CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Tuesday,
February 13, 2001, 1:00 p.m.
Francis
F. Campbell City Council Room
Plaza
Level of City Hall
Tulsa
Civic Center
MEMBERS
PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT STAFF PRESENT OTHERS
PRESENT
|
Dunham,
Vice Chair |
Perkins |
Beach |
Prather,
Legal |
|
Turnbo |
Cooper |
Butler |
|
|
White,
Chair |
|
|
|
The notice and agenda of said meeting was posted in the Office of INCOG, 201 W. 5th St., Suite 600, on Thursday, February 8, 2001, at 12:00 p.m., as well as at the City Clerks office, City Hall.
After declaring a quorum present, Chair, White called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Mr.
Beach announced that of the following cases, the applicants requested to
withdraw.
Case
No. 18962
Case
No. 18965
Mr. Beach announced that the applicant made a timely request for a Continuance of the following case.
Action
Requested:
Appeal from the decision of the Administrative Official
that the Juvenile Delinquency Center/Detention/Correctional Facility,
Residential Treatment Center, or Transitional Living Center requires a Special
Exception from the Board of Adjustment; OR in the alternative: Special Exception to operate as a
Juvenile Delinquency Center until June 30, 2001 in an RS-3 zoned district. SECTION 401. PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICTS and SECTION 1202.
USE UNIT 2. AREA-WIDE
SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES Use Unit 5; a Variance from
the maximum floor area ratio of 0.5.
SECTION 404.F.1. SPECIAL
EXCEPTION USES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, REQUIREMENTS; a Variance from the
minimum lot size of 12,000 square feet.
SECTION 404.F.2. SPECIAL
EXCEPTION USES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, REQUIREMENTS; a Variance from the
minimum frontage of 100. SECTION
404.F.3. SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES IN
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, REQUIREMENTS; and a Variance from the minimum building
setback of 25 from abutting properties located within an R District. SECTION 404.F.4. SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES IN RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICTS, REQUIREMENTS, located 10852 E. 33rd
St.
Presentation:
Steven
Novick, 1717 S. Cheyenne, stated that he represented the Brown Schools of
Oklahoma. He requested that this
Case be continued to March 13, 2001.
Board
Action:
On MOTION
of Turnbo, the Board voted 3-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo, "aye"; no
"nays"; no "abstentions"; Perkins, Cooper "absent") to CONTINUE
Case No. 18967 to the hearing on March 13, 2001.
MINUTES:
On MOTION of Dunham, the Board
voted 3-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo, "aye"; no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Perkins,
Cooper "absent") to APPROVE
the Minutes of January 23, 2001 (No. 811).
NEW APPLICATIONS
Action
Requested:
Variance of required lot width for RS-1 zoned district from 100 to 93.75 for two lots to allow a lot split. SECTION 403. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Use Unit 6, located 4349 S. Jamestown.
Presentation:
Patricia and
Joe Lochrie, 4336 S. Louisville, stated that they live behind the subject
property. Patricia stated that the
property is unique, in that it is larger than the majority of lots in the
area. A lot split would make the
lots more consistent with the neighborhood. She submitted two maps and photos
(Exhibit A-1, A-2, A-3). She
mentioned that these lots are for single-family dwellings, and that there were
other lot splits approved by the Board of Adjustment (BOA) in this area.
Interested
Parties:
John
Gibson,
stated that he represented his mother-in-law who resides at 4367 S.
Jamestown. He wanted to clarify
that her lot was not split, though she sold a lot that was south of her
residence. He mentioned her concern
about having houses too close together near her own home.
Comments and
Questions:
Chair
White,
asked staff about the history of property.
Mr. Beach responded that it appeared that the lot immediately south of
the subject property consists of one platted lot and a half of another platted
lot. He stated that it also appears
there have been several lot splits on this street.
Rebuttal:
Ms. Lochrie stated that Ms. Burns, Mr. Gibsons mother-in-law sold a lot that was perhaps not a lot split. Ms. Lochrie added that a new two-story home was built on the lot she sold and stated she could not understand why she would object to two more new homes on the other side of her property.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. Beach pointed
out that the subject lot and the lot immediately south are about the same
size. It appears that at some time
in the past Lot 11 was split, the north half went to Lot 12 and the south half
went to Lot 10, creating two larger lots out of three original lots. He stated that now the applicant wants
to split the larger lot in half, making two smaller non-conforming lots. Mr. Beach noted that the fact that the
lot is larger is not because it was platted that way but because of the action
of a private party it was made that way.
