minute book no. 64, city of oxford dement -me:ridian 61
TRANSCRIPT
MINUTE BOOK No. 64, CITY OF OXFORD DEMENT -ME:RIDIAN 61-1461
don't feel it would be useful to improve that portion of CR300. Mr. Bradley asked ifthe improved Oxford Way and CR 300 were capable of handling all traffic from both The Connection and the proposed development should it be required. Mr. Koshenina replied that his traffic impact analysis indicated that the current system could safely handle all traffic effectively. Discussion continued regarding the currency of the traffic impact analysis. It was determined that a recent impact study was done in February 6-14th of 2012.
Discussion continued regarding the need to improve CR300 and complete a connection to S. Lamar, University student growth, on campus housing, multi-unit housing occupancy rates in the City, and infrastructure concerns.
Chairman Harmon called for a motion on the case. Board of Alderman Member; Janice Antonow came forward not wanting to comment on the case however, expressed concern from the gallery that public notice for this case was insufficient.
Discussion continued. Mr. Linley commented as a landowner that he pays taxes on the subject property, it's zoned correctly and he met and followed all requirements for approval of'the site plan.
With no further questions or comments, Chairman Harmon called for a motion. Commissioner Kellum moved to deny site plan approval based on the recommendation by the planning. Commissioner Bradley seconded the motion. Commissioner Huelse abstained.
All remaining Commission members voted in favor of the denial.
The motion was approved.
9
2
MINUTE BOOK No. 64, CITY OF OXFORD illMLNr rvllHl[llANti1 14tJI
Bart Robinson, P.E. Director of Public Works @
The City --------------- of
Oxford Scplembc:· 27, 2012 ~ublic Works Department
Mr. Paul Koshenina, P.E. Precision Engineering Cooperation 276 CR 101 Oxford, MS 38655
Re: 'J'he Domain
Dettr Mr. Koshcnina,
Reanna Mayoral, P.E. A~sistant City Engineer
After review of the site plan as submitted for The Domain, lhc PL:blic Works Department will recommend Lhal Lhe Cily or Oxford Plauning Commission deny the proposed multifamily development. Life Safety issues are al the forefront ofthis recommendation.
The proposed site plnn proposes the primary entrance into 111t.: Domain be lm.:ated at the cul -de-sac on the southern lermiui of Oxford Way. This Southern termini is in cxces.s of 800 feet Crom Old Taylor Road. Section i.62.04 subsection 14 oftbe Code of Ordinance oftbc City of Oxford states "Dt.:aC. end Streets dcsi~.~1cd to be so pcnrnmcntly shall be no longer than 800 feet in length ... " Oxford Way was not designed and intended lo be a pernrnnent dead end street (see atim:hccl miot1les from Oxford Planning, Exhibit D from the previously approved and removed conservation casement, nnd Traffic Impact Study for The Exchange at Ole Miss, pertinent Section 2.0 page: 1). Tlicrefore, Lhe Public Works Deparlrr:cnt cannoi approve primary access for a development from a slreGL thal is currenUy in excess of dead end .c;trcct length set fo1th in the Cocc of Ordinances. The pu11rnsc of the above staled code is to ensure Health, Safety find Welfare of the future rcsidcnt.<;/tenants.
Tbc proposed site plan proposes only one public ingress/eg:css. Section l 62.04 subsection 3 paragraph (a) states "Hcsidcntial developments with more than 200 lots or dwelling units shall have at least two scparnie points of public road access." Thc:rcfore, the Public Works Dcpurlment cannot recommend a;-iprnval of the: siic 1-ilan as submitted. Again, thG purpose of this cock is to ensure the health, safety aud welfare of the future residents/tenants.
107 Courthouse Square Oxford, MS 38655 www.oxfordms.net
Phone (662) 232-2315 Fax (662) 232-2319
I
I
I
I
I
I
MINUTE BOOK No. 64, CITY OF OXFORD
The proposed site plan does not propose a sidewalk along County Road 300. Sections 125 subsection 7 states ''Sidewalks shall be required in all zoning districts ...... " This requirement is not addressed in the proposed site plan. There have been various discnssions concerning this requirement, bnt a resolution has not yet been determined. Therefore, the Public \Yorks Department cannot recommend approval of the site 1;la11 as presented.
Emergency ingress/egress to County Road 300 must remain strictly for emergency vehicles. The proposed site plan and the submitted Traffic Impact Study does not address additionuJ tra11ic on County Road 300. The proposed site plan does not address any limiting structures on the emergency ingress/egress. Therefore, the Public Works Department cannot recommend approval of the site plan as presented.
Furthermore, the Public Works Department also feels that development doesn't strive to meet less specific requirements of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Oxford such as:
Section 105 subsection 4, which states "Establish a densely connected network of slrnets and roads to guide future growth that equally serves automobiles, pedestrians, bicycles and future possibilities of transit."
