Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer scales back Miller Farms plan, offers preservation commitments and TIF proposal
Summary
Wilcox Communities presented an updated Miller Farms development plan reducing commercial space, increasing open space and proposing a tax-increment financing plan and a new preservation authority; neighbors raised concerns about density, traffic and wells.
Wilcox Communities updated Canal Winchester City Council on a revised plan for the Miller Farms property, reporting a removal of the previously proposed commercial block, added open space and new financial and preservation tools intended to fund infrastructure and land preservation.
At a presentation to council on April 7, developer representative Mr. Wilcox summarized changes made after community feedback: the commercial area at Lithopolis and Oregon Road was removed, the development added roughly 3.5 acres of park/open space and reduced overall density to about 4.82 gross units per acre — an 11% decrease from the prior concept. Wilcox said the revisions increase overall open space to roughly 40% of the site and commit to two‑story, fee‑simple townhomes rather than rental stacked units.
The developer also said the parties finalized a fee‑in‑lieu payment to the Canal Winchester school district totaling about $295,050 and proposed a combination residential/commercial tax‑increment financing (TIF) that Wilcox said could generate approximately $27 million to the city over 30 years. Wilcox additionally described an idea to form a new community authority — described in the presentation as a preservation or “conservation” authority — that would levy a small, additional assessment on properties in the new developments to fund land‑preservation activities and local conservation easements.
Council and staff asked for specifics about housing type, phasing and utility capacity. Development staff and Wilcox said townhomes will be two‑story for‑sale product and that the apartment product is oriented to active adults (single‑story apartments with rents the developer estimated around $2,000 per month). Wilcox said single‑family homes on his portion would likely start near $500,000, and townhomes around $300,000. He said the project already has interest from multiple builders but that no final building partners were under contract.
Finance and public works staff reviewed utility capacity and fees submitted with the application: water and sanitary infrastructure work for the site was estimated in the presentation at roughly $1.3 million for water and $2.5 million for sanitary sewer, to be built by the developer. Wilcox and staff said tap/capacity fees paid at permit issuance would help fund long‑term system upgrades. City staff gave the council per‑unit capacity fee figures provided by the developer: water capacity roughly $5,272 per dwelling unit and sanitary capacity roughly $7,020 per dwelling unit.
Several residents addressed council during the public comment period. Steve Giles and Brad Wilson urged caution and asked that the city preserve the area’s rural character. James Potter, who lives on property served by private wells, asked the developer and council to commit in writing to address any well impacts from construction and long‑term groundwater effects. Wilcox said the development would be served by the Canal Winchester public water system and that well impacts from long‑term use would not be expected; he acknowledged short‑term dewatering during deep trench construction can affect nearby private wells and said contractors had previously replaced or repaired wells where dewatering caused problems.
Wilcox said he is drafting a written “development intent” letter with about 14 additional commitments in response to neighborhood concerns; he said commitments will include phasing priorities and voluntary annexation/land‑use commitments for the adjacent Tomlinson property. He asked council and staff for time to complete the letter and said the team hopes to return with a final package in advance of upcoming zoning hearings.
Councilmembers asked staff and the developer for additional detail on timing, phasing (single‑family first vs. townhomes), tax‑increment assumptions and how a community preservation authority would be governed. Staff and the developer said they will provide draft documents, cost models and the proposed development‑intent letter to council and to the resident group before the next meeting.
Next steps: the developer said planning documents and the finalized fee in lieu were in the city packet; Wilcox asked to continue working with staff and the neighborhood and expects additional materials and a potential zoning submission prior to the next council agenda.