He considered it a self-imposed hardship. Mr. White asked the applicant to state
the hardship. Ms. Lochrie responded
that this is an unnecessary hardship to the property because it is a unique
size. She stated that the lot split
would bring a consistency to the uniformity of the neighborhood.
Board
Action:
On
MOTION
of Dunham,
the Board voted 3-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo "aye"; no "nays"; no "abstentions";
Perkins, Cooper "absent") to APPROVE
a Variance
of required lot width for RS-1 zoned district from 100 to 93.75 for two lots
to allow a lot split, finding the hardship that other lot splits have been
approved in the area and this would not create smaller lots than would be
consistent with the neighborhood, on the following described
property:
N/2 of Lot 11, and all Lot
12, Block 4, Villa Grove Heights 1st, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County,
Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Special Exception to allow a childrens daycare in an RM-2 district (both sides of duplex). SECTION 401. PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Use Unit 5; and a Variance of parking requirement from 5 to 0 parking spaces. SECTION 1205.C. USE UNIT 5. COMMUNITY SERVICES AND SIMILAR USES, Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements, located 6302 6304 S. Owasso Ave.
Presentation:
Joenetta
Ojo, 6302 S. Owasso Ave., stated her request to have a daycare at her
residence where she currently runs a daycare home. Ms. Ojo submitted photos (Exhibit B-1)
of the property. She stated she is
licensed for seven children, she would need to apply to the state for a larger
daycare center. She added that all
of the changes would be within the structure, no changes on the outside. Ms. Ojo commented that there is no one
who parks all day there except for her; and the parents drop off and pick up
children.
Comments and
Questions:
Ms. Turnbo asked
how many employees she would have.
She replied that she has an assistant and a substitute occasionally, as
needed. Ms. Turnbo asked where they
park. Ms. Ojo replied they park in
the driveway. Ms. Turnbo stated if
there are no spaces available, then children are going to have to enter the
street to get to a car. Ms. Ojo
responded that there is a grassy driveway on the other side of the duplex, and
she plans to pave it one day.
Mr. White noted staff comments that four other variances would be
needed. Mr. Beach replied that
there is a maximum floor area ratio of .5; a minimum lot size of 12,000 square
feet; a minimum frontage of 100; and a minimum building setback of 25 from
abutting properties located within an R district. Mr. Beach noted that the applicant did
not request these variances and according to the case map she could not meet
those requirements. Mr. White
clarified to the applicant that other relief was needed, noting that
floor-area-ratio was insufficient, the lot size was insufficient, the frontage
was too small, and the setback was too short. Candy Parnell stated it has been her
experience when working with internal commercial daycare facilities, that
parking is a problem. She cited one
on 41st Street, just East of Riverside, which was enlarged and
provides care for about 62 children and has only three parking spaces. Ms. Parnell stated it has become a real
problem for the neighborhood. She
asked that the Board take this into consideration since there seems to be no way
of controlling this type of problem.
Interested
Parties:
There
were no interested parties who wished to speak.
Board
Action:
On
MOTION of
Dunham,
the Board voted 3-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo "aye"; no "nays"; no "abstentions";
Perkins, Cooper "absent") to DENY
a Special Exception
to allow a childrens daycare in an RM-2 district (both sides of duplex); and a
Variance of parking requirement from 5 to 0 parking spaces,
finding the property and structure to be inadequate.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Minor amendment to a previously approved site plan. SECTION 403. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Use Unit 6, located 2902 S. Boston Ct.
Presentation:
Bob
Gibson, stated he was the builder/contractor for this residence. He stated that to meet Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) guidelines, he requested the garage have a minor
separation from the residence instead of attached per the previous plans. The separations would be about six
inches on one side and three feet on the other, and setbacks would remain the
same. A revised site plan was
submitted (Exhibit C-1).
Interested
Parties:
There
were no interested parties who wished to speak.