Section I 05 subsection 5, which states "Relate existing and fotme development to the network of streets, roads and natural drainage areas, emphasizing appropriate mixes of land uses instead of single use districts."
Section 162.01 subsection 1 paragraph (a), which states '~Provide a safe and convenient circulation system minimizing pedestrian and vehicle conflicts, and traffic congestion."
Section 162.04 Streets, as follows:
"1. General anangement and layout. The street pattern shall be based upon the following general design criteria:
3
DEMENT-MERIDIAN 61-1461
a. Provide for adequate vehicular access to all properties within the clevelopment.
b. Provide street or road connections to adjacent properties to ensure adequate traffic cil'culation within the general area.
c. Provide a local residential street system which discourages through traffic and provides adequate access for fire, police and other emergency vehicles.
d. Provide a sutlicient number of collector roads adequately sized to accommodate the present and f·uture traffic demands of an area.
e. Prnvide streets and roads in accordance with the ftlture transportation and circulation plan of the comprehensi vc plan,"
11 _......
r
4
i I
MINUTE BOOK No. 64, CITY OF OXFORD DEMlNT rv1E:RIDIAN 01 1461
In conclusion, the proposed sile plan for The Domain raises multipk Health, s,tfety and Welfare issues that are either in conflict with the Code of Ordinances or have been unaddressed. Only the presented site plan is addressed in this letter. Ideas on reconciling these conflicts in Bcconla.nce with the Code of Ordinances have heen discussed internally, hut not addressed by this letter. The Public Works Department would welcome the opportunity to present possible solutions to the developer to insme a site plan that complies with the Code of Ordinances of the City of Oxford such as extension of Oxford Way to County Road 300, traffic study of County Road JOO to Oki Taylor Road to determine usuge by proposed development, elimination of required sidewalk ou Cot1nly Road 300 in lieu of paved shoulder, etc.
ff you have additional questions or require addition information, please call 662.232.2315.
Sincerely,
I
I
I
I
I
I
489 MINUTE BOOK No. 3, OXFORD PLANNING COMMISSION
IOt'-fM.-MERIPJA»c!;'~~n2~,-=.o-~=;============="-"'=============::::::\I (Planning Comrnisslon)
Tifere came for discussion public hearing for case # 1286 - Preiimi.iiary Plat approvitl for The Gables Subdivision located on Highway 7 North. Mike Faullcner, ESI Engineering Solutions, d_esoribed the property as being ~pproximately 10.3 aoreo with 35 proposed residential lots end ii density of 3. 77 units pe( acre. A recreation area with waL1<lng trails and picnic tables is plai).ned within the development. Motion was made to recommend approval to the Board of Aldennen with _the Planner's rcca=endati_ans that a copy of the protective covenants must be filed with the Planning Office befqre fiuaJ. plat nppNVf!l, a ten (10) ft solid landscaped buffer alO!ll?; the fell/-' lats abutting lJighway .7 l\forth nJUSI be provided, nttist attempt to rcitain the grove of cedars Jocatec!, near the southwest corner of the development, must retain the l;irge sweet gum tree located on the west $.ide of the subdivision near llighwuy 7 North frontage, mus\ retain (except for building footprin'. nnd associated access) the large grove of oak trees lo!/ated near the northwest comer of tho subdivision, a passive recreation amenity within "the common open space must be developed and constructed before 40% of the houses in !he subdivision are occupied and an additional stipulation that additional screening must be provided to minimize the c:ffect of car lights on the adjacent properties to the south by Commissioner Noble, seconded by Commissioner McCullouch. All members present voting Aye.
Motion was A.PPR.OVED.
(Planning Con1nllilsion)
There cttrne for discQssion pQblic hearing for <;:<1se IJ J 287 - Preliminary Plat approval :or Oxr;noor Place located on Industriol Road · North. Ryland Saeed, Precision Engineering, stated the property is located north. of Oxford on Righway 7 and Industrial Road. The proposed subdivision is approximately 40 acres with 86 resirlr.ntial lots and a deI1Sity of 2.16 units per acre. A potition for annaxation is on :file in the Planning Office alou,g with ll 1ruffic impact study. The development will have 2 means of ingress/egress, a common area and poQ!, and the requiret;l reteution/detootion facility. ~otion was made to recommend approval to .the Board of Aldem1en based on the con<litious which were listed ai:id outlined by the Plann~r· s Comments; 1bc proposed ameuities (pool and walking trnil) be compl~,ted befon;: 40% of th~ ho:ises in the subdivision ere occupied and a copy of the restrictive covenants nu1st be filled with the Planning Office before the final plat is approved !Jy Commissioner Yoder, 3econded by Commissior.er McCulloucb. All mcm bers present voting Aye.
Motion was APPROVED.
