORKING: Member 7 Gronachan? 8 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes. 9 ROBIN WORKING: Member Krieger? 10 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 11 ROBIN WORKING: Member Bauer? 12 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 13 ROBIN WORKING: Member Fischer? 14 MEMBER FISCHER: Aye. 15 ROBIN WORKING: Member Sanghvi? 16 MEMBER SANGHVI: Aye. 17 ROBIN WORKING: Member Shroyer? 18 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 19 ROBIN WORKING: Motion passes 20 six to zero. 21 MEMBER SANGHVI: (Unintelligibl 22 e.) 23 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Now, in Case: 24 06-027, filed by Larry D. Craighead, in regards
25
1 to Sign B, I move that we deny the request for 2 this variance based on the fact that this would 3 be a marketing purpose, and not identification. 4 MEMBER BAUER: Second. 5 MEMBER SANGHVI: Motion has been 6 made and seconded. 7 Any discussion? 8 Member Fischer? 9 MR. SCHULTZ: Member Fischer 10 first. 11 MEMBER FISCHER: The maker of 12 the Motion could make some type of comment that 13 the Petitioner has not established a practical 14 difficulty for this sign, as well? 15 MEMBER GRONACHAN: And duly 16 noted. 17 MEMBER SANGHVI: (Unintelligibl 18 e) amended and seconded. 19 MR. SCHULTZ: Just a comment to 20 incorporate, if I may through the Chair, that 21 this is a destination area; and that's key to the 22 lack of practical difficulty from the 23 conversation. 24 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Based on my
26
1 previous comments made into the record, as the 2 lack of purpose of this sign and that it is a 3 designation location. 4 MEMBER BAUER: Second. 5 MEMBER SANGHVI: All right. 6 Will you please call the roll. 7 ROBIN WORKING: Member 8 Gronachan? 9 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes. 10 ROBIN WORKING: Member Bauer? 11 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 12 ROBIN WORKING: Member Fischer? 13 MEMBER FISCHER: Aye. 14 ROBIN WORKING: Member Krieger? 15 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 16 ROBIN WORKING: Member Sanghvi? 17 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 18 ROBIN WORKING: Member Shroyer? 19 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 20 ROBIN WORKING: Motion passes 21 six to zero. 22 MEMBER SANGHVI: Well, sir, with 23 (unintelligible) most of your signs have been 24 approved.
27
1 Please see the Building 2 Department. 3 Thank you. 4 MR. PLUMMER: Thank you very 5 much. 6 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Good luck. 7 MR. PLUMMER: Thanks. 8 9 MEMBER SANGHVI: Okay. 10 Moving along. 11 Moving along. 12 Next case, Case Number: 13 06-033, filed by Patrick Ziarnik at 1601 14 West Lake Drive. Mr. Ziarnik is requesting 15 two side yard setback variances for the 16 construction of a covered porch located at 17 1601 West Lake Drive. 18 He is seeking a seven foot six 19 inch north side yard setback variance and 20 also a combined total side yard variance for 21 seven feet three inches. The property is 22 zoned R-4, located on the south side of 23 Pontiac Trail and east of West Park Drive. 24 Are you Mister --
28
1 MR. ZIARNIK: Yes, I am, Pat 2 Ziarnik. 3 MEMBER SANGHVI: Will you please 4 be sworn in by our secretary. 5 MEMBER BAUER: Do you swear or 6 affirm to tell the truth regarding this case? 7 MR. ZIARNIK: I do. 8 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you. 9 MR. ZIARNIK: Good evening. 10 My name is Pat Ziarnik. As indicated, I 11 live at 1601 West Lake Drive. I'm here 12 tonight to request approval to construct 13 essentially a porch extension on our 14 existing porch. It involves two variances 15 that were previously described. 16 What we're really asking for 17 is an open air porch. It's nothing really 18 anymore than just a canopy that's supported 19 by two columns. And it measures eight feet 20 wide and four feet deep, just so that you 21 have an idea of what I'm talking about. 22 This doesn't show up real 23 well, but this is part of a larger addition 24 that my wife and I are putting on our house.
29
1 This basic addition right here, falls within 2 all the Code setback requirements and ratio 3 of building to lot size requirements and all 4 that sort of thing. So we opted to move 5 ahead with that basic construction, because 6 it didn't involve any potential variances. 7 And we've, in fact, received building 8 permits to proceed with that, and that 9 construction is underway. 10 What we're in front of the 11 Board here tonight for is to add this little 12 porch extension. And another view of this, 13 is right here. What we're looking to do on 14 the porch extension is simply extend the 15 existing porch. It's eight inches -- I'm 16 sorry, eight feet wide, four inches -- or 17 four feet deep. And it would connect to an 18 existing porch. This is an open air porch 19 right now. It's open on this side, on the 20 west side and on the north side. It's 21 enclosed. This is the entry to the house 22 right here on the -- on the east side and 23 south side. 24 We're also putting on this two
30
1 story addition. And the reason we're doing 2 that is my wife's mother, my mother-in-law, 3 is elderly and she's going to be moving in 4 with us. She needs daily assistance, and 5 she can't walk stairs. So we thought an 6 alternative would be to move her in our 7 house. We'd take one of our rooms; expand 8 it a little bit and add a bathroom and a 9 walk-in closet. You in effect create a 10 mother-in-law's suite, to enable her to live 11 in a more accommodating manner. 12 So that's the reason we moved 13 ahead with the basic addition. The -- once 14 again, all we're asking the Board's 15 permission to do is to build this little 16 porch extension. It's just an open air 17 porch; just simply a roof canopy supported 18 by two columns. 19 And the hardships we've got 20 are really two. First of all is the 21 narrowness of our lot. We're on Wall Lake. 22 Our lot is only 45 feet wide, so virtually 23 any kind of construction we do is going to 24 run (unintelligible) some of the setback
31
1 requirements and so forth. So we've got 2 that issue; but probably more importantly is 3 the placement of our house on the lot line. 4 At one point, effectively this 5 point right here in the house, we're inches 6 from the north lot line. And so you can see 7 that any (unintelligible) construction we do 8 is going to require variances basically. 9 We've tried to comply with the Code 10 requirements, but because of the placement 11 of the house and because of the narrowness 12 of the lot, it's virtually impossible to do 13 that. 14 Now, I guess at some point 15 there were some objections received, and I'd 16 like to speak to that. It's been more 17 frustrating to us, because apparently 18 there's been concerted underground efforts 19 to undermine(sic) (ph) our attempts here. 20 And what I will tell you is my wife and I 21 have spent considerable time -- we spent -- 22 weeks ago, we sent out notices to all of our 23 neighbors within 300 feet of our property. 24 We explained what we were
32
1 trying to do; why we were doing it; provided 2 them with elevations and drawings, and we 3 solicited their input. We said, please, if 4 you have any comments, questions, concerns, 5 get back to us and we'll try to address 6 those. And we didn't receive any comments 7 from anybody or the comments we received 8 were all positive. 9 And in addition to sending out 10 notices to all of our neighbors, we 11 contacted many of them personally. We 12 contacted our immediate neighbors to north 13 and west and the south. Spoke to them. We 14 were assured that they had no problems with 15 any of the proposed construction. And we 16 found out yesterday that one of the 17 neighbors who originally said she had no 18 problems with this whatsoever, is now 19 saying, she has -- she objects to our going 20 ahead with this. 21 And furthermore, we found out 22 from Robin earlier this evening that, in 23 fact, 4:00, today the Board received 24 three -- four more objections to our
33
1 proceeding with this. And so it's very 2 frustrating for us. We've done whatever we 3 could to alert our neighbors as to what we 4 were doing and why we were doing it; and 5 asking their help and their support; and 6 asking them to bring any issue to us. And 7 we didn't receive any comments until just 8 recently. 9 With respect to the one 10 neighbor who has -- that we know has voiced 11 a concern, I will tell you that we spoke 12 with her before we even submitted a variance 13 request. We talked to her weeks ago. We 14 explained what we were doing. She assured 15 us that she was in complete support of this. 16 I have talked to her several times in the 17 intervening weeks. At each time she 18 indicated she had no problem whatsoever with 19 our plans, and in fact, as recently as this 20 past Saturday, she assured me that there was 21 no problems with anything we were doing, and 22 she was in complete support of it. 23 And then I learn surprisingly 24 yesterday afternoon, this very neighbor,
34
1 that she was, in fact, objecting to our 2 going forward with this porch enclosure or 3 porch expansion. And, so, obviously, I'm 4 frustrated and -- I'm just frustrated with 5 the situation. We talked with the one 6 neighbor that voiced a concern to us. And 7 we talked probably 20 minutes or a half 8 hour; weren't able to resolve our 9 differences. So we -- the wife and I 10 decided to come before the Board; didn't 11 have enough time to plan any additional -- 12 there wasn't anything else we could do. We 13 didn't have time to look at other creative 14 solutions to the potential problem. 15 As we understand it, there are 16 problems expressed relative to the Fire 17 Code, the Novi Fire Code. And I don't know 18 what the Fire Code provides. What our 19 neighbor has advised us is that you must 20 have ten feet between your property line 21 and -- between the two houses, and we have 22 that. We've got 12 feet between our 23 neighbor's house and this proposed porch 24 expansion. So I don't see that as an issue.
