CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Tuesday, November 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 |
Turnbo |
Beach |
Boulden, Legal |
|
Cooper Perkins |
|
Butler |
|
|
White, Chair |
|
|
|
The notice and agenda of said meeting was posted in the Office of INCOG, 201 W. 5th St., Suite 600, on Wednesday, November 7, 2001, at 12:06 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.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action Requested:
Special Exception of the required 110%
setback from an O zoned district from 110 to 76 on the north and 350 on
the east for a monopole cell tower 100 in height, located NE/c E. 21st
St. & S. Columbia.
Presentation:
Mr. Beach
announced that the applicant, Dan Sullivan, requested a
continuance.
Board
Action:
On MOTION of Dunham, the
Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Perkins, Cooper "aye"; no
"nays"; no "abstentions"; Turnbo "absent") to CONTINUE
Case No. 19232 to the meeting on November 27, 2001.
Action Requested:
Special Exception to permit cellular telephone antennae and supporting structure to be affixed to an existing electrical utility monopole 75 in height extending the height of the supporting structure to 82 with antennae extending 3 above the supporting structure; a Special Exception to delete the requirement of security fencing of the cellular telephone tower; and a Special Exception to modify the setback of the cellular telephone tower from residentially zoned lots from 91.5 to 42.
Presentation:
Mr. Beach announced that the notice was flawed and a notice on Case No. 19240 for November 27, 2001 has been sent out and the case could be stricken from the agenda.
Action
Requested:
Approval of an amended site plan to
relocate manufactured home in an AG zoned district.
Presentation:
Mr. Beach announced that Case No. 19229 was withdrawn.
MINUTES:
On MOTION
of Cooper, the Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Perkins, Cooper
"aye", no "nays", no "abstentions", Turnbo
"absent") to APPROVE
the Minutes of October 9, 2001 (No.828).
On MOTION
of Cooper, the Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Perkins, Cooper
"aye", no "nays", no "abstentions", Turnbo
"absent") to APPROVE
the Minutes of October 23, 2001 (No.829).
Action Requested:
Request for
refund.
Presentation:
Mr. Beach stated that staff recommends
a $175.00 refund based on the fact that time and resources had been spent,
between the time the case was filed and the withdrawal request.
Board
Action:
On MOTION of Dunham, the Board voted 4-0-0 (White,
Dunham, Perkins, Cooper "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Turnbo "absent") to APPROVE a partial refund of $175.00.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action Requested:
Variance of minimum required front yard setback of
35 down to 25. SECTION 403. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS; a Variance of
rear yard setback of 25 down to 22.
SECTION 403. BULK AND AREA
REQUIREMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS; a Special Exception to permit a 6
wall in the required front yard.
SECTION 210.B. YARDS, Permitted Obstructions in Required Yards Use
Unit 6, located 3406 S. Delaware.
Presentation:
Juliana Hakman, 2230 E. 37th,
stated they propose to build additions to their home and to switch the front
and back yards. They are trying to
avoid cutting down large trees in the yard.
She explained there has been an extenuating delay in the building plans. She pointed out the setback variance
requested to build a wall, and the corner of the garage that encroaches on the
setback line. They also desire to build
a wall in the front yard of six feet in height instead of 4 feet.
Comments
and Questions:
Mr. White asked if Ms. Hakman had
spoken with any of the neighbors about this application. She replied that she has spoken with several
people. She indicated that the
opposition was to the delay in the project rather than the project itself. Ms. Perkins asked for a projected
timetable. She responded it should take
about six months.
Interested
Parties:
Jane Jergins, 3303 S. Delaware, stated her
opposition to this application. She
pointed out that a four to six-foot wall would obstruct the view of a three-way
intersection at 34th St. and Delaware. She stated there has never been a car accident at this
intersection and she believes it is because of the good visibility. She indicated the wall would not be in
keeping with the neighborhood with large lots and no walls. She mentioned that the applicant plans to
put in a pool in the front yard and there is not enough room for it. She stated that all of the neighbors within
300 of the subject property are opposed to the wall with concern for safety at
the intersection.
Comments and Questions:
There
was much discussion with the Board regarding which yards are front or back and
the setback measurements.
Interested
Parties:
Rod Baker, 3424 S. Delaware, stated that
the applicant has to show hardships and she has only shown self-imposed
hardships.