(Plannlng Commission)
T'nere came for discussion public hearing for case fl 1288- Site Plan approYlll fo: The Exchange@ Ole Miss Jocat!'d on Old Taylor Road. Ryland Sneed, Precision Engineering, stated the prop.my is a 300 unit development on approximately 75.2 acres with 11 density ofJ.93 units per acre. Twenty-0ne (21) acres of the property will be developed with the 54 acres remaining undisturbed. A petition for annexation llfld traffic study is on file in the Planning Office. The developer bes agreed to widen Old Taylor road for a tum Jane into the projwt. The entrance road will be dedicated to the county and may be extended south in the future to provide ac<;;eSS to the additional undeveloped acreage owned- Motion was made to recommend approval tu the Board of Aldenuen provided that legal counsel for the City do some {esearch to erumre that the propetty can not be sub divided 2nd further developed in anyway in the future by Commissioner Noble, ~ooonded by Cornmiss1onerMcCullouoh. All members present voting Aye.
Motion was APPROVED.
There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned 11t 6:30 p.m.
3
5
6
MINUTE BOOK No. 64, CITY OF OXFORD nt::M!::Nl Mf_Hlf>IANf\1 1·t6\
I
I
I
I
I·
7
MINUTE BOOK No. 64, CITY OF OXFORD DEMENT·MERIDIAN 61 ·1461
Bart Robinson, P.B. Dircdor of Public WorkJ @
The City ~~~~-o!~~~~-
Mr. Paul Koshenina, P.R. Precision Englnrering Cooperation 276CR101 Oxford, MS 38655
Re: The Domain
Dear Mr. Koshenlna,
RcQnnit Mayoral, P.B. &slstant City Engineer
After review of the site plan as submitted for The Domain, the Public Works Deprutment will recommend U1at the City of Oxford Planning Commissiorr deny the propoi!ed multifamily development. Life Safety issues are at the forefront of this recommendation.
The proposed site plan proposes 1he primal'y entranoo into The Domain be located at the cul-de-sac on the southern temtlni of Oxfo1xi Way. This Southern tennini is in excess of 800 feet from Old Taylor Road. Section 162.04 subsection 14 of the Code of Oxdlnance of the City of Oxford states "Dead end Streets designed to be so pem1anently shall be no longer than 800 feet in length ... " Oxford Way was not designed und hitended to be a pe1manent deod end street (see attached minutes from Oxford Planning, Exhibit D from the previously approved and removed conservation easement, and Trnffic Impact Shtdy for The Exchange at Ole Miss, pertinent Section 2.0 page 1 ). Therefore, the Public Works Department cannot OJJprove primary access for a development from a street tlmt is currently in excess of dead end street length set forlli in the Code of Ordh1ances. The purpose of the above stated code is to ensure Health, Safety and Welfare of the future residents/tenants.
The proposed site plan proposes only one public ingress/egress. Section 162.04 subsection 3 paxagraph (a) states "Residential developments with mote than 200 lots or dwelling units shall have at least two separate points of public road access." Therefore, the Public Works Department cannot recommend approval of the site plan as submitted. Again, the purpose of this code is to ensure the health, safety and welfare of the future residents/tenants.
10~ Cou.tthouse Square Oxford, MS 38655 www.oxfurdms.net
Phone(66?.)232-2315 Fax(662)?.32~2319
8
MINUTE BOOK No. 64, CITY OF OXFORD Dt:r,1u~ r ~.,.jf HllJIAN bl 14b~
The proposed site plnn docs not propose a sidewalk along Cmmty Roud 300. Sections 125 subsection 7 stutcs "Sidewalks shall be required in all zoning districts ... , .. " This requirement is not addressed in the proposed site plan. There have been vru'ious dlsc].ls~ions concerning this requirement, but a resolution has not yet been determined. Therefore, the Public Works Department CilllllOt recommend approval of the site plan as presente~.
Emergency ingress/egress to County Road 300 must remain strictly for emergency vehicles. The proposed site plan and the submitted Traffic Impact Study does not address additional traffic on County Road 300. The proposed site plan does not address any limiting strnctures on the emergency ingress/egress. Therefore, the Public Works Department cannot reconunend approval of the site plan as presented.
Furthermore, the Public Wmks Department also feels that development doesn't strive to meet less speclfic requixcments of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Oxford such 1:1s:
Section ] 05 subsection 4, which stute:; "Establish a densely connected network of streets and roads to gulde future growth that equally serves automobiles, pe<lestria11s, bicycles und futmc possibilities of transit."
Section 105 subsection 5, which states "Relate existing and future development to the network of streets, roads and natural drnlnage mens, emphasizing npproprlatc mixes of land use..'! instead of single use dL<>tricts."
Scction 162.01 subsection 1 parngraph (a), which states HProvide n safe nnd convenient circulation ::iystem minimizing pedestrian and vehicle conflicts, and tmffic congestion."