Board
Action:
On
MOTION
of Dunham,
the Board voted 3-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo "aye"; no "nays"; no "abstentions";
Perkins, Cooper "absent") to APPROVE
a Minor amendment
to a previously approved site plan, per the new plan submitted, on the following
described property:
Lot 1, and the N 15 of Lot
2, Bock 2, Travis Park Addition, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of
Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance of 24 required aisle width to back vehicles out from garage down to 18. SECTION 1303. DESIGN STANDARDS FOR OFF-STREET PARKING AREAS Use Unit 6 & 12, located 1733 S. Boston Ave.
Presentation:
Amanda
Lawhon, 1733 S. Boston Ave., submitted a site plan and elevation (Exhibit
D-1).
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. White noted
the Board had approved the plan before.
Ms. Lawhon responded that was for a Special Exception for a coffee shop
downstairs and her apartment above.
Mr. Beach added that her first site plan was conceptual and subject to
change.
Ms. Lawhon
continued, describing the plan for her personal drive and added that the plan
also meets requirements for the commercial parking and drive aisle.
Interested
Parties:
There
were no interested parties who wished to speak.
Board
Action:
On MOTION
of Dunham, the Board voted 3-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Perkins, Cooper "absent") to APPROVE a Variance of 24
required aisle width to back vehicles out from garage down to 18, finding the
hardship to be the size of the lot and that it will not cause substantial
detriment to the public good or impair the purposes, spirit, and intent of the
Code, or the Comprehensive Plan, on the following described
property:
Lot 3, Block 1, Stutsman Addition to the City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance to allow sign to be setback 43 from the centerline, down from the requirement of ½ right-of-way or 50 in a CS zoned district. SECTION 1221.C.6. USE UNIT 21. BUSINESS SIGNS AND OUTDOOR ADVERTISING, General Use Conditions for Business Signs Use Unit 11, located 4821 S. Peoria.
Presentation:
Ralph
Sigler, 4411 S. Sheridan, with Commercial Sign and Neon, stated he is the
contractor for the installation of this sign. The sign was manufactured by another
firm and sent from out of state. He
stated that the location selected for the sign was not going to work. The two owners of the separate lots at
this location have paved the parking area for common use for ingress and egress
of the two businesses. He pointed out that the fifty-foot setback and curb cuts
required in this zoning area would cause the sign to be standing in the common
drive.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. Dunham noted
a large tree that would obstruct view of the sign. He reminded the applicant that if
approved, he would need a license agreement with the City of Tulsa. Mr. Sigler acknowledged that
requirement.
Interested
Parties:
There
were no interested parties who wished to speak.
Board
Action:
On MOTION
of Dunham, the Board voted 3-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Perkins, Cooper "absent") to APPROVE a Variance to allow
sign to be setback 43 from the centerline, down from the requirement of ½
right-of-way or 50 in a CS zoned district, per plan, on condition that a
license agreement would be required with the City of Tulsa, finding the hardship
to be the configuration of the parking and the existing tree, on the following
described property:
North 90 of West 180, Lot
1, Block 1, Southern Center Addition to the City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State
of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Special Exception
to waive screening requirement on east, west and south sides of property. SECTION 1303.E. DESIGN STANDARDS FOR OFF-STREET PARKING
AREAS Use Unit 5, located 13902 E. 11th St.
Presentation:
Ken Riggs,
13902 E. 11th, submitted photographs (Exhibit F-2) to the Board. A site plan (Exhibit F-1) was submitted
with the application. He stated
they have received a building permit for a new sanctuary to the east of the
current one. The Stormwater
Management indicated that screening would be a problem in restricting the flow
of water particularly on the southeast corner if the creek overflowed. He pointed out there was no residence
close to the south property line; on the west there will be no construction
because it is completely in the floodway; and the back half of the east side is
also in the floodway.
Comments and
Questions:
Chair White asked
if the applicant has talked with the neighbor on the east, since he would be
most directly affected by the request.
Mr. Riggs responded that he has not talked with the owner. Mr. Riggs stated he would not be opposed
to a short screening on that side.
Interested
Parties:
Bill
Wiles,
320 S. Boston, with Electronic Research and Development, stated that they have
property in the area and was simply interested in the case. Mr. Wiles offered no objection.
Comments and
Questions:
Chair White asked
Mr. Riggs for the height of the new structure. He replied that he would have twelve
foot sidewalls and would be elevated about twenty-one inches above the
ground. He also asked for the side
yard dimension. He replied that
they received a variance for five feet.
Mr. Riggs commented that parking would be in the rear, and there would be
no parking in the front. The
front would be landscaped with green grass.