35
1 MEMBER SANGHVI: Are you still 2 continuing? 3 MR. ZIARNIK: Oh, yeah, if I 4 can. 5 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I'd just like 6 a point of order here. I would like to hear what 7 the objections are first, before the Petitioner 8 goes on and on about it. I think he's putting 9 the cart before the horse. It might speed things 10 up. 11 MEMBER SANGHVI: You made your 12 case already (unintelligible) sir? 13 MR. ZIARNIK: Well, I have 14 some additional comments, but 15 (unintelligible) going to hear the 16 objections. 17 MEMBER SANGHVI: (unintelligibl 18 e.) 19 MR. ZIARNIK: I assume you 20 have those. 21 MEMBER SANGHVI: (Unintelligibl 22 e) we don't know that, okay. We'll come to that 23 in a moment. 24 Does anyone in the audience
36
1 here wish to address this Board regarding 2 this case? 3 Seeing none, I'll tell you 4 that (interposing) (unintelligible.) 5 MR. ZIARNIK: (Interposing) 6 can I -- can I -- excuse me. Can I just say 7 one final comment? 8 MEMBER SANGHVI: Please hold 9 your horses for a moment, please. 10 MR. ZIARNIK: Sure. 11 MEMBER SANGHVI: 65 notices are 12 mailed; six approvals and four objections. 13 I think I'll ask the secretary 14 to (unintelligible.) 15 MEMBER BAUER: One objection. 16 It's always been our position that any 17 variance proposal that request a side yard 18 setback of less than five feet be denied. 19 House and permanent structure are becoming 20 increasingly too close together. In the 21 Fire Code is ten feet between structures 22 then putting the difference between 23 neighbors is the only reasonable solution. 24 We've had fires in the neighborhood
37
1 recently, and this is a concern for us. 2 Another objection. We are 3 objecting to the north side yard setback 4 request to build within two and a half feet 5 of the property line. (unintelligible) 6 consider requests for anything under five 7 feet, because of the ten foot Fire Code 8 between the houses. And ten feet 9 (unintelligible) should always be shared 10 equally between property owners. 11 Objection. Fire Code 12 determines a minimum of ten feet between the 13 homes. This must be distributed evenly 14 between properties, and no more than a 15 minimum variance of five feet per house to a 16 lot line. (Unintelligible) owner to 17 (unintelligible) six inches place a burden 18 of (unintelligible) of -- on the neighboring 19 owner. This is not only unfair, but 20 (unintelligible) violates the property of 21 the neighbor with -- looks like seven feet 22 four inches. 23 Objection. I'm objecting to 24 the setback on my side of the home because
38
1 it violates the Fire Safety Code of five 2 feet on each side of the lot line, or ten 3 feet between houses. I will not approve two 4 and a half feet, but I will approve a five 5 foot setback; if they would like to move the 6 porch over two and a half feet. 7 Approval. We own the property 8 directly to the south. We fully support the 9 additions and request the Board approve 10 these variances. 11 Approval. I fully support 12 this request for variances. Pat and Pam 13 communicated with me and other neighbors on 14 this request and asked for our input. This 15 request (unintelligible) perfectly 16 reasonable continuing the improvements 17 within the neighborhood. 18 Approval. We fully support 19 the requested variances. This property is 20 always well maintained, and the proposed 21 addition will enhance the neighborhood. 22 Approval. We have no 23 objections to the proposed request. The 24 yard setback due to the (unintelligible.)
39
1 This is a very old neighborhood. We -- some 2 of the properties have only one foot 3 setbacks. 4 Approval. Pat and Pam are 5 excellent neighbors. I'm sure that their 6 additions will be done tastefully, and will 7 add to the renovation in our neighborhood. 8 Approval. 9 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you. 10 Building Department? 11 MR. SAVEN: The audience first? 12 Just a couple issues that I 13 want to bring to the Board's attention. 14 Number one, as it was brought out, this is 15 an open air porch. This is not an 16 enclosure. This is an open air porch. 17 Number two, the existing building sits very 18 close to the property line, as it exists 19 right now. And Number three, there was a 20 fire in the general vicinity where there was 21 a loss of life. Based upon that concern, I 22 can see how the neighbors can have a issue 23 in regards to the Fire Codes. 24 Fire Codes are presented based
40
1 upon the issue of how close you do get to 2 the property line, not (unintelligible) to 3 the distance between the buildings; but 4 actually getting to that property line. And 5 there are things that you can do to restrict 6 the spread of flames by virtue of adding a 7 little more protection (unintelligible) 8 maybe overhang (unintelligible) construction 9 issue that needs to be looked at so the 10 spread of fire will not be there. 11 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you. 12 (Unintelligible.) 13 Member Gronachan? 14 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Thank you, 15 member Chair. 16 I have no problem with this 17 request and I can support it. Why I wanted 18 to save you some time and effort is because 19 I kind of thought what the objections were 20 going to be, so I wanted to hear them out. 21 I think what the residents are missing is 22 that these are extremely narrow lots. And 23 configurations and the lay of houses are 24 rather difficult. You can't pick up the
41
1 house and move it over. It's already on the 2 property line. 3 I don't feel that adding this 4 porch is going to increase or decrease -- 5 increase a fire hazard or decrease any 6 safety. Given the comments that Mr. Saven 7 said about aiding additional protection on 8 the overhang to cut down the spread of 9 fire -- I know that there's other building 10 things that can be done. I'll leave that to 11 the experts. But based on the information 12 that we have in front of us, and your 13 testimony I would be in support of this 14 request. 15 Thank you. 16 MEMBER SANGHVI: Mr. Fischer? 17 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 18 Mr. Chair. 19 Mr. Saven, is it part of the 20 building -- the Michigan Building Code or 21 whatever that materials are used -- what are 22 the overlying factors? 23 MR. SAVEN: The overlying issues 24 are opening protectives, opening protectives as
42
1 they get closer to the property line. So that if 2 there was a window or something along 3 (unintelligible) particular lines -- that 4 depending on how much square footage are involved 5 with those openings (unintelligible) restricted 6 for these openings (unintelligible) based upon 7 how close (unintelligible) to the property line. 8 The closer you get to the 9 property line, the more protected material 10 that you use; whether it's fire retardant 11 treated lumbar or something along those 12 lines. These things are options that 13 builders or owners may have at his deposal. 14 MEMBER FISCHER: Okay. 15 And will those be mandated by 16 some other (interposing) (unintelligible.) 17 MR. SAVEN: In this particular 18 case with the overhang (unintelligible) brings it 19 on back to that covered porch area. It's only a 20 small porch. I would assume two sheets of 21 plywood are probably going to end up being what's 22 going to be used? 23 MR. ZIARNIK: I was going to 24 say that we're perfectly willing to do that.
43
1 That's not an issue. 2 MEMBER FISCHER: I just want to 3 make sure that there's some type of other entity 4 or State regulation or something like that. 5 I would have to echo Member 6 Gronachan's comments for the second case in 7 a row, which always bothers me. 8 I want to commend you for 9 working with what seems like the majority of 10 your neighbors. We always like to hear 11 that. That's very important to us. And 12 especially when they get up and root for 13 you. That's quite the accomplishment. And 14 what confuses me about some of the other 15 comments is that this looks like it's just a 16 complete extension of the current porch. 17 Do you know by chance, the 18 current porch, how close that is to the lot 19 line? 20 MR. ZIARNIK: It's about two 21 feet six inches, which is what the extension 22 would be. 23 MEMBER FISCHER: Okay. And then 24 that's what it looks like on the map I'm looking
44
1 at; therefore, it doesn't seem like it's much 2 more of a variance request than what's currently 3 there. And also there's a north corner, so I 4 guess it would be the house. 5 How close is that to the lot 6 line? 7 MR. ZIARNIK: If you're 8 talking about from here to the lot line, 9 it's ten feet. 10 Oh, that. It's essentially 11 right on the lot line. I mean, it maybe a 12 few inches off the lot line, but that's 13 about it. It's essentially right there. 14 MEMBER FISCHER: I think this 15 request is quite minimal, given the fact that the 16 existing porch is that close, as well as other 17 areas, which are closer. I think there's one 18 other thing? Given obviously, the narrowness of 19 the lot. It's always a tough area to work in. 20 Can you explain a little more 21 the porch. It's not enclosed. What 22 exactly -- will it be just an overhang? 23 MR. ZIARNIK: It's simply an 24 overhang, you know, that extends from the
45
1 existing second floor, and it will be 2 supported by two columns. And that's -- 3 it's -- you know, it's eight feet wide, 4 which is the width of the current porch, and 5 it extends out four feet. It's really only 6 decorative. I mean, the only purpose is so 7 that the addition doesn't look as boxy as it 8 otherwise would. It makes it a little more 9 attractive for ourselves and for the 10 neighbors. 11 MEMBER FISCHER: So given those 12 comments that I made, I would be willing to 13 support this case, as well. 14 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you. 15 Ms. Krieger? 16 MEMBER KRIEGER: I am also in 17 support (unintelligible) previous speakers, that 18 the applicant is willing to construction the 19 (unintelligible) expansion for fire protection, 20 that he said he would do that; and regarding the 21 narrowness of the lot, and that it's also not 22 going to be enclosed. 23 Thank you. 24 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you.
46
1 I just wanted -- 2 Mr. Shroyer, go ahead. 3 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you, 4 Mr. Chair. 5 I just wanted to ask if, 6 indeed, this was denied, what are your 7 plans? 8 MR. ZIARNIK: You know, if it 9 was denied, I assume we'd just live with it 10 as it is. It's going to look like an 11 obvious addition, but the only other 12 alternative I can see would be to completely 13 reorient, you know, the entry to the house, 14 and that would be prohibitively expensive. 15 I would -- just my wife forced me to do it. 16 I wouldn't do it. I don't think we have too 17 many other alternatives, given where the 18 house is. 19 MEMBER SHROYER: That's what I 20 was trying to look at. It's about 12 foot wide 21 and the (unintelligible) four foot wide. 22 (unintelligible) try to move it over to meet the 23 requirement, then you'd really have to re-center 24 the front door. And that really --
47
1 MR. ZIARNIK: We'd have to 2 engage architects and it would be very 3 expensive; and I just could not support it 4 myself. 5 MEMBER SHROYER: Well, to me, 6 along with the new addition that you have in 7 the front of the house, to me it's building 8 up the property values of all of the homes 9 in this area. And now if your house wasn't 10 basically touching the side yard already, 11 you know, that might be a different issue. 12 But you've already gone over as far as you 13 can. (Unintelligible) you can't pick up the 14 house and move it over six feet or whatever. 15 So, I guess I have to agree 16 with my previous cohorts in crime here, and 17 I will be supporting the Motion. 18 Thank you, Mr. Chair. 19 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you, 20 Mr. Shroyer. 21 Mr. Fischer? 22 MEMBER FISCHER: I would move 23 that in Case Number: 06-033, filed by Patrick 24 Ziarnik at 1601 West Lake Drive, that this Board
48
1 approve the variances requested; given that the 2 Petitioner has established practical difficulty, 3 and that he has shown the minimum variance 4 necessary have -- will be used, given the current 5 existing porch. 6 The size and configuration of 7 the lot also proves that there's practical 8 difficulty, and that substantial justice to 9 this property owner and neighbors has been 10 shown with the conditions to -- the comments 11 that the Petitioner made about fire 12 protection, are part of the Motion in the 13 record. 14 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Second. 15 MEMBER BAUER: Second. 16 MEMBER SANGHVI: A Motion has 17 been made and seconded. 18 Any further discussion? 19 Seeing none, please call the 20 roll. 21 ROBIN WORKING: Member Fischer? 22 MEMBER FISCHER: Aye. 23 ROBIN WORKING: Member 24 Gronachan?
