Last week’s Oxford Village Planning Commission meeting was not a good one for the father-son development team of Chuck and Craig Schneider.
First, there was a significant amount of criticism for the Schneiders? proposed 76-unit multiple-family development at 98 S. Glaspie St. (see story on Page 1).
That was followed by commissioners 6-0 vote to recommend the village council deny their request for a conditional rezoning of a portion of the White House Village Shops development, located on the west side of M-24 between Lincoln and Crawford streets.
The Schneiders? request was tied to their desire to construct a two-story, 5,400-square-foot apartment building in the southwest corner of the White House site along Lincoln St. It would be located just west of the Oxford School of Music (125 S. Washington St.), which already has an apartment above it.
Without a rezoning, the apartment building cannot be constructed because the White House property is currently zoned for Commercial Office (CO) uses, which allows for retail establishments and office spaces. CO zoning does not permit buildings that are solely for residential use.
Village planner Chris Khorey, of the Northville-based McKenna Associates, recommended approval of the conditional rezoning provided the village engineer, fire chief, police chief, building official and DPW director all did so as well.
‘It is definitely consistent with the master plan,? he said.
In his Dec. 22, 2015 memo to the commission, Khorey explained the master plan calls for office/residential uses along this stretch of M-24.
He wrote the proposed apartment building ‘fits with the desire for mixed use here by adding walkable residential units to the existing office uses, while protecting the residential uses from heavy M-24 traffic by locating them at the rear of the site. The existing unit in 125 (S. Washington St.) fits the vision for mixed use by being located above the commercial use.?
Khorey also pointed out an apartment building would generate less traffic than if a commercial building was constructed there, plus it helps meet the ‘skyrocket ing demand for multiple family units? that’s being experienced at regional, state and national levels.
That being said, Khorey urged planning commissioners to listen to Fire Chief Pete Scholz, who had some serious concerns about the proposed project.
In order to fight potential fires there, Scholz recommended the 3-inch-diameter water line proposed for the site be doubled in size and that a hydrant be installed on the property.
‘I (currently) have no means of getting water back there to fight the fire with,? the chief told commissioners.
Right now, the nearest, accessible fire hydrants are located on the east side of M-24 in front of Coldwell Banker Shooltz Realty and Holy Cross Lutheran Church.
‘I don’t have a hydrant available without laying hose across M-24 and that’s not going to happen,? Scholz said.
That’s because laying hose across the busy state highway endangers firefighters and risks damaging equipment, the chief explained.
There is another fire hydrant located on the north side of Lincoln St., just west of M-24, but Scholz explained in order to access it, his personnel would have to cut a hole in an existing fence and run hose across someone else’s property.
Given the layout of the White House development in terms of where buildings, parking spaces and utility infrastructure are situated, Scholz was also concerned about how difficult it is to maneuver fire trucks there.
‘The site is extremely tight,? he said.
For example, there’s an overhead power line that runs straight down the middle of the property.
‘That pretty much eliminates me being able to use an aerial (truck) there,? Scholz said. ‘I can’t get the aerial device (onto) the property anyhow because I can’t make the turns to get into there.?
The chief also noted there’s a telephone pole sitting right in the middle of the driveway on the property’s south end.
Commission Chairman John DuVal echoed the chief’s sentiments.
‘My biggest concern is the access,? he said. ‘That is a huge concern.?
DuVal asked Craig Schneider, who was present for the meeting, if the proposed building could be constructed elsewhere on the site.
‘There’s nowhere else to put it,? Schneider replied.
Commissioner Maureen Helmuth, who also serves on the village council, was critical of the site’s lack of natural features.
‘There is no green space on this site,? she said. ‘This is just all asphalt. We’re just laying down asphalt. Let’s pave everything.?
‘There isn’t a requirement (for green space in this case), but I think it’s a reasonable concern,? Khorey noted.
Unlike a planned unit development (PUD) agreement where there’s give and take in the process, legally, there can be no negotiations between the village and the developer with regard to a conditional rezoning request.
Village attorney Bob Davis told commissioners, ‘You either accept what he’s proposed or you don’t.?
‘We don’t have the ability to barter on this,? he explained. ‘We accept his proposal or we don’t or we set it aside and sometimes they repropose.?