Board
Action:
On MOTION
of Dunham, the Board voted 3-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Perkins, Cooper "absent") to APPROVE a Special Exception to
waive screening requirement on east, west and south sides of property, per plan
submitted, with the condition, there will be no parking in the front of the
building, on the following described property:
Lot 5, Block 3,
11th Street Acres, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of
Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Special Exception to allow a single-family dwelling in a CS zoning district. SECTION 701. PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS, located 8822 E. Admiral Blvd.
Presentation:
David
Rowan, 8822 E. Admiral Blvd., stated he is renting the structure as it is
now. He added he would like to
purchase the property.
Comments and
Questions:
Chair White asked
if the application was for title purposes.
Mr. Rowan replied in the affirmative. Chair White noted there were about
fourteen homes in this CS district.
Interested
Parties:
There were no interested parties who
wished to speak.
Board
Action:
On MOTION
of Dunham, the Board voted 3-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Perkins, Cooper "absent") to APPROVE a Special Exception to
allow a single-family dwelling in a CS zoning district, finding that it will be
in harmony with the spirit and intent of the Code, and will not be injurious to
the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare, on the
following described property:
Lot 3, Block 2, Hirrlinger
Addition to the City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of
Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Case
No. 18975
Action
Requested:
Variance of
required front yard from 30 to 24 in an RS-2 zoned district. SECTION 403. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Use Unit 6, located 2435 E. 22nd
Pl.
Presentation:
Michele
Falkensten, 3319 S. Yorktown, with OakLeaf Designs, stated she is the
designer for her client, Virginia Heller who resides on the subject
property. She submitted a site plan
with photo (Exhibit G-1) to the Board.
She described the conditions of a stoop at the back door, which makes it
difficult to maneuver a full size car down the driveway. They have been parking their cars in the
front of the house and in the street, which is a concern to them and their
neighbors. She pointed out a sewer
line that runs along the east of the property, which creates a very small lot
and causes an open gulley at the bottom of the hill. Ms. Falkensten showed illustration and
described the addition plans and the plans in comparison to the building lines,
and use of materials to keep it uniform and consistent with the
neighborhood.
Comments and
Questions:
Chair White asked
if Ms. Falkensten has spoken with the neighbors. She replied that she has not but her
client has shared her preliminary plans with them.
Interested
Parties:
Pamela
Lowe,
2447 E. 42nd Pl., stated that she lives on the east of the subject
property. She stated her objection
to the protrusion of the house into the front further than the other homes along
the street.
James
Torey,
2472 E. 22nd Pl., stated he is a neighbor and long-time
resident. He suggested there are
better alternatives to achieve the same goals.
Charles
Tobbins,
2430 E. 22nd Pl., and Sara Landers, 2424 E. 22nd Pl.
stated the objection as above.
The Board
received a letter of opposition to the application (Exhibit G-3) and signatures
of interested parties present, who were in opposition were obtained during the
hearing (Exhibit G-2).
Rebuttal:
Ms. Falkensten
stated that there is no way to fix the problem unless you fix the whole
problem. She urged consideration
that there are several other garages that face the front of lots in the
area.
Board
Action:
On MOTION
of Dunham, the Board voted 3-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Perkins, Cooper "absent") to DENY a Variance of required
front yard from 30 to 24 in an RS-2 zoned district, finding that it would
cause substantial detriment to the public good and impair the purposes, spirit,
and intent of the Code, or the Comprehensive Plan.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance from
required parking from 384 to 96 spaces to permit the addition of a new gymnasium
to Webster High School. SECTION
1205.C. USE UNIT 5. COMMUNITY
SERVICES AND SIMILAR USES, Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements Use
Unit 5; and a Special Exception to approve an amendment to a previously approved
site plan, located NE/c W. 40th St. & S. Yukon
Ave.
Presentation:
Jeannie
Kovach, 3027 S. New Haven, P.O. Box 470208, Tulsa, OK 74147, stated that she
represented Tulsa Public Schools. She stated Dale Ragland, Sr. was with her
at the hearing.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. Dunham asked
if she had seen the Staff comments on the application. She stated she had not seen them, but
would address them. She called
their attention to the existing and proposed gymnasiums on the site plan. The existing gymnasium will be turned
into a practice gym. They would not
have simultaneous uses on campus.