49
1 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes. 2 ROBIN WORKING: Member Bauer? 3 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 4 ROBIN WORKING: Member Krieger? 5 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 6 ROBIN WORKING: Member Sanghvi? 7 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 8 ROBIN WORKING: Member Shroyer? 9 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 10 ROBIN WORKING: Motion passes 11 six to zero. 12 MR. ZIARNIK: Thank you. 13 MEMBER SANGHVI: Your variance 14 has been approved. Please see the Building 15 Department. 16 17 18 19 We'll move on to our next Case 20 Number: 06-034, filed by On the Border 21 Restaurant at 21091 Haggerty Road. 22 Is the applicant here? 23 MR. KUBERACKI: Mak Kuberacki 24 for the On the Border of Novi.
50
1 MEMBER SANGHVI: Would you raise 2 your right hand and be sworn. 3 MEMBER BAUER: Do you swear the 4 truth regarding case 06-034? 5 MR. KUBERACKI: I do. 6 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you. 7 MR. KUBERACKI: Okay. My 8 name's Mark Kuberacki (unintelligible) On 9 the Border Novi, located at 21091 Haggerty 10 on Eight Mile in the High Point Shopping 11 Center. We just want to get out 12 (unintelligible) request our approval for 13 Cinco de Mayo party this Friday from 2:00 14 p.m. to 1:00 a.m. 15 MEMBER SANGHVI: Are you done? 16 MR. KUBERACKI: What's that? 17 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you. 18 Anybody in the audience that 19 would like to make a comment about this 20 case? 21 Seeing none, Building 22 Department? 23 MR. SAVEN: Oh, yeah. 24 Just to bring it to the
51
1 Board's attention, the Cinco de Mayo at On 2 the Border was previously approved by my 3 office on several occasions in the past, 4 which was based upon the fact there was -- 5 there was an issue regarding one thing in 6 particular and that was charging admission, 7 okay. At that time, there was fund -- I 8 believe you guys did fundraisers at that 9 time, and we went through all the steps, 10 police, fire, all the necessary requirements 11 for food source and things of this 12 (unintelligible) your liquor license 13 requirement and everything else. 14 And we're doing the same thing 15 right now. The thing that triggers this 16 thing more so than not, I'm making myself 17 explicitly clear today and now. If you're 18 going to charge for this particular issue; 19 you're going to have over 200 attendees, you 20 will go to City Council next year; is that 21 understood? 22 MR. KUBERACKI: Yes, sir. 23 MR. SAVEN: Okay. I just want to 24 make that as a point. That's one of the things
52
1 that we have to deal with with a temporary use 2 permit. And I can handle certain things within 3 my Department, but when things go by definition 4 and Ordinance, it becomes a very difficult 5 situation. And this particular case I'm bringing 6 it to the Board, timing purposes, and the things 7 that were done in the past (unintelligible) 8 things have changed, so. 9 If you charge admission, over 10 200 attendees, you'll go to City Council, 11 okay? 12 MR. KUBERACKI: Yes, sir. 13 MR. SAVEN: Thank you. 14 MEMBER SANGHVI: Very good. 15 I'd like to mention that we 16 had 12 notices were mailed out; there was 17 one approval and zero objections. 18 Ms. Gronachan? 19 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Thank you. 20 I figure it's my last meeting, 21 what the heck, you know. I'm going to miss 22 the Cinco de Mayo party though. You know, 23 I'm going to have to cancel the move. 24 Mr. Saven, this has gone on
53
1 for -- consistently for several years? 2 MR. SAVEN: That is correct. 3 MEMBER GRONACHAN: And there has 4 been no violations, no incidences? 5 MR. SAVEN: I have not received 6 any notices for violations or been -- anything 7 been brought to my attention (unintelligible.) 8 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. So 9 parking problems; no -- none of that? 10 MR. SAVEN: None that I'm aware 11 of. 12 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Nothing. 13 Then given that the Border has 14 been -- 15 How long have you been in Novi 16 now? 17 MR. KUBERACKI: Eight years. 18 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Eight years. 19 -- been a long time business 20 in Novi, and there has been no history of 21 any problems with this particular event at 22 the business, and that Mr. Saven put the 23 fear of God in you now, because charging 24 over 200 people, you'll be hearing have
54
1 somebody. I can be in complete support of 2 this. 3 Thank you, Mr. Chair. 4 MEMBER SANGHVI: Mr. Shroyer? 5 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you, 6 Mr. Chair. 7 I'll go ahead and make a 8 Motion in Case Number 06-034, filed by Mark 9 Kuberacki? 10 MR. KUBERACKI: Yes, sir. 11 MEMBER SHROYER: For On the 12 Border Restaurant, I move to approve the request 13 for a special use approval to permit the 14 placement of a 40 foot by 100 foot tent for Cinco 15 de Mayo on May 5th, whereas this was approved in 16 2004 and 2005 without any significant 17 (unintelligible); and that the applicant has been 18 proactive in hiring (unintelligible) police 19 officers to ensure patron and pedestrian safety. 20 Also, the applicant has a full 21 understanding of his agreement with the 22 statements made by the Building Department. 23 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Support. 24 MEMBER SANGHVI: All right.
55
1 Go ahead, Mr. Bauer. 2 MEMBER BAUER: 3 (Unintelligible) liquor license permit, says 4 100 by 70 (unintelligible) 100 by 40. 5 MR. SAVEN: Just an additional 6 issue, you need to obtain the appropriate 7 permits for electrical and (unintelligible) 8 prior to the opening. 9 MR. KUBERACKI: Yes, sir. 10 MEMBER FISCHER: (Unintelligibl 11 e) how big is your tent going to be? 12 MR. KUBERACKI: The tent 13 itself is a structure of 40 by 100. The 14 State of Michigan when I applied for the 15 license had (unintelligible) overflow of -- 16 for -- just overflow on the side, that's 17 additional about 30 feet. So they needed to 18 know for the liquor license if we had an 19 overflow, and it came out to be 70 feet 20 altogether. 21 MEMBER BAUER: All right. 22 MEMBER FISCHER: All right. 23 Just a friendly amendment or something -- 24 discussion, are we going to put a time on
56
1 Saturday that they need to have this thing down 2 by? 3 MEMBER SANGHVI: (Unintelligibl 4 e.) 5 MR. SAVEN: It should be 6 immediately after; (unintelligible) difficult 7 situation, but immediately after. 8 MR. KUBERACKI: Yes. It's 9 actually -- I do have it set up by 9:00 a.m. 10 the next morning. 11 MEMBER FISCHER: Oh, okay. 12 I didn't expect you to do it 13 that night or anything. I just didn't want 14 it out there Saturday, and all of a sudden 15 I'd be out there on a Saturday night 16 drinking away. 17 Thank you, Mr. Chair. 18 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you. 19 Please call the roll. 20 ROBIN WORKING: Member Shroyer? 21 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 22 ROBIN WORKING: Member 23 Gronachan? 24 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes.
57
1 ROBIN WORKING: Member Bauer? 2 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 3 ROBIN WORKING: Member Fischer? 4 MEMBER FISCHER: Aye. 5 ROBIN WORKING: Member Krieger? 6 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 7 ROBIN WORKING: Member Sanghvi? 8 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 9 ROBIN WORKING: Motion passes 10 six to zero. 11 MEMBER SANGHVI: Your permit has 12 been granted. (Unintelligible) the Building 13 Department. 14 MR. KUBERACKI: Thank you. 15 16 MEMBER SANGHVI: Okay. Next 17 Case: 06-036, filed by Garnish Restaurant 25875 18 Novi Road. And Garnish Restaurant is requesting 19 one sign variance to allow placement of an 20 additional wall sign at 25875 Novi Road, Suite 21 170. 22 Please state your name. 23 MR. CURZ(ph): Jason Curz, 24 Garnish Restaurant.
58
1 MEMBER BAUER: Would you raise 2 your right hand, please. 3 Do you swear or affirm to tell 4 the truth regarding case, 06-036? 5 MR. CURZ: I do. 6 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you, sir. 7 MEMBER SANGHVI: Please proceed. 8 MR. CURZ: Okay. 9 Good evening. I'm Jason Curz 10 on behalf of Garnish Restaurant. When we 11 first started as a franchise restaurant, we 12 looked at a lot of cities around. We chose 13 Novi because we were excited about the 14 potential growth. And before I get into why 15 I'm here tonight, I'd just like to thank the 16 City. They've been exceptionally wonderful 17 to work with as far as getting all of our 18 permits everything else, as for as for the 19 building. 20 The reason I'm here tonight is 21 because, I'm requesting a sign variance at 22 the City Center Plaza. Garnish Restaurant 23 is located on an end cap corner of the 24 Plaza, facing both Novi Road and Grand
59
1 River. After speaking with my partners and 2 they've spoke with Alan, it was stated that 3 typically, corner lots -- hard corner lots 4 get two signs without having to apply for 5 variances. Obviously, an example is the 6 Fidelity Building across the street on the 7 southeast corner of Novi Road and Grand 8 River. 9 Our position on that shopping 10 plaza, because it's the end of the Plaza -- 11 which is what we did choose -- it is behind 12 a gas station; and obviously the landscaping 13 shopping plaza. The reason we're requesting 14 the sign variances is because of the 15 hardship we will face based on the fact that 16 we are losing the visibility of any 17 potential customers heading south on Novi 18 Road. 19 The reason for that is, the 20 speed limit being 45 miles an hour. By the 21 time they can see our sign off the road, 22 they've already blown by the entrance to the 23 plaza. Obviously, we have the visibility 24 from the south side, but we are looking to
60
1 place a sign so that anybody on the Grand 2 River side, heading east or west can see 3 that we do, in fact, have a restaurant 4 there. 5 Because visibility in any 6 restaurant -- because a restaurant, 7 obviously, is an impulse business, versus a 8 Sam's Club or destination -- we feel 9 obviously that that would impact our sales, 10 if obviously our customer base can't see 11 that we're there until they pass us. 12 Because of that, we are 13 requesting a 5O foot -- 50 square foot sign 14 erected on the side facing Grand River 15 Street. Obviously, the allowance goes up 64 16 feet. And all we're looking for -- since 17 obviously it's not a marketing ploy -- is 18 just a 50 foot sign. 19 MEMBER SANGHVI: You done? 20 MR. CURZ: That's it. 21 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you. 22 MR. CURZ: Thank you. 23 MEMBER SANGHVI: Would anyone in 24 the audience like to address the Board regarding
61
1 this case? 2 Seeing none, there were 49 3 notices mailed; zero approvals, zero 4 objections. 5 Building Department? 6 MR. AMOLSCH: No comment, sir. 7 MEMBER SANGHVI: No comment from 8 there. 9 Board, any comment? 10 Go ahead, take the lead. 11 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Thank you. 12 I have no problem with this 13 request. I -- 14 Alan, what is the standard 15 size of a sign? Just refresh my memory 16 for -- for the first building sign? Is it 17 40 square feet? 18 MR. AMOLSCH: Those TC 19 (unintelligible) 1.25 square feet per lineal 20 foot to a maximum of 65 square feet. 21 Different than any other part of the City. 22 MEMBER GRONACHAN: The reason I 23 don't have a problem with this is because you're 24 right. By the time you go by this building, you
62
1 can't see it. And it's -- given the location of 2 this particular -- your store front, given the 3 location of your store front, I think it is 4 important to have it on -- where it is, and so 5 that people can see it. A lot of times when 6 you're driving down Novi road it is very busy, 7 it's very congested. You can't catch what 8 businesses are in there. 9 So I think you did a very good 10 job on your presentation, and we always 11 appreciate positive comments to the 12 City of -- regarding the City of Novi, and 13 I think you should tell all your business 14 partners, as well. 15 Thank you. 16 That's all. 17 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you, 18 Ms. Gronachan. 19 Anybody else? 20 Mr. Shroyer? 21 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you, 22 Mr. Chair. 23 I agree with the previous 24 comments. I do have a couple questions.