·Section 162.04 Sh·cets, as follows:
"1. General arrangement and layout. The .~treet pattern shall he bnsed upon the following general design criteria:
a. Provide for adequate vchicuhll' access to all properties wlthin the development.
b. Provide street or road connections to adjacent properties to ensure adcq<rntc traffic circulation within the general area.
c. Provide u locnl residential street system which discourages through traffic and provides adequattJ uccess for fire, police und other emergency vehicles,
d. Provide a sufficient munbcr of e-01lector roads adequately sized to cicconunodate the prt;';ent and futme traffic demands of an area.
e. Provide streets and roads in accordance with the future transpmtation and circulation plan of the comprehensive plan."
I
I
i
I
I
I
MINUTE BOOK No. 64, CITY OF OXFORD
In conclusion, the proposed site plan for The Domain raises multiple Health, Safety and Welfare issues that are either in conflict with the Code of Ordinances or hav~ been unaddresse<l. Only the presented site plan is addressed in this letter, Ideas on reconciling these conflicts in accordance with the Code of Ordinances have been discussed internally, but not addressed by this letter. The Public Works Department would welcome the opportunity to present possible solutions to the developer to insure a site plan that complies with the Code of Ordinances of the City of Oxford such as extension of Oxford Way to County Road 300, traffic study of County Road 300 to Old Taylor Road to determine usage hy proposed development, elimination of required sidewalk on County Road 300 in lieu of paved shoulder, etc,
If you have additional questions or require addition information, please call 662.232.2315.
Sincerely,
, 9
10
MINUTE BOOK No. 64, CITY OF OXFORD L1t:_1,1t:l\JT Ml Hl[)IAN 61 1·11 1
I
EXHIBIT
MINUTE BOOK No. 64, CITY OF OXFORD DEMENT-MERIDIAN 61-1461
NOTICE OF APPEAL OF THE CITY OF OXFORD PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION
CASE 1668
Pursuant to Sec. 227 of the City of Oxford Code of Ordinances, Planning Commission
Appeal Procedure, through the undersigned, notice is hereby given that ASSET PLUS REALTY
COMPANY INVESTMENT, INC. ("APRC") appeals to the Mayor and Board of Aldermen of
the City of Oxford from the recommendation of the Planning Commission rendered at its
meeting on the evening of October 8, 2012 in Case 1668.
1. On October 8, 2012, the Oxford Planning Commission heard the request of APRC to
develop a 230-unit apartment complex on Old Taylor Road ("The Domain"). The
Oxford Planning Commission has denied the Site Plan based upon what it referred to
as Health, Safety and Welfare issues.
2. We request that the mayor and board of aldermen consider denial of the decision and
recommendation of the Planning Commission. APRC files this appeal with the
director of planning and development and will later file a written brief outlining the
basis for the appeal and stating the facts of the matter in question, including any
maps, reports or other documents pertinent to the case, prior to or at the time of the
public hearing.
3. We request that you advise us of the date of the public hearing on the appeal.
Respectfully submitted,
(~41{~ Yrn£da Jones Toll iron; Butler, Snow, O'Marvkvens & Cannada. PLLC 1200 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 205 P.O. Box 1138 Oxford MS 38655 T: 662-513-8007/ F: 662-513-8001 Attorneys/or APRC Investment, Inc.
12
MINUTE BOOK No. 64, CITY OF OXFORD utrv1tNr-Mlf\1DIAN61 14!>1
I
I
I
I
I
----, 13
DEMENT-MERIDIAN 61-1461
9. Public hearing for Case #1668 - Request for site plan approval for 'The Domain' - a 234 multi-unit residential rental development located at 2000 Oxford \Vay in an (RC) Multi-Unit Residential zoned district (Planning Commission)
Zoning History - The subject property was a poriion of a lager tract of land located in the county that included the cmTent Exchange (fonnerly the Connection) apartment complex. As a condition to approval of the Exchange site plan, the subject property was placed in a conservation easement restricting development of the site. The current RC zoning of the property was established when the property was annexed in 2007. Subsequent to annexation the subject property has been removed from the conservation easement now permitting development of the site.
Planner's Comments: The subject prope1iy is a 37 acre site of heavily wooded site with rolling hills. The applicant is requesting approval for a 260 unit 650 bed apartment complex. The Site Plan Review Committee reviewed the proposed site plan on March 28, 2012; April 4, 2012; September 19, 2012; and September 26, 2012.
See attached letter from the Public Works Director and supplemental documentation.
Recommendation: Denial of the request based on conclusions outlined in the attached letter from the Public Works Director.
Patil Watkins, city attorney explained to the Commission that the properiy now callee! the Exchange was originally developed before 2007 annexation restricting them to 4-units per acre. To meet their desired density and unit number the developer put the remaining property under a conservation easement with the state. Once this property was annexed into the City the developers petitioned to have the easement lifted and the 4-unit per acre requirement no longer applied as it became RC zoned property.
Paul Koshenina infom1ecl the Commission that a land swap took place effectively moving the conservation easement to the south, freeing the subject property to be developed. Mark Linley with Asset Plus Corp. is requesting site plan approval for a 234-unit development.
Discussion continued among the Commission members and the applicants regarding the amount of land swapped.