This means an increase of only 185 seats, requiring only 52 new parking
spaces on this site according to the architect, and they are able to provide 92
new spaces.
Interested
Parties:
George Parker,
3928
S. Union, stated his opposition to the application because the creek still
overflows and he was concerned about the flood control
problems.
Comments
and Questions:
Mr.
Dunham explained to Mr. Parker that they would have to meet the requirements of
the City Stormwater Management Department regarding those issues.
Board
Action:
On MOTION
of Dunham, the Board voted 3-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Perkins, Cooper "absent") to APPROVE a Variance from
required parking from 384 to 96 spaces to permit the addition of a new gymnasium
to Webster High School, finding that it would not cause substantial detriment to
the public good or impair the purposes, spirit, and intent of the Code, or the
Comprehensive Plan; and a Special Exception to approve an
amendment to a previously approved site plan, per plan, with the condition that
not more than 1 event take place at
the same time, finding that it will be in harmony with the spirit and intent of
the Code, and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental
to the public welfare, on the following described
property:
A portion of SE/4 SE/4 of
Section 22, T-19-N, R-12-E, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma,
consisting of Lots 4-23, Block 1 inclusive, Lots 7-26, Block 2 inclusive, Lots
1-20, Block 3 inclusive, Lots 1-20, Block 4 inclusive, Lots 8-27, Block 5
inclusive, and that portion of W. 38th St. bounded on the W by the E
right-of-way of S. Yukon Ave. and bounded on the E by the centerline of 20
alley and W. 39th St. bounded on the W by the E right-of-way of S.
Yukon Ave. and bounded on the E by the centerline of a 20 alley and S. Waco
Ave. bounded on the N by the S line of Block 1 and bounded on the S by the N
right-of-way of W. 40th St. and the W 10 of an alley perpendicular
with and contiguous to Lot 4, Block 1, W. 38th St., Lots 7 and 26,
Block 2, W. 39th St., and Lots 8 and 27, Block 5, all in Clinton
Homesites an Addition to Red Fork; now an Addition to the City of Tulsa, Tulsa
County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Case No. 18978
Action
Requested:
Special Exception
to permit retail sales in an IL district.
SECTION 901. PRINCIPAL USES
PERMITTED IN INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS Use Unit 14 / 23; and a Variance of required
parking from 28 spaces to 8.
SECTION 1214.D. USE UNIT 14.
SHOPPING GOODS AND SERVICES, Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements
and SECTION 1223.D. USE UNIT 23.
WAREHOUSING AND WHOLESALING, Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements,
located 8516 E. 41st St.
Presentation:
Roy
Johnsen, 201 W. 5th, Ste. 501, stated that they discovered there
was a previous Board action (BOA Case No. 7477) that granted the relief he was
seeking today. He saw no need to
proceed and asked to withdraw this application.
Board
Action:
Withdrawal was
accepted.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Case
No. 18979
Action
Requested:
Variance of the
maximum height for a business sign from 25 to 64. SECTION 1103.B.2.b.4. USES PERMITTED IN
A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, Accessory Uses Use Unit 19; and a Variance of
maximum display surface area from 325 square feet to 348 square feet. SECTION 1221.D.3. USE UNIT 21. BUSINESS SIGNS AND OUTDOOR ADVERTISING,
CS District Use Conditions for Business Signs, located 7141 S. 85th
E. Ave.
Presentation:
John
Moody, stated he was assisting Richard Craig in the presentation of this
case. He stated he represented
Tri-Star Investments. They own and
operate the Hampton Inn on South 85th East Avenue. He described the location and
surrounding properties, mostly retail stores. Mr. Moody pointed out that this is
essentially a request to remove and take down an existing wall-sign 43.2 in
height that was affixed to the eastern wall of the building and to replace it
with a monopole sign approximately the same size and would stand 63 in
height. He stated that during the
design phase of the hotel the wall sign was designed for a four-story
building. A site plan, and sign
photo were previously provided for the Board (Exhibits I-1, I-1a). He illustrated the additional height
that was added to the DSW Shoe Store when the strip mall was remodeled,
subsequent to the ground breaking for the hotel. The owners found after two months of
opening the hotel that people could not locate the hotel when they were
specifically looking for the Hampton Inn.