63
1 First of all, I assume all the signs that 2 are in the windows are going to go away? 3 MR. CURZ: That's right. 4 MEMBER SHROYER: It's kind of 5 overkill (unintelligible) checked out the site. 6 You know it's there now. 7 Driving along Grand River 8 Road, (unintelligible) indicate this was 9 somebody (unintelligible) restaurant's 10 there. I still wouldn't know there's a 11 restaurant. I think it might be a grocery 12 store or a what-not shop or something. 13 Where does it say restaurant or food or 14 anything along that line? I don't know -- 15 is this a franchise? 16 MR. CURZ: It's a start-up 17 franchise, yes. 18 MEMBER SHROYER: I wonder if 19 their marketing department has carefully looked 20 at this. Because if people don't know that 21 Garnish is a restaurant, they're not going to 22 stop to eat anyway. I think most of your 23 advertisement is going to be through word of 24 mouth or somebody from the City goes there for
64
1 lunch and starts telling their friend or 2 whatever, and then you start getting more and 3 more business and repeat business. 4 One of the questions I did 5 want to ask, if I may, Mr. Amolsch, am I 6 correct in remembering there's not a sign 7 (unintelligible) side of (unintelligible?) 8 MR. AMOLSCH: The sign 9 (unintelligible.) 10 MEMBER SHROYER: (Unintelligibl 11 e.) 12 MR. AMOLSCH: Oh, no, there's 13 not. They only have one sign. 14 MEMBER SHROYER: They're 15 basically a corner lot, as well, at the other end 16 of the complex. 17 MR. AMOLSCH: It's not a 18 corner lot. It's a multi-tenant building, 19 and doesn't have (unintelligible.) 20 MEMBER SHROYER: I understand. 21 (Unintelligible) a thoroughfare, as well. They 22 may come back and look for a sign on that side so 23 people can see (unintelligible) Panera Bread. 24 I'm not opposed to this. I
65
1 was just asking this question because 2 (unintelligible) even with the sign there. 3 Just food for thought. 4 I don't have anything else, 5 Mr. Chair. 6 MEMBER SANGHVI: Any further 7 comments? 8 Making a Motion? 9 MEMBER FISCHER: (Unintelligibl 10 e) further comments. 11 It is the corner store of the 12 multi-tenant building, correct? 13 MR. CURZ: Correct. 14 MEMBER FISCHER: And how many 15 doors do you have? 16 MR. CURZ: We currently have 17 two. 18 MEMBER FISCHER: One would be 19 under each of the signs; is that correct? 20 MR. CURZ: Yes, that is 21 correct. 22 MEMBER FISCHER: Given those 23 facts, I would be willing to support and probably 24 make a Motion.
66
1 Just one quick comment on the 2 verbiage. I would agree that you might not 3 know exactly what it is, but my philosophy 4 has always been for the Board to look at the 5 case and not necessarily what exactly the 6 Petitioner is trying to put up there. And 7 that's -- it's up to them. I'm concerned 8 about the size. I'm concerned about the 9 esthetic looks and the safety of the 10 residents. 11 And so that's why I'm not too 12 concerned about what they want to put up 13 there as long as it matches my tie. 14 Given that, I'd like to make a 15 Motion in Case Number: 06-036, filed by 16 Derrick Stein, Garnish Restaurant, that we 17 approve the variance has requested, given 18 Petitioner has established a practical 19 difficulty, and for identification reasons. 20 That's it. 21 MEMBER BAUER: Second. 22 MEMBER SANGHVI: Seconded. 23 Any other comments? 24 Please call the roll.
67
1 ROBIN WORKING: Member Fischer? 2 MEMBER FISCHER: Aye. 3 ROBIN WORKING: Member Bauer? 4 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 5 ROBIN WORKING: Member 6 Gronachan? 7 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes. 8 ROBIN WORKING: Member Krieger? 9 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 10 ROBIN WORKING: Member Sanghvi? 11 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 12 ROBIN WORKING: Member Shroyer? 13 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 14 ROBIN WORKING: Motion passes 15 six to zero. 16 MR. CURZ: Thank you. 17 MEMBER SANGHVI: Your variance 18 has been granted. Go and see the Building 19 Department. 20 Thank you. 21 MEMBER FISCHER: Good luck. 22 23 MEMBER SANGHVI: Okay. Next 24 Case is 06-037, filed by Beaner's Coffee at 31208
68
1 Beck Road, Shoppes at the Trail Plaza. 2 (Unintelligible) state your 3 name and address and be sworn in by our 4 secretary. 5 MS. KOZINSKI: Jenene 6 Kozinski, the owner of Beaner's Coffee, 7 31208 Beck Road. 8 MEMBER BAUER: Would you raise 9 your right hand. 10 Do you swear or affirm to tell 11 the truth regarding Case 06-037? 12 MS. KOZINSKI: Yes, I do. 13 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you. 14 MS. KOZINSKI: Thank you. 15 I'm here to ask the Board for 16 a temporary use permit for outdoor setting 17 in front of my coffee shop. I'm asking to 18 be allowed to put three to four tables out 19 in front of the store. They're a temporary 20 nature to be brought in nightly 21 (unintelligible.) And I'm also asking for 22 a number of chairs to be seated at each 23 table, as much as the City will allow me to 24 do.
69
1 Mr. Saven has visited the 2 location and as I told him, I will put in as 3 many as you will allow me to put in; no more 4 than four tables. If it's three, it's 5 three. And I will place them where you want 6 me to place them, as long as they're, you 7 know, according to Code, nowhere close to 8 the curb where the traffic is flowing. 9 There are -- there is an ample amount of 10 area in front of the building. 11 Forgive my crude pictures, but 12 you can see the brick area, that's where I'm 13 proposing to place the tables. And 14 unfortunately, (unintelligible) you can see 15 the extension of the curb and how far is 16 goes down. But there's plenty of space. I 17 know that some of the issues with placing 18 outdoor furniture at this building 19 (unintelligible) with the canopy and 20 placement of the furniture under the canopy, 21 I'm not proposing to do that. The canopy 22 doesn't even extend in front of my store. 23 So that's not something that I'm looking to 24 do.
70
1 And I presume at some point 2 the landlord is going to have a tenant 3 neighboring me who wouldn't want my 4 furniture under there any way. So that's 5 not what I anticipate doing. I just hope to 6 have furniture surrounding the tree bed; all 7 very tasteful furniture; four tables, 8 aluminum, 31 inches wide. The umbrellas are 9 hunter green, no logos; no big B on there. 10 Not to worry about that. 11 My hardship is, at this pint, 12 nowadays, the average coffee shop consumer 13 does anticipate, does expect to see outdoor 14 seating. They want to -- there's two types 15 of customers in a coffee shop. The kind 16 that are coming in to grab a cup of coffee 17 on their way to work; the other one wants to 18 sit there; (unintelligible) on the lap top 19 for awhile; work on his homework from 20 school, whatever it maybe, and they'd like 21 to be able to sit outside. And there's not 22 a day that guess by since the weather has 23 turned, I don't have a customer coming up to 24 me, when are you going to get outdoor
71
1 seating. 2 I have girls putting out a 3 blanket on the patio when I come to work 4 every day, sitting outside. So I'm trying 5 to start up in the City. Beaner's is a 6 chain, but not really well-known in Novi. I 7 do have those struggles. And it would be a 8 further struggle for me not to have outdoor 9 seating. That's what they expect. 10 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you. 11 Does anyone in the audience 12 wish to address the Board regarding this 13 case? 14 Not seeing anyone, there were 15 16 notices mailed; zero approvals, zero 16 objections. 17 Building Department? 18 MR. SAVEN: I met Ms. Kozinski 19 the other day and we went over the areas 20 where the placement of these particular 21 tables would be. She does have ample enough 22 room. It's no different than the adjacent 23 building which (unintelligible) a variance 24 for I believe about a month ago or a month
72
1 or two ago; same principal, where all the 2 applicants in this area are aware that they 3 cannot have tables underneath the canopy. 4 (Unintelligible) concerns regarding 5 (unintelligible) of this nature, based on 6 the use of that building and also 7 construction of the building. 8 So what she proposed seems to 9 be quite adequate for what she intends to 10 do. (Unintelligible) keep it away 11 (unintelligible) follow the same procedures. 12 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you, sir. 13 (Unintelligible) Mr. Fischer? 14 MEMBER FISCHER: Mr. Saven, in 15 this type of case, can you explain to me exactly 16 why this typically comes to us in a very 17 simple -- 18 MR. SAVEN: (Unintelligible) 19 it's a use not permitted in this particular -- it 20 is an outdoor application, and everything's 21 supposed to be enclosed within a building. 22 MEMBER FISCHER: Okay. That 23 makes much more sense. I couldn't agree more. I 24 think everybody expects to be able to sit outside
73
1 now. 2 My only concern is with table 3 number four. 4 Don't know if you have 5 pictures, by chance, with you? 6 MS. KOZINSKI: I do. And I 7 know you're concerned. Mr. Saven had the 8 same concern. This was the one closest to 9 the north curb, right. And we'd talked 10 about maybe either eliminating that or 11 placing it on the other side. 12 MR. SAVEN: That's correct. 13 MEMBER FISCHER: Yeah, I think 14 if it was almost near number one and two, that 15 would be fine. I have absolutely no problem with 16 this at all. 17 You will take care of 18 (unintelligible) compliance? 19 MR. SAVEN: Absolutely. 20 (Unintelligible) accessibility to the building, 21 making sure we have accessibility from the 22 parking lot (unintelligible) entrance, 23 (unintelligible) the walk area and all those 24 issues were discussed with the applicant.