Paul Koshenimt, wanting to address the concerns outlined in a letter to the Commissioner from the City Engineer, Bart Robinson. The first concern…
don't feel it would be useful to improve that portion of CR300. Mr. Bradley asked ifthe improved Oxford Way and CR 300 were capable of handling all traffic from both The Connection and the proposed development should it be required. Mr. Koshenina replied that his traffic impact analysis indicated that the current system could safely handle all traffic effectively. Discussion continued regarding the currency of the traffic impact analysis. It was determined that a recent impact study was done in February 6-14th of 2012.
Discussion continued regarding the need to improve CR300 and complete a connection to S. Lamar, University student growth, on campus housing, multi-unit housing occupancy rates in the City, and infrastructure concerns.
Chairman Harmon called for a motion on the case. Board of Alderman Member; Janice Antonow came forward not wanting to comment on the case however, expressed concern from the gallery that public notice for this case was insufficient.
Discussion continued. Mr. Linley commented as a landowner that he pays taxes on the subject property, it's zoned correctly and he met and followed all requirements for approval of'the site plan.
With no further questions or comments, Chairman Harmon called for a motion. Commissioner Kellum moved to deny site plan approval based on the recommendation by the planning. Commissioner Bradley seconded the motion. Commissioner Huelse abstained.
All remaining Commission members voted in favor of the denial.
The motion was approved.
9
2
MINUTE BOOK No. 64, CITY OF OXFORD illMLNr rvllHl[llANti1 14tJI
Bart Robinson, P.E. Director of Public Works @
The City --------------- of
Oxford Scplembc:· 27, 2012 ~ublic Works Department
Mr. Paul Koshenina, P.E. Precision Engineering Cooperation 276 CR 101 Oxford, MS 38655
Re: 'J'he Domain
Dettr Mr. Koshcnina,
Reanna Mayoral, P.E. A~sistant City Engineer
After review of the site plan as submitted for The Domain, lhc PL:blic Works Department will recommend Lhal Lhe Cily or Oxford Plauning Commission deny the proposed multifamily development. Life Safety issues are al the forefront ofthis recommendation.
The proposed site plnn proposes the primary entrance into 111t.: Domain be lm.:ated at the cul -de-sac on the southern lermiui of Oxford Way. This Southern termini is in cxces.s of 800 feet Crom Old Taylor Road. Section i.62.04 subsection 14 oftbe Code of Ordinance oftbc City of Oxford states "Dt.:aC. end Streets dcsi~.~1cd to be so pcnrnmcntly shall be no longer than 800 feet in length ... " Oxford Way was not designed and intended lo be a pernrnnent dead end street (see atim:hccl miot1les from Oxford Planning, Exhibit D from the previously approved and removed conservation casement, nnd Traffic Impact Study for The Exchange at Ole Miss, pertinent Section 2.0 page: 1). Tlicrefore, Lhe Public Works Deparlrr:cnt cannoi approve primary access for a development from a slreGL thal is currenUy in excess of dead end .c;trcct length set fo1th in the Cocc of Ordinances. The pu11rnsc of the above staled code is to ensure Health, Safety find Welfare of the future rcsidcnt.<;/tenants.
Tbc proposed site plan proposes only one public ingress/eg:css. Section l 62.04 subsection 3 paragraph (a) states "Hcsidcntial developments with more than 200 lots or dwelling units shall have at least two scparnie points of public road access." Thc:rcfore, the Public Works Dcpurlment cannot recommend a;-iprnval of the: siic 1-ilan as submitted. Again, thG purpose of this cock is to ensure the health, safety aud welfare of the future residents/tenants.
107 Courthouse Square Oxford, MS 38655 www.oxfordms.net
Phone (662) 232-2315 Fax (662) 232-2319
I
I
I
I
I
I
MINUTE BOOK No. 64, CITY OF OXFORD
The proposed site plan does not propose a sidewalk along County Road 300. Sections 125 subsection 7 states ''Sidewalks shall be required in all zoning districts ...... " This requirement is not addressed in the proposed site plan. There have been various discnssions concerning this requirement, bnt a resolution has not yet been determined. Therefore, the Public \Yorks Department cannot recommend approval of the site 1;la11 as presented.
Emergency ingress/egress to County Road 300 must remain strictly for emergency vehicles. The proposed site plan and the submitted Traffic Impact Study does not address additionuJ tra11ic on County Road 300. The proposed site plan does not address any limiting structures on the emergency ingress/egress. Therefore, the Public Works Department cannot recommend approval of the site plan as presented.
Furthermore, the Public Works Department also feels that development doesn't strive to meet less specific requirements of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Oxford such as:
Section 105 subsection 4, which states "Establish a densely connected network of slrnets and roads to guide future growth that equally serves automobiles, pedestrians, bicycles and future possibilities of transit."
Section I 05 subsection 5, which states "Relate existing and fotme development to the network of streets, roads and natural drainage areas, emphasizing appropriate mixes of land uses instead of single use districts."