Steve
Bradshaw, 2675 E. 33rd Pl., submitted petitions with signatures
(Exhibits A-5). He stated that the
subject lot is about three feet above the street level. He repeated objection to a wall that would
obstruct the view for traffic.
Philip Teeter, 3450 S. Delaware, stated this
application is not allowed by the covenants.
Mr. White informed him that the Board does not deal with matters of
covenant, that is a civil matter for court.
Tim Nelson, 2735 E. 34th, stated
he is opposed to a pool in the front yard.
He spoke his objection to the wall for privacy at a pool.
Applicants
Rebuttal:
Ms.
Hakman responded that this is the first time she has heard any objection to the
proposed wall, even though she has talked with Ms. Jergins and others
before. She stated that they have taken
the neighborhood into consideration and they rejected the original plans for
the wall because it would have been too far out and obstruct the view for
traffic. The way the house was built
does not give a clear front or back yard.
She stated that the hardships are caused by the situation of the
existing structure on the property.
Comments
and Questions:
Mr.
White tried to determine the placement of the wall, the location of the
proposed pool, the space around the pool.
Ms. Hakman could not answer specifically. Mr. Beach reminded the Board that pools are not allowed in the
front yard, and she is not advertised for relief from that requirement. The Board discussed the options and
requirements for front yard, rear yard and side yard per the Zoning Code. Mr. Beach informed the Board that the case
was advertised properly. He added that
the only thing missing was the pool and he was not informed of the pool.
Councilor Brady Pringle asked
to speak. He indicated that Interested
Parties want a continuance. He
mentioned that he has received numerous calls regarding this property because
of the delay in construction. He added
that he used to live in the neighborhood.
He stated that common sense indicates 34th Street is the
front of the house. He realized that
the address has been changed.
Board
Action:
On MOTION of Dunham, the Board voted 4-0-0 (White,
Dunham, Perkins, Cooper "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Turnbo "absent") to APPROVE a Variance of
minimum required front yard setback of 35 down to 25 from the property line;
a Variance of rear yard setback of 25 down to 22, strictly for the corner of
the garage, per plan as submitted today, finding the hardship to be the
existing structure and the shape of the lot; and to DENY a Special
Exception to permit a 6 wall in the required front yard, finding it
would not be in harmony with the spirit and intent of the Code, and would be
injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare,
on the following described property:
Lot 1, Block 7, Timberland, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action Requested:
Special Exception for church and church
accessory uses. SECTION 401. PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS
Use Unit 5, located SW/c W. 39th St. & 28th W. Ave.
Presentation:
Byron Salsman, 2618 W. 45th
St., stated he was representing the Redfork Baptist Church as the architect and
as a member. He stated that the church
owns the south forty feet of Lot 2, and recently purchased the balance of Lot 2
and Lot 1. They propose to build a bus
barn. They plan to use the existing
house on the property for temporary storage during construction. They are removing some smaller existing
structures. They plan to keep the 12 x
12 existing storage building and the structure in the southwest corner. A site plan (Exhibit B-1) was submitted to
the Board.
Comments
and Questions:
Mr. Cooper asked if any of the property
would be used for parking. Mr. Salsman
replied that it would not be used for parking as they already have adequate
paved parking. Mr. Beach informed the
Board that a tie-agreement would be recommended to prevent a bus barn from
being a separate principle use. Mr.
Salsman stated they would be in favor of the tie-agreement.
Interested
Parties:
There were no interested parties who wished to
speak.
Board
Action:
On Motion of Dunham, the Board voted 4-0-0 (White,
Dunham, Perkins, Cooper "aye", no "nays", no
"abstentions", Turnbo "absent") to APPROVE a Special Exception for church and church accessory uses, per plan, conditioned
upon a tie-agreement between the subject property and the church property, on
the following described property:
Lot 1 - 2, Block 39, Red Fork, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action Requested:
Variance of side yard setback from 15
down to 5 in an RE district. SECTION
403.A. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, Bulk and Area
Requirements in the RE, RS, RD, RT and RM Districts Use Unit 6, located 2232
E. 26th St.
Presentation:
Bob Winchester, 2232 E. 26th
St., stated the original garage was converted to a living space. They proposed to build a garage on the
east. They have discussed it with their
neighbors. The site plan was submitted
(Exhibit I-1).
Comments
and Questions:
Mr. Dunham noted the staff have asked
for an explanation of he could not move the location south and east to connect
to the house and meet the required yard.