74
1 They're well aware of it. 2 MEMBER FISCHER: Okay. 3 I would -- 4 MEMBER SANGHVI: Any comments? 5 MEMBER FISCHER: -- make a 6 Motion in this case, Number: 06-037, filed by 7 Jenene Kozinski of Beaner's Coffee to approve 8 this case as submitted. 9 Would it be applicable, 10 Mr. Attorney, to put anything -- I know you 11 don't like continuing jurisdiction, but 12 anything giving Mr. Saven the ability to 13 move things around, take way a table, if 14 necessary. 15 MR. SCHULTZ: Through the Chair. 16 I think that would be entirely 17 appropriate (unintelligible) duties as the 18 Building Official to make sure that 19 (unintelligible) compliance. 20 MEMBER FISCHER: As a condition 21 of this variance request, I would include that 22 Mr. Saven does have jurisdiction to comply with 23 access rights and other compliance issues. This 24 would be for dates May 3rd, 2006 through November
75
1 30th, 2006. 2 MEMBER KRIEGER: Support. 3 MEMBER SANGHVI: May I make an 4 observation? 5 MEMBER FISCHER: I'd love for 6 you to. 7 MEMBER SANGHVI: (Unintelligibl 8 e.) 9 MEMBER FISCHER: Yes. Mr. Saven 10 or (unintelligible.) 11 MEMBER SANGHVI: (Unintelligibl 12 e) going downtown looking (unintelligible.) 13 MEMBER FISCHER: An official of 14 the Building Department given the direction from 15 Mr. Saven. 16 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 17 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Support. 18 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you. 19 Yes, Mr. Shroyer? 20 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you, 21 Mr. Chair. 22 Mr. Schultz, if I may, there's 23 probably six, eight, maybe as many as ten 24 locations in this City that may be looking
76
1 at similar type activity. Where do we stand 2 in regard to consistency, and should we try 3 to adopt something or should we try to set 4 up -- set guidelines even to the point of 5 the dates that (unintelligible) requested 6 the seating I believe are different than the 7 dates whether granted a couple weeks ago or 8 couple months ago in the previous case. 9 Help me out here. 10 MR. SCHULTZ: Through the Chair. 11 I guess we kind of avoid 12 having the ZBA adopt consistent rules and 13 things like that in a formal way. It's 14 obviously important to be consistent in your 15 decisions, but each case is a little bit 16 different; each case has different physical 17 characteristics; each owner has different 18 needs in terms of when to have seating like 19 this. 20 I think, you know, there are a 21 number of these, and they seem to come kind 22 of regularly. It's always (unintelligible) 23 looking -- to have long term set goals and 24 policies. You do it in the Ordinance,
77
1 rather than here at the table. So, I think 2 maybe we can (unintelligible) it came up and 3 see if the Planning Committee wants to take 4 a look at the Ordinance for outdoor seating. 5 (Unintelligible) policy (unintelligible) 6 start there, rather than here. 7 MEMBER SHROYER: I have the same 8 issue (unintelligible) come up later, in regard 9 to outdoor sales, (unintelligible) Home Depot 10 (unintelligible.) 11 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you. 12 Yes, Mr. Saven? 13 MR. SAVEN: In a general 14 comment, an issue like this -- one of the things 15 that Board in the past (unintelligible) the fact 16 that -- one, to see how the business did operate, 17 was it's kept neat and clean in an orderly 18 fashion at all times. (Unintelligible) what the 19 Ordinance was and not try to take advantage of 20 the situation for more than or whatever. And 21 that, so-called continuing jurisdiction, have a 22 look-see, make sure that things were okay. 23 We set it up on principal of 24 one year, two years, three years, four
78
1 years, based upon how well the business did; 2 and looking at this as an incentive to keep 3 things in an orderly fashion. I thought 4 that worked pretty well over the period of 5 time. And, yes, I do agree with you. We do 6 have a lot of these businesses. It's a 7 chain, it's an inherent chain that the 8 Ordinance has to deal with constantly. And 9 sometime (unintelligible.) And it's nice. 10 I don't mind sitting outside, enjoy a cup of 11 coffee. It's a nice and new 12 (unintelligible) with any other issue, you 13 know, that's all I could tell you. 14 MEMBER SANGHVI: (Unintelligibl 15 e) your Motion? 16 MEMBER FISCHER: My Motion 17 (unintelligible.) I think it was supported by 18 Member Krieger. 19 MEMBER SANGHVI: Please call the 20 roll. 21 ROBIN WORKING: Member Fischer? 22 MEMBER FISCHER: Aye. 23 ROBIN WORKING: Member Krieger? 24 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes.
79
1 ROBIN WORKING: Member Bauer? 2 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 3 ROBIN WORKING: Member 4 Gronachan? 5 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes. 6 ROBIN WORKING: Member Sanghvi? 7 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 8 ROBIN WORKING: Member Shroyer? 9 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 10 ROBIN WORKING: Motion passes 11 six to zero. 12 MS. KOZINSKI: Thank you. 13 MEMBER SANGHVI: Your variance 14 has been granted. 15 16 Moving along, next Case 17 Number: 06-038, filed by Dykema Gossett, 18 PLLC, representing Sam's Club at 27300 Wixom 19 Road, Novi Promenade. 20 MS. HUNTER: Hi. My name is 21 Sandy Hunter and I'm with Dykema Gossett, 22 representing Sam's Club. 23 MEMBER BAUER: Do you swear or 24 affirm to tell the truth regarding case, 06-038?
80
1 MS. COTTER: Yes, I do. 2 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you. 3 MS. COTTER: Thank you. 4 As I noted, I'm Sandy Cotter. 5 I'm with Dykema Gossett's Lansing Office. 6 First of all, I wanted to express my 7 appreciation to the Building Department 8 Staff. Sarah and Alan, in particular -- 9 while, I have never in person met you, I 10 really appreciate you taking my calls on 11 this rather unique situation that I have 12 before you this evening. 13 What we do have are two sign 14 variance requests, and these requests are 15 made to comply with the Michigan Liquor 16 Control Commission January 2006 Order; 17 through which it approved the issuance of 18 liquor licenses that will allow Sam's Club 19 to sell beer and wine, as well as spirits 20 for take out at the Club. 21 The license that allows for 22 the sale of spirits is actually limited by a 23 quota that's set forth under Michigan law. 24 So there are only a certain amount of
81
1 licenses permitted per local unit of 2 Government. And in Novi, you all have 16 of 3 these licenses authorized, and 12 of them 4 are presently issued. 5 We are an applicant for one of 6 the remaining four. The Liquor Control 7 Commission has a policy where if a liquor 8 license is issued to a membership club, such 9 as Sam's or Costco, or any of those 10 club-type businesses, then that Club must 11 make sales of alcohol to the general public. 12 You don't have to be a member in order to 13 purchase alcoholic beverages at a Club in 14 Michigan; and in many other States, as well. 15 We can't refuse those people entrance into 16 the store. 17 And so to promote that policy, 18 the Liquor Control Commission as part of 19 their Order of Approval, wants us to put 20 certain signs in place, so that the general 21 public is made aware of the policy, and 22 knows that they can come in to make the 23 purchases of beer, wine, or spirits. At the 24 same time, the Commission also recognizes
82
1 that it's policies, which are not set forth 2 in Michigan law, but they're granted some 3 ability to have discretion the issuance of 4 liquor licenses and the conditions that 5 those licenses are used under. 6 They cannot supersede local 7 Zoning laws and regulations. So if you deny 8 us, I have to take it through the Appeals 9 process, and I would like for the ability to 10 put those signs in and Sam would like to 11 (unintelligible) general public of it's 12 ability to come on the premises to make 13 these purchases; but at the same time, the 14 Liquor Control Commission would not then -- 15 not issue the licenses to us. 16 I feel that I have to make you 17 aware of the whole story there. So that's 18 the purpose of that. 19 I would be happy to answer any 20 questions that you might have. The other 21 thing that I had discussed with Sarah before 22 is maybe you could see your way 23 (unintelligible) of thing. We could have 24 the sign that would be on the wall, even
83
1 though we might not be able to put the sign 2 up at the store entrance -- parking lot 3 entrance. 4 The Liquor Control Commission 5 staff with whom I've been working with 6 really believes that it's the wall sign on 7 the store that is more informative; and the 8 generally most accepted by the local units 9 of Government, as well. 10 So under full disclosure, 11 that's the whole story. 12 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you. 13 MS. COTTER: Thank you. 14 MEMBER SANGHVI: Is there anyone 15 in the audience that wishes to speak regarding 16 this case? 17 Seeing none, I'll inform the 18 Board there are 17 notices mailed; zero 19 approvals, zero objections. 20 Building Department? 21 MR. AMOLSCH: This matter came 22 up (unintelligible) come up before, a new 23 thing. I conferred with Mr. Schultz on the 24 and he said this sign did not fit in any
84
