Council tables Miller Farms Subarea B final development plan after debate over corner-unit patios and fencing

Canal Winchester councilors delayed action on the final development plan for Miller Farms Subarea B after extended discussion about unit layouts, front-facing patios on corner units ("Edgewaters"), and the use of fencing versus landscaping for privacy and aesthetics.

Mister Moore and staff presented the plan (FDP 25009): the 41.7‑acre Subarea B contains 221 apartment units, sidewalk and multi‑use path connections, phased roadway and utility improvements, and a landscape program that proposed more than 500 trees. Planning & Zoning recommended approval with seven conditions requiring things such as extension of the public water main to a specific location, completion of Oregon Road widening prior to occupancy, public access easements on multi‑use paths, dedication of right‑of‑way, and compliance with development-text fencing standards.

Why it matters: The project will add significant rental housing capacity to the city and includes public-access and roadway conditions tied to occupancy. Council focused on how the product changes (moving some edge patios to front elevations) affect the public realm and whether vinyl fencing or a planted screen is appropriate where a patio now sits near the public-facing elevation.

Key points - Product changes: Wilcox Communities explained they revised the Edgewater corner-unit floor plan and relocated some patios to the front elevation to address interior layout complaints and furniture placement. That change unintentionally created a scenario where a vinyl privacy fence on the front elevation would be visible from public spaces. - Fencing options: The applicant proposed lowering fence height from 6' to 5', switching to decorative wood or landscape screening (arborvitae) to keep the open feel, or providing a 4' ornamental solution. Staff and Planning & Zoning had recommended limiting vinyl fencing to rear patios only, perpendicular to buildings. - Council direction: Multiple council members asked for renderings and specific options and expressed aesthetic preference for green screening or lower decorative fences rather than tall vinyl privacy fences facing the public realm.

Representative quotes - Andrew Broussard (Wilcox Communities) on compromise options: "We could certainly take down from a 6 to a 5 and still leave it somewhat open with a little bit of screening and privacy." (developer representative) - Mister Shea (council): "I'll move to table this ordinance." (motion to postpone to allow additional renderings)

Outcome: Council voted to postpone Resolution 25‑057 to the first meeting in December so the applicant can provide renderings and options that respond to council concerns about the front‑patio treatments.

Next steps: Applicant to return with renderings and fencing/landscaping options on Dec. 1; staff to incorporate Planning & Zoning conditions and coordinate timing of roadway and water-main commitments required prior to occupancy.