Section 162.01 subsection 1 paragraph (a), which states '~Provide a safe and convenient circulation system minimizing pedestrian and vehicle conflicts, and traffic congestion."
Section 162.04 Streets, as follows:
"1. General anangement and layout. The street pattern shall be based upon the following general design criteria:
3
DEMENT-MERIDIAN 61-1461
a. Provide for adequate vehicular access to all properties within the clevelopment.
b. Provide street or road connections to adjacent properties to ensure adequate traffic cil'culation within the general area.
c. Provide a local residential street system which discourages through traffic and provides adequate access for fire, police and other emergency vehicles.
d. Provide a sutlicient number of collector roads adequately sized to accommodate the present and f·uture traffic demands of an area.
e. Prnvide streets and roads in accordance with the ftlture transportation and circulation plan of the comprehensi vc plan,"
11 _......
r
4
i I
MINUTE BOOK No. 64, CITY OF OXFORD DEMlNT rv1E:RIDIAN 01 1461
In conclusion, the proposed sile plan for The Domain raises multipk Health, s,tfety and Welfare issues that are either in conflict with the Code of Ordinances or have been unaddressed. Only the presented site plan is addressed in this letter. Ideas on reconciling these conflicts in Bcconla.nce with the Code of Ordinances have heen discussed internally, hut not addressed by this letter. The Public Works Department would welcome the opportunity to present possible solutions to the developer to insme a site plan that complies with the Code of Ordinances of the City of Oxford such as extension of Oxford Way to County Road 300, traffic study of County Road JOO to Oki Taylor Road to determine usuge by proposed development, elimination of required sidewalk ou Cot1nly Road 300 in lieu of paved shoulder, etc.
ff you have additional questions or require addition information, please call 662.232.2315.
Sincerely,
I
I
I
I
I
I
489 MINUTE BOOK No. 3, OXFORD PLANNING COMMISSION
IOt'-fM.-MERIPJA»c!;'~~n2~,-=.o-~=;============="-"'=============::::::\I (Planning Comrnisslon)
Tifere came for discussion public hearing for case # 1286 - Preiimi.iiary Plat approvitl for The Gables Subdivision located on Highway 7 North. Mike Faullcner, ESI Engineering Solutions, d_esoribed the property as being ~pproximately 10.3 aoreo with 35 proposed residential lots end ii density of 3. 77 units pe( acre. A recreation area with waL1<lng trails and picnic tables is plai).ned within the development. Motion was made to recommend approval to the Board of Aldennen with _the Planner's rcca=endati_ans that a copy of the protective covenants must be filed with the Planning Office befqre fiuaJ. plat nppNVf!l, a ten (10) ft solid landscaped buffer alO!ll?; the fell/-' lats abutting lJighway .7 l\forth nJUSI be provided, nttist attempt to rcitain the grove of cedars Jocatec!, near the southwest corner of the development, must retain the l;irge sweet gum tree located on the west $.ide of the subdivision near llighwuy 7 North frontage, mus\ retain (except for building footprin'. nnd associated access) the large grove of oak trees lo!/ated near the northwest comer of tho subdivision, a passive recreation amenity within "the common open space must be developed and constructed before 40% of the houses in !he subdivision are occupied and an additional stipulation that additional screening must be provided to minimize the c:ffect of car lights on the adjacent properties to the south by Commissioner Noble, seconded by Commissioner McCullouch. All members present voting Aye.
Motion was A.PPR.OVED.
(Planning Con1nllilsion)
There cttrne for discQssion pQblic hearing for <;:<1se IJ J 287 - Preliminary Plat approval :or Oxr;noor Place located on Industriol Road · North. Ryland Saeed, Precision Engineering, stated the property is located north. of Oxford on Righway 7 and Industrial Road. The proposed subdivision is approximately 40 acres with 86 resirlr.ntial lots and a deI1Sity of 2.16 units per acre. A potition for annaxation is on :file in the Planning Office alou,g with ll 1ruffic impact study. The development will have 2 means of ingress/egress, a common area and poQ!, and the requiret;l reteution/detootion facility. ~otion was made to recommend approval to .the Board of Aldem1en based on the con<litious which were listed ai:id outlined by the Plann~r· s Comments; 1bc proposed ameuities (pool and walking trnil) be compl~,ted befon;: 40% of th~ ho:ises in the subdivision ere occupied and a copy of the restrictive covenants nu1st be filled with the Planning Office before the final plat is approved !Jy Commissioner Yoder, 3econded by Commissior.er McCulloucb. All mcm bers present voting Aye.
Motion was APPROVED.