1 category. (Unintelligible.) 2 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you. 3 Well, I'll open it to the 4 Members. 5 Ms. Gronachan? 6 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I think that 7 this sign is unique. This particular request, I 8 should say, is a unique request; and that is, it 9 clearly a regulation. It's not -- it's not 10 advertising. It's not site location. It's not 11 drawing in. If anything, it's making sure that 12 people who walk in the door and try to buy 13 alcohol must have these requirements -- be 21 14 years of age and have proof of age at the time of 15 purchase. 16 So I have no problem with 17 this. I think that it serves a regulatory 18 purpose, and it might also contribute to a 19 safety -- avert some sort of confrontation 20 in the store, if somebody comes in and 21 they're not of age or there's some sort 22 of -- it makes -- it keeps those attempted 23 buyers out the door, and not walking in 24 trying to buy alcohol if they're not 21 --
85
1 not that I've ever did that. 2 I'm just getting my ID next 3 week (unintelligible) New York State. 4 Thank you. 5 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you. 6 Mr. Fischer. 7 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, 8 Mr. Chairman. 9 I somewhat agree, I somewhat 10 don't agree. I personally feel that one 11 sign is stating regulation. I feel that two 12 signs then becomes advertising that anybody 13 can come and buy alcohol in the store. So I 14 do see the need and I see a practical 15 difficulty for the wall sign, as you had 16 stated; but I don't think that the 17 Petitioner has established difficulty for 18 the second sign. And I don't think that it 19 really could be established. 20 So I would be in support of 21 one sign, and that would be -- it would be 22 up to the Petitioner to say the wall sign. 23 I'd be up for one sign, either one. 24 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
86
1 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you. 2 Anybody else? 3 Yes, Mr. Shroyer? 4 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you, 5 Mr. Chair. 6 I meant to get to the Sam's 7 Club on Haggerty Road, and I wasn't able to 8 get there prior to the meeting. 9 Where is their sign located? 10 Do they have one in the parking lot or one 11 in the store? 12 MS. COTTER: They just have 13 one on the wall, as well. 14 MEMBER SHROYER: That's what I 15 thought. (Unintelligible) remember ever seeing 16 one in the parking lot. 17 MS. COTTER: I come before 18 Townships and City Boards' rather 19 frequently, and it's always a new issue, 20 they've never seen the issue before. I 21 think we have a Costco in Southwest Michigan 22 that had seen it before. But it's a new 23 question, and most of the local units of 24 Government don't care for the multiplicity
87
1 of the sign. They would prefer to have one. 2 They also have one on the inside, but that 3 couldn't have the same regulation 4 (unintelligible.) And as I noted before, 5 I'll just restate the Liquor Control 6 Commissions' preference is for a wall sign. 7 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you, 8 Ms. Cotter. 9 I want to ask Mr. Schultz 10 (unintelligible) with this being the first 11 time it comes before the Board, and it's not 12 addressed directly in any of our Ordinances, 13 if we go one way or the other, are we in 14 jeopardy of setting any type of precedence? 15 MR. SCHULTZ: Through the Chair. 16 Same answer we usually give. 17 Each parcel is different. This particular 18 building was actually before you earlier in 19 the meeting (unintelligible) sign variances. 20 You know, from my perspective, this is a 21 wish list on the part of the Liquor Control 22 Commission. They don't tell you that you 23 have to approve the sign. They want people 24 to know they can come to a Sam's Club at get
88
1 in the door for certain purposes. 2 So they can ask for huge 3 signs, if they wish, not what's necessarily 4 best for you as part (unintelligible) 5 committee. So I think, all these issues are 6 fair game, recognizing that there is a 7 legitimate purpose to putting some kind of 8 notification (unintelligible) 36 square 9 feet. That's a pretty good sized sign. The 10 Petitioner (unintelligible) very candid with 11 you. 12 If you go through your normal 13 process of what's reasonable for this 14 building with the signs that exist and all 15 that, it would probably help the Petitioner, 16 as long as they get something. 17 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you, 18 Mr. Schultz. 19 With that being said, I 20 believe I'm in favor of the Sign A, the 21 first sign, which is inside, the one 22 interior one. In favor of an exterior sign; 23 I would like to see it consistent in size 24 with the other exterior signs that we
89
1 approved earlier in the day. 2 I'd have to go back and figure 3 Outs what that was. 4 MEMBER GRONACHAN: We denied 5 that. 6 MEMBER SHROYER: We denied that. 7 Never mind. (Unintelligible.) 8 Thank you, Mr. Chair. 9 MEMBER SANGHVI: Go ahead. 10 MEMBER FISCHER: I move that in 11 Case Number: 06-038, filed by Dykema Gossett, 12 PLLC, representing Sam's Club at Novi Promenade, 13 that we grant the wall sign, Sign A, given that 14 the Petitioner has established practical 15 difficulty as this is part of the regulation of 16 the Michigan Liquor Control Commission; and that 17 we deny Sign B, given that the Petitioner has not 18 established a practical difficulty, in that it 19 would be an overage and an abundance of the same 20 message delivered in the first approved sign. 21 MEMBER BAUER: Second. 22 MEMBER SANGHVI: Made and 23 seconded. 24 Any other comments?
90
1 Please call the roll. 2 ROBIN WORKING: Member Fischer 3 -- 4 MEMBER SHROYER: I'm sorry. I 5 just want to make a clarification, because I 6 referred (unintelligible) Sign B. And I was 7 referring to letter, the inter-office 8 correspondence dated January 11th, 2006. And I 9 just wanted to make sure that that is not 10 confused with the cover letter that addresses 11 Sign A as a wall sign and Sign B as the ground 12 sign. 13 MEMBER FISCHER: In the Motion I 14 stated, Sign A, the wall sign, is approve; Sign 15 B, the ground sign, for a point of clarification 16 as part of the Motion, that's fine with me; if 17 the seconder -- 18 MEMBER SHROYER: Okay. 19 MEMBER SANGHVI: Please call the 20 roll. 21 ROBIN WORKING: Member Fischer? 22 MEMBER FISCHER: Aye. 23 ROBIN WORKING: Member Bauer? 24 MEMBER BAUER: Yes.
91
1 ROBIN WORKING: Member 2 Gronachan? 3 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes. 4 ROBIN WORKING: Member Krieger? 5 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 6 ROBIN WORKING: Member Sanghvi? 7 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 8 ROBIN WORKING: Member Shroyer? 9 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 10 ROBIN WORKING: Motion passes 11 six to zero. 12 MS. COTTER: Thank you very 13 much. 14 MEMBER SANGHVI: (Unintelligibl 15 e.) 16 17 Okay. Moving along. 18 MEMBER FISCHER: Mr. Chairman? 19 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 20 MEMBER FISCHER: May I 21 respectfully request a five minute break for the 22 Board Members? 23 MEMBER SANGHVI: If it's the 24 consensus of the Board.
92
1 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes. 2 MEMBER SANGHVI: If you'd like 3 to have a five minute coffee break go ahead and 4 take it. 5 We're adjourned for five 6 minutes. 7 (A brief recess was taken.) 8 (Back on the record.) 9 MEMBER SANGHVI: We'll resume 10 the session. 11 12 And I would like to call Case 13 Number: 06-042, filed by the Road 14 Commission or Oakland County. 15 I beg your pardon. 16 Is the applicant here? 17 MR. LAFATA: Yes. 18 MEMBER SANGHVI: I stand 19 corrected. Case Number: 06-039, filed by ACO 20 Hardware 41800 West Ten Mile Road. 21 Please identify yourself. 22 State your name and address and be sworn in 23 by our secretary, please. 24 MR. LAFATA: I am Sam Lafata.
93
1 I represent ACO Hardware nat 41800 Ten Mile 2 Road. 3 MEMBER BAUER: Do you swear or 4 affirm to tell the truth regarding case 06-039? 5 MR. LAFATA: I do. 6 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you, sir. 7 MEMBER SANGHVI: Please proceed. 8 MR. LAFATA: ACO Hardware has 9 been at that location for approximately 21 10 years. For approximately the past 15 years, 11 we've had merchandise displayed outside for 12 sale. We have treated and (unintelligible) 13 to come to us to market for sale. 14 That area, that section of the 15 sidewalk where we (unintelligible) display 16 the merchandise on is ten feet wide. We use 17 approximately four feet of that, leaving a 18 six foot walkway. The front of our store is 19 121 feet. We'd like to accommodate 30 feet 20 of that with season garden merchandise; 21 which is bags of dirt products and bags of 22 cement products. 23 By displaying this merchandise 24 out front, it allows our customers to know
94
1 what we have for sale, and (unintelligible) 2 of purchasing the merchandise. By us having 3 that merchandise on sale, out front, we're 4 creating a traffic for it, which allow us to 5 obviously have sales and continue to be 6 profitable. And in this market, the way 7 things are in this area, with the big box 8 coming in, we need to have all the sales we 9 can acquire. 10 This is something that we have 11 to better ourselves from them, so customers 12 can come to us, come in, shop, get the 13 merchandise and be gone and not have to 14 stand in line at the big box stores. If we 15 had to remove the merchandise from the front 16 of the building, we would have to stop 17 selling some of the products. We would lose 18 approximately 80 to 90 percent of those 19 sales, because the customer would not go 20 into there because we would not have them to 21 sell to customers. 22 That would create a hardship 23 on us. It would effect our sales; it would 24 effect our profitability.
