OXFORD VILLAGE – Lots of concerns and criticisms were expressed, but not much support was voiced for a proposed four-story, mixed-use development on W. Burdick St. that would consist primarily of affordable apartments for low-income senior citizens.

“This project really does nothing for the community except drain us,” said local developer Chuck Schneider. “It’s not an asset, it’s a liability.”

“This building is going to be nothing but a drain on our municipal resources,” said village Councilman Erik Dolan.

“Four stories, in that setting, is totally inappropriate (given) the surrounding property,” said resident John DuVal, who used to serve on the planning commission.

Venture, Inc. pitched its concept plan for a $10.9 million development called “Oxford Station” during a special town hall meeting held Oct. 27 at Immanuel Congregational United Church of Christ. Approximately 30 people were in attendance.

Mikki Droste, a consultant who made the presentation on behalf of Venture, stressed that nothing in the concept plan is set in stone and all the numbers are estimates and guesstimates that are expected to change. She explained the purpose of the town hall was to gauge community interest in the project and learn what people like and don’t like about it.

“We really are here to get input from you,” she said.

Venture is proposing to buy the village municipal complex and the two parcels (a total of 1.7 acres) it sits on for $450,000.

The existing 13,624-square-foot building – which currently houses the village office, police station and other government offices as well as the chamber of commerce – would be renovated and expanded to accommodate approximately 16,000 square feet of commercial, retail and office space.

On top of the existing building, three additional stories would be constructed. These floors would contain 32 to 48 one and two-bedroom rental apartments for senior citizens age 55 and older.

“These are going to be some really nice-looking units downtown,” Droste said.

A subsidiary of the nonprofit Oakland Livingston Human Service Agency (OLHSA), Venture builds and sells affordable housing to low-income homebuyers.

Droste explained the apartments would be a mix of affordable and market-rate units.

“We haven’t determined exactly what the mix is going to be at this point between the affordable and the market rate,” she said. “But I will say this, there will be more affordable (units) than there will be market rate.”

That’s because the proposed funding source for this project is federal low-income housing tax credits administered by the Michigan State Housing Development Authority (MSHDA).

If Venture were to apply and be successful in receiving these credits via the competitive process, they would be sold to an investor, such as a financial institution or large company, and the proceeds used to fund the project.

Based on the presentation, rents for the affordable units would range from $376 to $753 per month for one-bedroom apartments and $542 to $904 for two-bed apartments. The rent paid would depend on the tenant’s income.

“There are people that live in the community right now (who) would qualify for affordable housing,” Droste said.

According to Venture’s presentation, 7.6 percent of men and 25.3 percent of women, ages 55 to 64, currently live in poverty in Oxford Township. Of those age 65 and older, 19.3 percent of men and 18.6 percent of women live in poverty in Oxford Township.

Droste said many people “frequently” believe low-income means folks “they don’t know and live next door to.” But the reality is, they’re often seniors living on pensions and Social Security.

Although the seniors proposed to live in Oxford Station “could come from anywhere,” Droste said the intent to is try to fill the apartments with seniors who already live here.

“We won’t advertise in a 100-mile radius. We’ll advertise immediately in the community,” she explained.

Rent for the market-rate apartments is estimated to be $1,100 per month for one-bedroom units and $1,400 for two bedrooms, according to the presentation.

Many of the citizens who attended the town hall meeting expressed their concern about the proposed development dumping more traffic onto Hudson St. and W. Burdick St., the latter of which some believe is already quite congested.

Droste assured them Venture would conduct a traffic study to evaluate the impact.

Parking was another big concern. There was a question as to whether or not the 89 spaces shown on the preliminary site plan would be adequate for the apartment tenants, the commercial/retail spaces, plus the village office and police station, both of which are proposed to stay put and become part of the development.

Droste explained the parking requirement for senior housing is 0.8 spaces per unit. She said that’s because many seniors either don’t own extra vehicles or don’t drive anymore. She also noted the senior residents would be within walking distance of the downtown, where they could shop and dine.

“The interesting thing is seniors have more discretionary income at the income level they’re at than families because they don’t have some of the same costs at that point,” Droste said.

The Oxford Station concept plan calls for removing the 6,080-square-foot pole barn located behind the village hall and turning the land into additional parking spaces.

Concern was expressed about where all the downtown business employees and patrons who currently use the village lot would park when the southwest quadrant lot fills up, particularly during busy periods such Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights.

It was noted the village parking area near Hudson St. is not part of the proposed project and would remain open to public parking.