They propose to put up the monopole sign on the undeveloped northeast
corner of the property, behind the Barnes and Nobel Bookstore, for greater
visibility. He submitted a letter
(Exhibit I-3) from Mr. James H. Beacham, President of the Woodland Office Park
Association, who is in support of the application. He described the size of the sign,
lettering and height, including lighting.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. White asked
if there was a potential problem with the proposed location since it was land,
which is off the Hampton Inn site, and probably an area for future
development. Mr. Moody stated the
same owner owns the property. Chair
White was still concerned that if this part of the property were split off if
the sign would be a problem. Mr.
Moody mentioned that that there is no way to provide access to that portion of
the lot if there was a lot split.
Richard
Craig, 810 W. Walnut Street, Collinsville, OK, stated he was the contractor
that put up the wall signs for this Hampton Inn. He stated that in order to fit the sign
as high as possible in the peak of the wall for the best visibility, they asked
for a new sign to be made with letters three-feet tall instead of four
feet. He described the survey and
submitted photographs (Exhibit I-4) to illustrate how they determined what size
of lettering and sign they needed.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. Dunham asked
if the pole was calculated in the required footage of the sign. Mr. Craig responded that the variance
requested would cover the ground sign at the entrance and the pole sign.
Interested
Parties:
There were no
interested parties who wished to speak.
Board
Action:
On Motion
of Dunham, the Board voted 3-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Perkins, Cooper "absent") to APPROVE a Variance of the
maximum height for a business sign from 25 to 64; and a Variance
of maximum display surface area from 325 square feet to 348 square feet, per
plan for the combination of two signs, finding it will not cause substantial
detriment to the public good or impair the purposes, spirit, and intent of the
Code, or the Comprehensive Plan, on the following described property:
Lot 7, Block 2, El Paseo, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Case
No. 18980
Action
Requested:
Special
Exception to permit residential uses under Use Unit 6, 7, and 8 in RM-2, RS-2,
and CS districts. SECTION 701. PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN COMMERCIAL
DISTRICTS Use Unit 6, 7 & 8; and a Variance of off-street parking design
requirements to permit tandem parking.
SECTION
1303. DESIGN STANDARDS FOR
OFF-STREET PARKING AREAS, located SE/c N. Country Club Dr. & Latimer
St.
Presentation:
Roy
Johnsen, 201 W. 5th St., Ste. 501, stated he represented Tulsa
Housing Authority, regarding Osage Hills Apartments. The proposed project is to remove
some of the old structures and redevelop under more modern techniques and
approaches. He stated that this is
similar to the application several months ago, and is south of the previous
project. He pointed out that on the
property they are adding to the south, there were three duplex structures in CS
to be used for residential use. Mr.
Johnsen added that they are requesting tandem parking within the duplex areas of
the project.
Board
Action:
On MOTION
of Dunham, the Board voted 3-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Perkins, Cooper "absent") to APPROVE a Special
Exception
to permit residential uses under Use Unit 6, 7, and 8 in RM-2, RS-2, and CS
districts; and a Variance of off-street parking design
requirements to permit tandem parking, per plan, finding it will not cause
substantial detriment to the public good or impair the purposes, spirit, and
intent of the Code, or the Comprehensive Plan, on the following described
property:
A tract
of land located in a part of Osage Hills Apartments and a part of South Osage
Hills Addition and all of Block 8 Osage Hills Addition, being more particularly
described as follows: Beg. at the SW/c of Blk 5, Osage Hills Apartments;
thence N 00Ί0701 E along the W line of Blk 5, a distance of 705.00; S
89Ί2310 E a distance of 542.37; S 00Ί0143 W a distance of 115.00; S
89Ί2310 E a distance of 195.01 to the E line; S 00Ί0143 W along the E line
a distance of 716.86 to a bend in the E line; S 00Ί0000 W along the E line a
distance of 25.00 to the NE/c of Blk 3; N 89Ί4125 W along the N line of Blk 3
a distance of 154.00; S 00Ί0507 W a distance of 454.00; N 89Ί2310 W a
distance of 444.62 to the W right-of-way of Country Club Dr. in South Osage
Hills Addition; N 00Ί0507 E along the W right-of-way of Country Club Dr. a
distance of 606.67 to the most Sly SE/c of Blk 5, Osage Hills Apartments; N
89Ί2310 W along the S line of Blk 5, a distance of 140.00 to the SW/c of Blk
5, to the POB; less and except any public dedicated streets or roadways within
the above description; and a tract Beg. at the NE/c of Blk 3, Osage Hills
Apartments; thence S 00Ί0000 W along the E line a distance of 1281.55 to the
SE/c of Blk 2; S 89Ί5650 W along the S line of Blk 2 and across Osage Dr. a
distance of 266.33 to the W right-of-way of Osage Dr. in South Osage Hills
Addition; N 00Ί0507E along the W right-of-way of Osage Dr. a distance of
406.08 to the SE/c of Blk 1, Osage Hills Apartments; N 89Ί2310 W along the S
line of Blk 1, and across Country Club Dr. a distance of 334.19 to the W
right-of-way of Country Club Dr. in South Osage Hills Addition; N 00Ί0507 E
along the W right-of-way of Country Club Dr. a distance of 423.73; S 89Ί2310
E a distance of 444.62; N 00Ί0507 E a distance of 454.00 to the N line of
Blk 3, Osage Hills Apartments; S 89Ί4125 E along the N line of Blk 3, a
distance of 154.00 to the NE/c of Blk 3, the POB; less and except any public
dedicated streets of roadways within the above description, all located within
the City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Case No. 18981
Action
Requested:
Minor Special
Exception to modify site plan.