(Plannlng Commission)
T'nere came for discussion public hearing for case fl 1288- Site Plan approYlll fo: The Exchange@ Ole Miss Jocat!'d on Old Taylor Road. Ryland Sneed, Precision Engineering, stated the prop.my is a 300 unit development on approximately 75.2 acres with 11 density ofJ.93 units per acre. Twenty-0ne (21) acres of the property will be developed with the 54 acres remaining undisturbed. A petition for annexation llfld traffic study is on file in the Planning Office. The developer bes agreed to widen Old Taylor road for a tum Jane into the projwt. The entrance road will be dedicated to the county and may be extended south in the future to provide ac<;;eSS to the additional undeveloped acreage owned- Motion was made to recommend approval tu the Board of Aldenuen provided that legal counsel for the City do some {esearch to erumre that the propetty can not be sub divided 2nd further developed in anyway in the future by Commissioner Noble, ~ooonded by Cornmiss1onerMcCullouoh. All members present voting Aye.
Motion was APPROVED.
There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned 11t 6:30 p.m.
3
5
6
MINUTE BOOK No. 64, CITY OF OXFORD nt::M!::Nl Mf_Hlf>IANf\1 1·t6\
I
I
I
I
I·
7
MINUTE BOOK No. 64, CITY OF OXFORD DEMENT·MERIDIAN 61 ·1461
Bart Robinson, P.B. Dircdor of Public WorkJ @
The City ~~~~-o!~~~~-
Mr. Paul Koshenina, P.R. Precision Englnrering Cooperation 276CR101 Oxford, MS 38655
Re: The Domain
Dear Mr. Koshenlna,
RcQnnit Mayoral, P.B. &slstant City Engineer
After review of the site plan as submitted for The Domain, the Public Works Deprutment will recommend U1at the City of Oxford Planning Commissiorr deny the propoi!ed multifamily development. Life Safety issues are at the forefront of this recommendation.
The proposed site plan proposes 1he primal'y entranoo into The Domain be located at the cul-de-sac on the southern temtlni of Oxfo1xi Way. This Southern tennini is in excess of 800 feet from Old Taylor Road. Section 162.04 subsection 14 of the Code of Oxdlnance of the City of Oxford states "Dead end Streets designed to be so pem1anently shall be no longer than 800 feet in length ... " Oxford Way was not designed und hitended to be a pe1manent deod end street (see attached minutes from Oxford Planning, Exhibit D from the previously approved and removed conservation easement, and Trnffic Impact Shtdy for The Exchange at Ole Miss, pertinent Section 2.0 page 1 ). Therefore, the Public Works Department cannot OJJprove primary access for a development from a street tlmt is currently in excess of dead end street length set forlli in the Code of Ordh1ances. The purpose of the above stated code is to ensure Health, Safety and Welfare of the future residents/tenants.
The proposed site plan proposes only one public ingress/egress. Section 162.04 subsection 3 paxagraph (a) states "Residential developments with mote than 200 lots or dwelling units shall have at least two separate points of public road access." Therefore, the Public Works Department cannot recommend approval of the site plan as submitted. Again, the purpose of this code is to ensure the health, safety and welfare of the future residents/tenants.
10~ Cou.tthouse Square Oxford, MS 38655 www.oxfurdms.net
Phone(66?.)232-2315 Fax(662)?.32~2319
8
MINUTE BOOK No. 64, CITY OF OXFORD Dt:r,1u~ r ~.,.jf HllJIAN bl 14b~
The proposed site plnn docs not propose a sidewalk along Cmmty Roud 300. Sections 125 subsection 7 stutcs "Sidewalks shall be required in all zoning districts ... , .. " This requirement is not addressed in the proposed site plan. There have been vru'ious dlsc].ls~ions concerning this requirement, but a resolution has not yet been determined. Therefore, the Public Works Department CilllllOt recommend approval of the site plan as presente~.
Emergency ingress/egress to County Road 300 must remain strictly for emergency vehicles. The proposed site plan and the submitted Traffic Impact Study does not address additional traffic on County Road 300. The proposed site plan does not address any limiting strnctures on the emergency ingress/egress. Therefore, the Public Works Department cannot reconunend approval of the site plan as presented.
Furthermore, the Public Wmks Department also feels that development doesn't strive to meet less speclfic requixcments of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Oxford such 1:1s:
Section ] 05 subsection 4, which stute:; "Establish a densely connected network of streets and roads to gulde future growth that equally serves automobiles, pe<lestria11s, bicycles und futmc possibilities of transit."
Section 105 subsection 5, which states "Relate existing and future development to the network of streets, roads and natural drnlnage mens, emphasizing npproprlatc mixes of land use..'! instead of single use dL<>tricts."
Scction 162.01 subsection 1 parngraph (a), which states HProvide n safe nnd convenient circulation ::iystem minimizing pedestrian and vehicle conflicts, and tmffic congestion."
·Section 162.04 Sh·cets, as follows:
"1. General arrangement and layout. The .~treet pattern shall he bnsed upon the following general design criteria:
a. Provide for adequate vchicuhll' access to all properties wlthin the development.
b. Provide street or road connections to adjacent properties to ensure adcq<rntc traffic circulation within the general area.
c. Provide u locnl residential street system which discourages through traffic and provides adequattJ uccess for fire, police und other emergency vehicles,
d. Provide a sufficient munbcr of e-01lector roads adequately sized to cicconunodate the prt;';ent and futme traffic demands of an area.
e. Provide streets and roads in accordance with the future transpmtation and circulation plan of the comprehensive plan."