95
1 So we're asking for a variance 2 to allow us to continue to have this 3 merchandise displayed out front; seasonal 4 merchandise, bag product; nothing in bulk. 5 It will not obstruct traffic, as far as 6 customers walking on the sidewalk. 7 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you. 8 MR. LAFATA: Thank you. 9 MEMBER SANGHVI: Anybody in the 10 audience that would like to address the Board 11 regarding this case? 12 Seeing none, we'll move on. 13 36 notices mailed; zero approvals, zero 14 objections. 15 Building Department? 16 MR. SAVEN: Just a couple 17 issues I want to point out. Number one is, 18 this is a B-3 zoning district; number two, 19 if you take a look at the plot plan, they 20 show where they plan on -- where they're 21 planning on putting the products, they have 22 a customer loading zone, which is coming off 23 the rear end of the building. I think this 24 is something they probably thought of, and
96
1 taking into account where they would like to 2 store; and they are going to maintain six 3 feet of walk way. 4 MR. LAFATA: Yes, yes. 5 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you. 6 Ms. Gronachan? 7 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Didn't this 8 store always have outside --- 9 MR. SAVEN: (Unintelligible.) 10 (Interposing.) 11 MR. LAFATA: The past 15 12 years, we've had outside. 13 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Well, what -- 14 why are they coming in front of us now? Because 15 there's a change in ownership (unintelligible) of 16 the building? 17 MR. SAVEN: Whether it's a 18 change in ownership -- I don't believe that's 19 what it is. I think the timing factor. A number 20 of times they have this particular 21 (unintelligible) only lasts for a couple of 22 seasons before it comes back to the Board. 23 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I would like 24 to make a comment on the record, then. I have --
97
1 how appropriate that this store be my second to 2 the last case, since I think I probably paid for 3 the first part of the sidewalk at that store 4 redoing my home for 25 years, and what a 5 wonderful store you have. 6 If I couldn't find it, I came 7 to your store. That's a personal point, 8 just not as a Board Member. But as a Board 9 Member and seeing that store, there's never 10 been -- it's always been clean and neat. 11 It's always been easy to identify. I can't 12 think of the countless of times that I've 13 shopped there, and have always seen your 14 items and there is no safety problems. The 15 sidewalk seems to be almost wider there, 16 because of that curb. 17 MR. LAFATA: Correct. 18 MEMBER GRONACHAN: As opposed to 19 the other parts of the sidewalk, which even adds 20 to the added safety to it; and also adds to the 21 ability of being -- of doing this. 22 So I'm in complete support of 23 this. This is a longstanding business in 24 Novi; has repainted, repotted, and replanted
98
1 probably 50 percent of the homes in Novi. 2 So I have no problem. 3 And in case -- if I'll make a 4 Motion if nobody has anything else to do. 5 In Case Number 06-039, filed 6 by Sam Lafata at ACO Hardware, I move that 7 the Motion for the request for sidewalk sale 8 in front of this hardware store from May 3rd 9 to October 31st, 2006, be approved, due to 10 the testimony given by the Petitioner and 11 the items stated by this Member. 12 MEMBER KRIEGER: Second. 13 MEMBER BAUER: Second. 14 MEMBER SANGHVI: (Unintelligibl 15 e) seconded. 16 Any comments from any Members? 17 MEMBER BAUER: Sure. 18 I think I go to that store at 19 least once a week; never found it dirty; 20 never found the outside dirty. I think it's 21 great. 22 MR. LAFATA: Thank you. 23 MEMBER BAUER: I'm for it. 24 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes.
99
1 Go ahead. 2 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you. 3 I think your manager probably 4 recognizes several of us up here from being 5 in the store every single week. And I fully 6 agree. 7 The only concerns that I had, 8 I addressed them earlier, consistency with 9 the seasonal dates. And, of course, 10 sidewalk safety in providing 11 (unintelligible.) I assume they're four 12 foot. And the six foot buffer for the 13 sidewalk meets all my requirements regarding 14 that. 15 So, I am in full support, as 16 well. 17 Thank you, Mr. Chair. 18 MEMBER SANGHVI: Any further 19 comments? 20 Seeing none, please call the 21 roll. 22 ROBIN WORKING: Member 23 Gronachan? 24 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes.
100
1 ROBIN WORKING: Member Krieger? 2 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 3 ROBIN WORKING: Member Bauer? 4 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 5 ROBIN WORKING: Member Fischer? 6 MEMBER FISCHER: Aye. 7 ROBIN WORKING: Member Sanghvi? 8 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 9 ROBIN WORKING: Member Shroyer? 10 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 11 ROBIN WORKING: Motion passes 12 six to zero. 13 MR. LAFATA: Thank you. 14 MEMBER SANGHVI: Your variance 15 has been granted. Please see the Building 16 Department. 17 18 MEMBER SANGHVI: Now Case 19 Number: 06-042, filed by the Road Commission for 20 Oakland County for Michigan C-A-T, at 24460 Novi 21 Road, and I'm not going to list all that is 22 written down here. 23 You're going make the 24 presentation, Mr. Schmitt?
101
1 MR. SCHMITT: I am. 2 MEMBER SANGHVI: Okay. 3 MR. SCHMITT: Did I have to be 4 sworn? 5 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. I'm not a 6 lawyer. 7 MEMBER BAUER: Do you solemnly 8 swear or affirm to tell the truth regarding case, 9 06-042? 10 MR. SCHMITT: I do. 11 MEMBER BAUER: Go ahead, sir. 12 MR. SCHMITT: Thank you. 13 Through the Chair. 14 The Road Commission for 15 Oakland County, in conjunction with our 16 Council and the Planning Department -- who 17 has worked outstandingly on this job -- have 18 met recently regarding the proposed right of 19 way acquisition for Novi Road. There's 20 really two projects that you need to be 21 aware of with respect to this. 22 First and foremost, the Novi 23 and Ten Mile intersection -- which you can't 24 actually see on this drawing -- but which
102
1 was completed in the last year, was the 2 first portion of the road construction. 3 The second portion was from 4 the end of the intersection improvements 5 north, to the Grand River Novi Road 6 intersection, which was also completed last 7 year. This Novi Road gap project will 8 involve a substantial amount of construction 9 in the area; and subsequently, several 10 right-of-way acquisitions. 11 To make a long story short 12 regarding the Michigan Cat property, the 13 Judge in the case has asked that these 14 projects be moved along a little bit quicker 15 than it was moving; and we have been asked 16 by the Road Commission -- Ms. Diane Hersey 17 and Ms. Grazac(ph) are here this evening to 18 bring this forward to the Commission to 19 discuss it. 20 Essentially what you're 21 dealing with is, Michigan CAT has been in 22 the City in this location for decades. At 23 one time they were considering a to the 24 corner of 12 Mile and West Park, that fell
103
1 through. They sold the property to a 2 developer that currently does have 3 development going on there. So what -- 4 Michigan CAT remains on the property to this 5 day. 6 What we're dealing with 7 specifically with the right of way 8 acquisition -- let me show you on this 9 overhead -- this is a -- zooming in on the 10 northern end of the property, you can see at 11 the far left hand side -- this is the 12 centerline of Novi Road as it currently 13 exists. Their property line goes to the 14 center of Novi Road. It's an old platted 15 line. It's been there for -- for many 16 years. 17 The dashed -- the dark dashed 18 line is the proposed 60 foot right-of-way. 19 So the Road Commission for Oakland County 20 has acquiring 60 feet Pete along the entire 21 frontage of the property. As you can see, 22 there are several buildings and several 23 parking lots on the property. Specifically 24 this evening -- I'm going to go through
104
1 these one by one for you. We're dealing 2 with two buildings; Building A, which is the 3 southern most building, is an office 4 building; and Building B, which is the main 5 building people think of on the site as the 6 -- most of the retail sales and walk-in 7 traffic. 8 The northern most building, 9 although it looks close, is actually setback 10 exactly 160 feet from the centerline. So 11 variance is actually necessary for that 12 building. So Building A, which is 24460 13 Novi Road is currently setback 145 feet from 14 the centerline. This whole property is 15 zoned I-2. So the first thing you need to 16 know is 100 feet of setback is required from 17 the property line along the entire frontage, 18 which is why the northern most building is 19 conforming. They have 100 feet after the 60 20 feet of right-of-way acquisition. 21 So after the acquisition, 22 Building A will only have 65 feet of 23 frontage; Building B is in a similar 24 situation; will have 85 feet of frontage for
105
1 a portion of it and 96 feet for the 2 majority. Then you get into several parking 3 areas. At the far north end of the site, 4 next to the U.S. Post Office Building, there 5 is a small parking lot of five spaces. This 6 is within the front yard setback. In the 7 I-2 district, there are four specific 8 requirements you have to have. The two 9 we'll be dealing with this evening is the 10 100 foot setback, again; and the requirement 11 that front yard parking be screened by a 12 berm. 13 Given the grades that will 14 exist after the construction occurs, berm 15 construction along Novi road will not be 16 feasible. There's going to be substantial 17 grade changes throughout the length and even 18 existing there are substantial grade 19 changes. So from this parking area, we are 20 requesting a variance to eliminate the berm 21 and a variance for the lack of setback in 22 this case, 40 -- 52 feet in setback is the 23 variance. 24 The main building, the 24800
106
1 building, as I'm sure you're aware, has a 2 large parking area right in front of it at 3 the bottom of the hill. Again, this area, 4 not feasible to put a berm in due the 5 existing really and proposed grades. And 6 actually this parking area will be setback 7 approximately two to three feet once the 8 acquisition occurs. 9 There is going to be some 10 substantial grade changes in this area, and 11 it's not feasible to move these parking 12 spaces anywhere else. So we're requesting a 13 variance for the lack of setback there, as 14 well. The last two parking areas are a 15 small area to the north of 24460 Novi Road 16 and a small area to the south. Again, same 17 concerns as before. Parking area C does not 18 have the required berm, and is not setback 19 appropriately. And parking area D, no berm 20 and is not setback appropriately for the 21 spaces I've indicated on the plan in front 22 of you. So those seven spaces, I believe. 23 Nine -- I apologize, nine spaces are not 24 setback appropriately.
107
1 Lastly, there is a display 2 area -- and I'm sure you're all aware of -- 3 along Novi Road. This is what you see. 4 There are four pieces of heavy machinery 5 right along Novi Road. It's always been 6 there. It's existing, non-conforming use, 7 because it's in the existing non-conforming 8 situation; because it's in the front yard, 9 which is not normally permitted. 10 So we are requesting a 11 variance to be able to relocate that so that 12 it's outside in the future right of way, but 13 still in the front yard, still in the 14 configuration that you see in front of you. 15 Small gravel pad for up to four pieces of 16 machinery. 17 The question really is why 18 have we gotten to this point. As 19 Mr. Schultz can elaborate on further and the 20 attorneys for the Road Commission, State law 21 allows the applicant -- State law allows the 22 Governmental agency -- my apologies -- to 23 the applicant for variance in the case of an 24 acquisition. That's why the Road Commission
108
1 is the applicant in this case. 2 The owner of the property, 3 Michigan Caterpillars, Michigan CAT is not 4 requesting these variances. This is not a 5 situation they brought upon themselves by 6 any means. This is a situation that occurs 7 as a result of the acquisition and the road 8 improvements. 9 So to go through some of the 10 standards you may want to look at. On the 11 last page of my memorandum in your packet, 12 outlines the nine specific variances that 13 are being requested by the Road Commission 14 this evening. The effect of these variances 15 will be in the legal realm in many ways. 16 Not to get into the gory details, but once 17 the -- this goes to a Judge and possibly a 18 Jury, they're going to look at the 19 usefulness of the property and the value of 20 the property after the taking. 21 A granting of variances, the 22 Zoning Board of Appeals will in essence say, 23 we recognize these don't conform to the 24 existing standards, however, it's not
109
1 altering the character of the area. It's 2 not changing. It's not harming the intent 3 of the Ordinance. And should this be -- 4 should this building be burned down it would 5 be able to be rebuilt in a similar -- in the 6 exact same configuration. 7 That's really the hardship on 8 the applicant in a situation like this. If 9 we come in and acquire property, that then 10 renders their building non-conforming. And 11 heaven forbid a fire comes in or a truck 12 rams into it and the building collapses; 13 they would need to seek relief from the 14 Zoning Board of Appeals to rebuild that 15 building, because it was not conforming with 16 our Ordinance. 17 What we're doing is getting in 18 front of that problem before it ever occurs. 19 This certainly helps in two ways. It helps, 20 as I said, if a catastrophe ever occured; 21 and it helps, really the financing the 22 Planning Department gets on a regular basis 23 request from property owners that say, we'd 24 like zoning verification that our property
110
1 is in compliance with current Ordinances. 2 Pretty much every lending 3 institution that I'm aware of requests that 4 from property owners when they refinance or 5 finance property. 6 The second part of my memo on 7 the last page, should the Board choose to 8 grant the variances in this case, I've had 9 several discussions regarding the practical 10 difficulty for these variances. I've 11 discussed them at some length with you this 12 evening. And I'd be happy to discuss them 13 further. 14 As I've mentioned, the 15 attorneys from the Road Commission are here, 16 and Mr. Schultz may have something to add, 17 but that's all I have at this time. 18 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you 19 Mr. Schmitt. 20 There were 14 notices mailed 21 out; zero approvals, one objection. 22 Would you just like to mention 23 it for the Minutes, please. 24 MEMBER BAUER: Yes.