SECTION 410 PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. Use Unit
5, located SW/c E. 18th Pl. & S. 129th E.
Ave.
Presentation:
Roy
Johnsen, 201 W. 5th St., Ste. 501, stated that this property is
located in a multi-family residential zoned district. The First Four Square Gospel church came
before the Board a few months ago, and received approval for church use. The Board told them they could come back
with minor changes in a revised site plan.
They desire to move the structure further to the south and to increase
floor area from 10,000 to 10,340.
He asked for approval of the revised site plan (Exhibit K-1).
Comments and
Questions:
Chair White asked
if this plan could be considered the final site plan. Mr. Johnsen replied in the affirmative.
Board
Action:
On MOTION
of Dunham, the Board voted 3-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Perkins, Cooper "absent") to APPROVE a Minor Special
Exception to modify site plan, including the increase of square
footage from 10,000 to 10,500 square feet, per plan, finding that it will be in
harmony with the spirit and intent of the Code, and will not be injurious to the
neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare, on the following
described property:
Lot 1, Block 1, Coventry Addition to the City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Case
No. 18982
Action
Requested:
Special Exception
to permit Use Unit 14, Retail Electrical Supply, and General retail store in an
IL district. SECTION 901. PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN INDUSTRIAL
DISTRICTS Use Unit 14; and a Variance of Section 1303.D requirement for an
all-weather material in parking areas to permit the existing gravel lot. SECTION 1303.D. DESIGN STANDARDS FOR OFF-STREET PARKING
AREAS, located 8136 E. 48th St.
Presentation:
Perry
Schauvliege, 2109 Chyme St., Ponca City, OK, stated he is an architect on
behalf of William G. Allen. The
structure on the subject property is an existing two-story facility built in
1971. He stated that they desire
approval of a Use Unit 14, for the businesses, which are already in place.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. Dunhan noted that they are also requesting a variance of the all-weather surface on the parking lot. Mr. Schauvliege responded in the affirmative, stating part of the surface is hard surface and some gravel.
Interested
Parties:
Mike
Hilsabeck, 2615 E. 15th St., stated he was an attorney
representing the property owners across 48th St. of Lots 1 and 2,
Block 2, of the subdivision. They
object to the variance for a gravel parking lot because it is an eyesore. He stated that large tractor-trailer
trucks use it frequently and kick up dust.
There are no properties in the area that have gravel parking lots.
Comments and
Questions:
Chair White noted the plan indicates forty-two spaces, and wanted to know if that was sufficient for these businesses. Mr. Beach replied that he did not have enough information to determine parking needs. He added that in 1979 the Board approved a Special Exception for this same use, subject to the applicant providing 125 parking spaces with a dust free surface for this property. Mr. Hilsabeck responded that the owners would be willing to provide the additional spaces.