I
I
i
I
I
I
MINUTE BOOK No. 64, CITY OF OXFORD
In conclusion, the proposed site plan for The Domain raises multiple Health, Safety and Welfare issues that are either in conflict with the Code of Ordinances or hav~ been unaddresse<l. Only the presented site plan is addressed in this letter, Ideas on reconciling these conflicts in accordance with the Code of Ordinances have been discussed internally, but not addressed by this letter. The Public Works Department would welcome the opportunity to present possible solutions to the developer to insure a site plan that complies with the Code of Ordinances of the City of Oxford such as extension of Oxford Way to County Road 300, traffic study of County Road 300 to Old Taylor Road to determine usage hy proposed development, elimination of required sidewalk on County Road 300 in lieu of paved shoulder, etc,
If you have additional questions or require addition information, please call 662.232.2315.
Sincerely,
, 9
10
MINUTE BOOK No. 64, CITY OF OXFORD L1t:_1,1t:l\JT Ml Hl[)IAN 61 1·11 1
I
EXHIBIT
MINUTE BOOK No. 64, CITY OF OXFORD DEMENT-MERIDIAN 61-1461
NOTICE OF APPEAL OF THE CITY OF OXFORD PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION
CASE 1668
Pursuant to Sec. 227 of the City of Oxford Code of Ordinances, Planning Commission
Appeal Procedure, through the undersigned, notice is hereby given that ASSET PLUS REALTY
COMPANY INVESTMENT, INC. ("APRC") appeals to the Mayor and Board of Aldermen of
the City of Oxford from the recommendation of the Planning Commission rendered at its
meeting on the evening of October 8, 2012 in Case 1668.
1. On October 8, 2012, the Oxford Planning Commission heard the request of APRC to
develop a 230-unit apartment complex on Old Taylor Road ("The Domain"). The
Oxford Planning Commission has denied the Site Plan based upon what it referred to
as Health, Safety and Welfare issues.
2. We request that the mayor and board of aldermen consider denial of the decision and
recommendation of the Planning Commission. APRC files this appeal with the
director of planning and development and will later file a written brief outlining the
basis for the appeal and stating the facts of the matter in question, including any
maps, reports or other documents pertinent to the case, prior to or at the time of the
public hearing.
3. We request that you advise us of the date of the public hearing on the appeal.
Respectfully submitted,
(~41{~ Yrn£da Jones Toll iron; Butler, Snow, O'Marvkvens & Cannada. PLLC 1200 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 205 P.O. Box 1138 Oxford MS 38655 T: 662-513-8007/ F: 662-513-8001 Attorneys/or APRC Investment, Inc.
12
MINUTE BOOK No. 64, CITY OF OXFORD utrv1tNr-Mlf\1DIAN61 14!>1
I
I
I
I
I
----, 13
DEMENT-MERIDIAN 61-1461
9. Public hearing for Case #1668 - Request for site plan approval for 'The Domain' - a 234 multi-unit residential rental development located at 2000 Oxford \Vay in an (RC) Multi-Unit Residential zoned district (Planning Commission)
Zoning History - The subject property was a poriion of a lager tract of land located in the county that included the cmTent Exchange (fonnerly the Connection) apartment complex. As a condition to approval of the Exchange site plan, the subject property was placed in a conservation easement restricting development of the site. The current RC zoning of the property was established when the property was annexed in 2007. Subsequent to annexation the subject property has been removed from the conservation easement now permitting development of the site.
Planner's Comments: The subject prope1iy is a 37 acre site of heavily wooded site with rolling hills. The applicant is requesting approval for a 260 unit 650 bed apartment complex. The Site Plan Review Committee reviewed the proposed site plan on March 28, 2012; April 4, 2012; September 19, 2012; and September 26, 2012.
See attached letter from the Public Works Director and supplemental documentation.
Recommendation: Denial of the request based on conclusions outlined in the attached letter from the Public Works Director.
Patil Watkins, city attorney explained to the Commission that the properiy now callee! the Exchange was originally developed before 2007 annexation restricting them to 4-units per acre. To meet their desired density and unit number the developer put the remaining property under a conservation easement with the state. Once this property was annexed into the City the developers petitioned to have the easement lifted and the 4-unit per acre requirement no longer applied as it became RC zoned property.
Paul Koshenina infom1ecl the Commission that a land swap took place effectively moving the conservation easement to the south, freeing the subject property to be developed. Mark Linley with Asset Plus Corp. is requesting site plan approval for a 234-unit development.
Discussion continued among the Commission members and the applicants regarding the amount of land swapped.
Paul Koshenimt, wanting to address the concerns outlined in a letter to the Commissioner from the City Engineer, Bart Robinson. The first concern…