111
1 The objection from JD Dinan 2 Company. We own the property at 24400 Novi 3 Road. In the fall of 2005, our complex 4 applied for a variance allowing Classic 5 Collision (unintelligible.) We were met by 6 strong opposition regarding storage issues 7 at our complex and the Board placed a six 8 month review on our application in order to 9 reassess our outdoor storage issues upon 10 receipt of our certificate of occupancy. 11 Therefore we regretfully request that -- 12 respectfully request that the same 13 (unintelligible) policy be applied to every 14 business located on Novi Road. Outdoor 15 storage is not permitted. 16 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you 17 Mr. Secretary. 18 Are you going to wear a double 19 hat and (unintelligible) Planning Department 20 comments now? 21 MR. SCHMITT: You know, the 22 Planning Department appreciates the Road 23 Commission coming to us with this. The City has 24 in the past, dealt with similar situations, most
112
1 notably Twelve Mile. I can say that, you know, 2 we developed a pretty good rapore here and 3 hopefully throughout Novi Road (unintelligible) 4 issues obviously, we would come back to the Board 5 as necessary. 6 But for now, this is what we 7 have. The Planning Department 8 (unintelligible) (interposing.) 9 MEMBER SANGHVI: Building 10 Department, any comments? 11 MR. SAVEN: Just to point out 12 that if you took a look at those two homes 13 to the north, (unintelligible) relationship 14 to the road (unintelligible) they are 15 depressed or they are lower than the road, 16 and the issue regarding the berm issue maybe 17 (unintelligible) do any good. 18 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you. 19 At this point, Mr. Schultz, do 20 you have any comments? 21 MR. SCHULTZ: Just briefly. 22 Mr. Schmitt outlined the 23 practical difficulty questions. 24 (Unintelligible) provided you a letter
113
1 explaining why the Road Commission's the 2 applicant; what your authority is, what kind 3 (unintelligible) on that. We only asked the 4 Road Commission to be here if there were 5 specific questions for them; didn't have 6 them prepare a presentation at all for the 7 Board. 8 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you, 9 Mr. Schultz. 10 Board Members? 11 Yes, Ms. Gronachan? 12 The final hoorah. 13 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. I 14 don't have no oil can and no Kleenex, so let's 15 not do that. 16 Based on the presentation 17 given by our Planning Department and also 18 the material that was in our packets 19 summarizing the variance requests, I am in 20 full support of all of these requests. I 21 feel that the Petitioner should not suffer 22 any type of difficulty. And I would ask 23 that in rendering our decision, that our 24 attorney right or could create our final
114
1 findings to make it clear, especially since 2 this is going back to court. 3 MR. SCHULTZ: If I may, through 4 the Chair? 5 MEMBER SANGHVI: Please, go 6 ahead, Mr. Schultz. 7 MR. SCHULTZ: That's always a 8 good request. I'd be happy to do that for the 9 board. We kind of anticipated direction, and 10 Mr. Schmitt kind of took that opportunity in that 11 final paragraph in the report that he prepared, 12 where he did address practical difficulty and the 13 reason and our hope was, that the Board -- if 14 it's inclined the grant that, that recitation was 15 sufficient, I think for a Motion. 16 MEMBER GRONACHAN: And you would 17 like that read into the record? 18 MR. SCHULTZ: (Unintelligible.) 19 MEMBER GRONACHAN: If there 20 isn't any further comment, and given the hour, I 21 would just go ahead and make a Motion, if that's 22 all right with the fellow Board Members? 23 Although I lost my paperwork. 24 I need the case number. Okay.
115
1 In Case Number 06-042, filed 2 by Michigan CAT, filed by Diane Hersey for 3 the Road Commission of Oakland County, I 4 move that the nine variances for the 5 property located at 24460 Novi Road, 24800 6 Novi Road, and 25000 Novi Road, be granted, 7 based on the fact that the practical 8 difficulty standards cover these types of 9 dimensional variances. 10 In this case, the practical 11 difficulty is two-fold. First, the property 12 owner would have severe hardship for the 13 business after the Novi Road widening. If 14 the buildings and the parking are deemed to 15 be non-conforming, this would make financing 16 through banks extremely difficult, and no 17 modification to the property could be made 18 in the future without a variance. 19 The second is the Municipal 20 side of the difficulty. Not granting these 21 variances would be a substantial detriment 22 to the overall public good. As the RCOC 23 would like -- likely not to be able to 24 acquire the right-of-way necessary to widen
116
1 Novi Road. And we'd have to pay 2 substantially more for it; a cost that would 3 need to be burden on the taxpaying public. 4 I'd also like to add that 5 there is a safety issue. By not granting 6 these variances, there could be an increase 7 of hazards with the road not being repaired 8 properly. 9 The granting of these 10 variances would not impair the intent of the 11 Ordinance, as there is no new construction 12 proposed on the CAT -- Michigan CAT property 13 that would alter the existing conditions. 14 And the character of the area will not 15 change, as the parking and the buildings 16 will still be in the same location as they 17 are today; just closer to the travel portion 18 of the road after construction. 19 MEMBER BAUER: Second. 20 MEMBER SANGHVI: Motion has been 21 made and seconded. 22 Any discussion? 23 MEMBER FISCHER: Mr. Chair? 24 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes,
117
1 Mr. Fischer. 2 MEMBER FISCHER: If appropriate 3 and agreed to by counsel, a friendly amendment 4 just to point out on the record, as well, that 5 the request -- the variance requests are not 6 cause of the -- practical difficulty is not 7 caused by the property owner. 8 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I said that 9 already, but sure. 10 MEMBER BAUER: No problem. 11 MEMBER FISCHER: Is that a yes? 12 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Let me sleep 13 on it. 14 MEMBER BAUER: Next case. 15 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you. 16 Any other comments? 17 Please call the roll. 18 ROBIN WORKING: Member 19 Gronachan? 20 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes. 21 ROBIN WORKING: Member Bauer? 22 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 23 ROBIN WORKING: Member Fischer? 24 MEMBER FISCHER: Aye.
118
1 ROBIN WORKING: Member Krieger? 2 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 3 ROBIN WORKING: Member Sanghvi? 4 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 5 ROBIN WORKING: Member Shroyer? 6 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 7 ROBIN WORKING: Motion passes 8 six to zero. 9 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you. 10 Your request is granted. 11 12 All right. Moving along. 13 Tonight is young and we're 14 almost done here. 15 Before we finish for the day, 16 I have a very pleasant task to perform, and 17 that's to present a special plaque to 18 Cynthia Gronachan. 19 Will you please come here, 20 Ms. Gronachan? 21 22 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Where are we 23 going? 24 MEMBER SANGHVI: We have done
119
1 everything we can to make sure you go. And so 2 this is the final (unintelligible.) Joking 3 apart, Cindy, we love you. We will miss you. 4 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Thank you. 5 Thank you very much. 6 MEMBER SANGHVI: Good luck an 7 God bless you. 8 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Thank you 9 everybody. This is wonderful. This is very 10 nice. I have to go back to my mic in order to 11 give a speech. 12 Fine, okay. I hope that there 13 are a few people at home watching and not 14 just to be able to blow my horn and walk in 15 the bask of the limelight these last couple 16 of days in Novi. 17 Justin said if I cried during 18 the meeting, he would walk out and resign 19 from the Zoning Board of Appeals. 20 (Unintelligible.) But this is the end of an 21 era. And I've been fortunate enough that 22 when he moved here to Novi I got to watch 23 and witness the growth and the challenges 24 that this City faced.
120
1 And with that experience, I 2 take with me to new area, which is similar 3 to Novi, but I will never forget the lessons 4 that I've learned; the people that I've met 5 and the lives that have touched me, and I 6 hope that I've touched you. And from the 7 comments tonight, I guess I have. I didn't 8 really realize just how much. So I'm very 9 grateful. 10 And I wasn't kidding earlier 11 when I said I have a lot of boxes packed at 12 the house, but what I take with me from 13 Novi, will never be in a box or never on a 14 shelf. 15 Thank you very much. 16 MEMBER SANGHVI: If there are no 17 further comments, (unintelligible) hear a Motion 18 to adjourn? 19 MEMBER FISCHER: Motion to 20 adjourn. 21 MEMBER BAUER: So moved. 22 MEMBER SANGHVI: So moved. 23 All signify by saying Aye. 24 BOARD MEMBERS: Aye.
121
1 MEMBER SANGHVI: Meeting 2 adjourned. 3 Thank you. 4 (The meeting was adjourned at 5 9:40 p.m.) 6 - - - - - - 1 C E R T I F I C A T E 2 3 I, Machelle Billingslea-Moore, 4 do hereby certify that I have recorded 5 stenographically the proceedings had and testimony 6 taken in the above-entitled matter at the time and 7 place hereinbefore set forth, and I do further certify 8 that the foregoing transcript, consisting of (116) 9 typewritten pages, is a true and correct transcript 10 of my said stenograph notes. 11 12 13 ___________________________ Machelle Billingslea-Moore, 14 Certified Shorthand Reporter 15 16 June 22, 2006. (Date) 123
|