OXFORD VILLAGE – A rezoning recommendation that could help pave the way for the sale of the former industrial site located at 98 S. Glaspie St. and the potential construction of 16 single family homes there was approved last week.

Village planning commissioners voted 5-0 to recommend rezoning a 0.838-acre parcel from R-3 single family residential to R-1 single family residential.

R-1 zoning requires lots to have a minimum area of 7,200 square feet and a minimum width of 60 feet. R-3 zoning requires the minimum lot area to be 12,500 square feet and minimum width to be 90 feet.

Now, it’s up to the village council to either approve or deny the rezoning recommendation. Council was expected to vote on it at a special Feb. 28 meeting.

In late January, council approved a $305,000 purchase agreement with the Sterling Heights-based Clearview Homes for the two parcels, totalling 3.582 arces, which the village has owned since March 2006. The municipality paid $700,000 for the site.

Clearview is anticipating building 16 single family homes on the property, but the current zoning only allows 14. No site plan has been submitted at this point.

The site consists of a 2.744-acre western parcel fronting S. Glaspie St. and a 0.838-acre landlocked parcel to the east. The western parcel is zoned R-1 and has the potential for 11 homes, while the eastern parcel is zoned R-3 and could accommodate three homes.

In order for the proposed development to be financially viable, Clearview needs the R-3 portion to be rezoned as R-1. This change would potentially allow for the construction of two additional homes, raising the total to 16.

Council was previously told the homes would be two-story colonials, ranging in size from 2,000 to 2,500 square feet.

The proposed zoning change was endorsed by village planner Chris Khorey, of the Northville-based McKenna Associates.

“The master plan states unequivocally that it supports unifying the 98 Glaspie parcel under one single family zoning district, as proposed by this rezoning,” he wrote in his Feb. 13 review letter.

Khorey noted there are already single family homes along the west side of S. Glaspie St. and on the opposite side of nearby Round Lake in the Oxford Lakes subdivision.

“The new homes would fit with the existing development in the neighborhood,” he wrote in his review.

Because the rezoning would only result in the construction of two additional homes on the site, Khorey wrote, “The additional traffic generated would be minimal.”

The property is surrounded by the village’s Scripter Park to the north and east, the village Department of Public Works (DPW) garage/yard and water treatment plant to the south, and single family homes to the west.

Khorey noted 98 S. Glaspie St. “does not border” nearby Round Lake.

“There is public property (i.e. Scripter Park) between this property and the water,” he said. “And there will continue to be public property (on) this part of the water. The water, technically, is part of the park, so there will not be any waterfront homes in terms of people having land that goes all the way to the water.”

Village resident Mark Miner, who lives on Pearl St., told commissioners he’s “okay” with tearing down the former industrial buildings currently occupying that site.

“That’s a good thing for the (village),” he said.

“But having homes come up and encroach on the park, I think, is an eyesore,” Miner continued. “If there could be a way to protect the aesthetics on that side with trees or whatever – something that would say, this is still a park over here for the members of the village – that would be better than urban sprawl.”

Khorey noted during the site plan review and approval process, the issue of having some sort of screening or buffer between the homes and the DPW property will have to be addressed so that adjacent residential properties are not negatively impacted.

Gary Douglas, chairman of the planning commission, asked whose responsibility it would be to provide screening between the two properties.

“That’s an interesting question,” Khorey replied. “Ordinarily, it’s the non-residential use. However, the DPW yard was there first.”

He believes that any good developer understands that “in order to make those homes salable, they’re going to have to make sure that’s well-screened.”

Douglas noted he just wants to “make sure” the village “does not get stuck with the bill for creating a screen there.”

“We have very clear rules on screening between residential and non-residential,” Khorey explained. “Ordinarily, it’s the responsibility of the non-residential (property owner). In this case, the residential (development) is the new thing. And it would be my opinion that it would be the responsibility of the residential (development) to create the screening.

“I also think it would be in their best interest because they’re not going to sell a lot so they can build a house (with) no screening between them and (the) DPW (property).”

As far as types of screening, Khorey noted there are “a few options” under the village zoning ordinance.

“They are basically some combination of landscaping and fencing,” he said.