Some in the audience were concerned about this proposed development being a losing proposition when it comes to public services if it consumes more than it pays in taxes.

Venture is proposing to pay the standard property taxes on the market-rate apartments and the commercial and retail spaces, but it wishes to establish a payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT) program for the affordable apartments.

Under a PILOT program, instead of paying property taxes based on actual value, Venture would pay a certain amount for public services (a service fee). This amount would have to be negotiated with and approved by both the village and township.

The township has only one PILOT in existence and it’s for Hope Senior Apartments, a two-story, 50-unit, 47,000-square-foot, multi-family development on W. Drahner Rd. It contains 36 one-bedroom units and 14 two-bedroom apartments. The complex, built in the 1990s, pays a fixed rate of $1,051 annually and will continue to do so until the PILOT expires in January 2029.

That sum gets split between the township, school district, county and state. For example, Hope is currently paying $55 a year for fire/emergency medical services.

According to Fire Chief Pete Scholz, his department responds to an average of 40 to 45 calls annually at Hope.

Township Treasurer Joe Ferrari attended the town hall meeting to express his opposition to establishing a PILOT for Venture. He said he’s studied them in-depth and “most of the PILOTs never pay for the services they consume.”

Ferrari pointed to Hope as an example.

“They consume a lot more services than $1,000 a year,” he said.

Because somebody ultimately has to pay for government services, it falls upon the other taxpayers in Oxford to make up the difference, Ferrari explained.

Schneider was of the same mind.

“If these people get a free ride, guess who’s going to pick up the slack?” he asked.

Giving Venture a tax break doesn’t make sense to Schneider because, in his view, “this community needs taxes” to survive.

“The only way this community is going to sustain itself is by increasing its tax base. There is no other way.” he said.

If the village doesn’t get more tax revenue, Schneider said, “There won’t be a village.”

Despite all the emphasis that was placed on Hope Senior Apartments’s PILOT, Droste noted these programs are not a one-size-fits-all type of thing.

“PILOTs look different depending upon what’s negotiated,” she explained. “We go into communities knowing that we want to pay as much tax as we possibly can.”

Venture’s presentation included a scenario where the Oxford Station had an estimated appraised value of $8.7 million and as a result, paid annual property taxes of $10,476 on the market-rate apartments and $15,714 on the commercial/retail space. For the PILOT, it would pay a total of $14,728 annually in service fees. However, it was stressed these numbers are only guesstimates.

The only part of the development that wouldn’t pay any taxes or service fees would be the 6,000 square feet that the village would purchase and own as a condominium unit under the concept plan. The first-floor space would be completely renovated and house the village office and police station.

According to Droste, the idea is Venture would pay the village $450,000 for the 1.7-acre property with its two buildings. The village would then turn around and give that money back to Venture as payment for the newly-renovated office/police station space.

But that $450,000 cost to the village is by no means a certainty. Droste said it represents the “best-case scenario of what we really hope is going to happen.”

“We don’t know (whether) that’s absolutely going to be the case or not at this point because we don’t have the specifications of what actually needs to be done to that space (to meet the village’s needs),” she explained.

Droste stressed it’s Venture’s “hope” the $450,000 will cover the village’s costs.

But Dolan fears it will end up costing more and the village cannot afford it.

Ultimately, Dolan doesn’t see this as a good deal for the village, “trading an asset” for new office space. “In most circumstances, I can’t think of anyone who would be willing to do that,” he said.

Schneider told the crowd Oxford needs to determine what the “vision” for itself really is. “Do we see ourselves as the keepers of low-income housing or do we see ourselves as potentially rising and seeing our home values rise because our downtown is strong and viable?”

Schneider argued, “We already have plenty of housing in this downtown that is, in my view, low-income . . . So, why do we need more?”

As for low-income seniors patronizing downtown businesses, Schneider doesn’t believe they’re going to spend $20 on dinner at local restaurants.

“What are low-income people going to do for our community?” he asked.

Despite the many concerns and criticisms, there were a couple of favorable comments about the proposal.

Jennifer Aiken, a disabled Oakland Township resident who lives near Addison Oaks County Park, told Venture representatives, “I like what you’re presenting” and “I hope something can come about” for “those of us that need a place to live, that want to be in this community.”

Paul Good, a Rochester resident who attends Immanuel Church, said the proposal would provide housing for low-income seniors, new space for the village government, more commercial/retail development and additional tax revenue.

“I don’t see any downside,” he said.