Board
Action:
On MOTION of Dunham, the Board voted 3-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo "aye"; no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Perkins, Cooper "absent") to APPROVE a Special Exception to permit Use Unit 14, Retail Electrical Supply, and General retail store in an IL district, finding that in Case No. 10304 on January 18, 1979 this same use was approved on the condition that 125 additional dust free parking spaces be provided; and to DENY a Variance of Section 1303.D requirement for an all-weather material in parking areas to permit the existing gravel lot, on the following described property:
Lots 1 and 2 and the E 86 of Lot 3, Block 3, Second Research and Development Center Resubdivision, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Case No. 18983
Action
Requested:
Variance of
Design Standards for off-street parking areas. SECTION 1303. DESIGN STANDARDS FOR OFF-STREET PARKING
AREAS Use Unit 12a; and a Special Exception to reduce required parking spaces
from 28 to 20 spaces. SECTION
1212a. USE UNIT 12a. ADULT ENTERTAINMENT ESTABLISHMENTS and
SECTION 1408.B.4. ADULT
ENTERTAINMENT ESTABLISHMENTS, located
2913 E. 11th St.
Presentation:
Roy
Johnsen, 201 W. 5th St., Ste. 501, stated he represented Tony
Henry, owner of J.R.s, a bar near the University of Tulsa campus. The residences surrounding this property
are owned by the university, one is unoccupied and would be scheduled for
something long-term other than single-family.
Comments and
Questions:
Chair White asked if there was any new construction planned on this site. Mr. Johnsen responded there might be remodeling of restrooms, but he knows of nothing planned for the exterior. He added that the parking does not meet the standards regarding aisle space, so they may be short on required spaces. Mr. Dunham asked if the plan submitted is the correct plan. Ms. Turnbo noted that the majority of the customers are probably pedestrian or bicyclists because of the location.
Interested
Parties:
There were no
interested parties who wished to speak.
Board
Action:
On MOTION
of Dunham, the Board voted 3-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Perkins, Cooper "absent") to APPROVE a Variance of Design
Standards for off-street parking areas, finding it is an existing condition, the
size of the lot, and there are no R uses; and a Special Exception
to reduce required parking spaces from 28 to 20 spaces, per plan, finding that
it will be in harmony with the spirit and intent of the Code, and will not be
injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare, on
the following described property:
Lot 6, Block 27, College
Addition, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Case No. 18984
Action
Requested:
Variance of rear
setback from 25 to 15. SECTION
603. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN
THE OFFICE DISTRICTS Use Unit 6, located 2218 E. 48th Pl.
S.
Presentation:
Jeff
Levinson, 35 E. 18th St., stated the property has an underlying
OL zoning, and a rear setback of 25 along the northern boundary of the
subdivision. They would like to get
a reduction to 15 setback. The
Board has approved other compatible setbacks.
Board
Action:
On MOTION of Dunham, the Board voted 3-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo "aye"; no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Perkins, Cooper "absent") to APPROVE a Variance of rear setback from 25 to 15, and must comply with all other development standards, finding the hardship to be the OL zoning for a residential area, and other cases in the area have been approved, for the following described property:
Lot 14, Block 1, Bolewood Place, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Case
No. 18985
Action
Requested:
Variance of rear
setback from 25 to 15. SECTION
603. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN
THE OFFICE DISTRICTS Use Unit 6, located 2139 E. 48th Pl.
S.
Presentation:
Jeff
Levinson, 35 E. 18th St., stated the property has an underlying
OL zoning, and a rear setback of 25 along the northern boundary of the
subdivision. They would like to get
a reduction to 15 setback. The
Board has approved other compatible setbacks.
Interested
Parties:
Robert Lyon, 4749 S. Yorktown Pl., stated he lives just north of this property. He questioned why he would want to reduce the setback, because he would object to the loss of privacy.
Comments and
Questions:
Chair White noted that the neighboring rear setbacks have already been reduced. Mr. Dunham also noted that there is a wall that separates their properties.
Rebuttal:
Mr. Levinson
commented that one of the development standards mentioned in the previous case
is that no windows on the second story level would be allow on the north
side. He stated his client intends
to abide by that standard.
Board Action:
On MOTION
of Dunham, the Board voted 3-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Perkins, Cooper "absent") to APPROVE a Variance of rear
setback from 25 to 15, and must comply with all other development standards,
finding the hardship to be the OL zoning for a residential area, and other cases
in the area have been approved, for the following described
property:
Lot 10, Block 1, Bolewood
Place, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
There being no further
business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:24 p.m.
Date approved:______________________
__________________________________
Chair