Mr. Winchester responded that could not be accomplished because of Crow
Creek. Mr. Cooper verified what the
applicant stated about the topography.
Interested
Parties:
There were no interested parties who wished to
speak.
Board
Action:
On Motion of Dunham, the
Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Perkins, Cooper "aye", no
"nays", no "abstentions", Turnbo "absent") to APPROVE
a Variance of side yard setback from 15 down to 5 in an RE
district, per plan, finding the hardship to be the existing setbacks of this
nature are common in this neighborhood, and the topography of the lot would
prevent locating the garage elsewhere, on the following described property:
Lot 3 and E 30.00 of Lot 4, Block 2, Forest Hills Addition, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action Requested:
Special Exception to permit a manufactured home in an RS-3 district. SECTION 401. PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Use Unit 9; and a Variance of the one-year time limit to permit on a permanent basis. SECTION 404. SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, REQUIREMENTS, located approx. 2300 Block of N. Canton Ave.
Presentation:
Gary Linder, 12473 E. 13th
St., stated they propose to move a manufactured home on the subject
property. He submitted an amended site
plan and photographs (Exhibits C-1,2) of other manufactured homes in the
neighborhood. He has plans for a
permanent foundation, and an asbestos roof.
Comments
and Questions:
Mr. White
asked if it is a new structure, to which he replied in the affirmative.
Interested
Parties:
There were no interested parties who wished to
speak.
Board
Action:
On Motion of Dunham, the
Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Perkins, Cooper "aye", no
"nays", no "abstentions", Turnbo "absent") to APPROVE
a Special Exception to permit a manufactured home in
an RS-3 district finding 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; and a Special Exception of the
one-year time limit to permit a 100-year time limit, per the amended plan
submitted today, finding it will not cause substantial detriment to the public
good or impair the purposes, spirit, and intent of the Code, or Comprehensive
Plan, on the following described property:
Lot
3 - 4, Block 1, S. R. Lewis Addition to the Town of Dawson, now a part of the
City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action Requested:
Variance of required yard abutting a
public street from 35 to 27 on East 41st Street. SECTION 403. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Use
Unit 6; and a Variance of required yard abutting a public street from 35 to
20 on Evanston Avenue. SECTION
403. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, located 3944 S. Evanston Ave.
Presentation:
David Short, 3944 S. Evanston,
stated he is the owner of the home. The
permit office told him that the property is legal non-conforming. He proposes to build a porch onto the front
of the house on both sides. He stated
that the neighbors are in support of the improvement. He plans to move the driveway also. A site plan (Exhibit D-1) was submitted.
Comments
and Questions:
Mr. White verified with the applicant
where he plans to add the porch and driveway.
Interested
Parties:
There were no interested parties who wished to
speak.
Board
Action:
On Motion of Dunham, the
Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Perkins, Cooper "aye", no
"nays", no "abstentions", Turnbo "absent") to APPROVE
a Variance of required yard abutting a public street from 35 to
27 on East 41st Street; and a Variance of required
yard abutting a public street from 35 to 20 on Evanston Avenue, per plan,
finding the hardship to be the existing condition and is improving a
non-conforming situation, on the following described property:
Lot 7, Block 25, of Blocks 19-26 of the Ranch Acres Addition, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action Requested:
Variance of lot width from required 200 to 135 on Tract A and 100 on Tract B. SECTION 303. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE AGRICULTURE DISTRICT Use Unit 6; a Variance of lot area from 2 acres to 1.89 acres on Tract A. SECTION 303. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE AGRICULTURE DISTRICT; and a Variance of land area per dwelling unit from 2.2 acres to 2.0 acres on Tract A to permit a lot split. SECTION 303. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE AGRICULTURE DISTRICT, located 7507 S. Elwood Pl.
Presentation:
Ruby Prince, 7507 S. Elwood,
stated she has five acres and would like to sell the back two and one-half
acres and build a roadway.
Interested
Parties:
Jack Heath, 7505 S. Elwood Ave., stated he
did not object to the application. He
did want to contest the accuracy of the new survey (Exhibit J-1). He was concerned that it infringes on his
property.
Applicants
Rebuttal:
Ms.
Prince acknowledged that the survey was not totally accurate.
Comments and Questions:
Mr. White commented that
the Board makes a decision on the legal description. Mr. Beach provided information regarding division of land for a
lot-split.
Board
Action:
On Motion of Dunham, the
Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Perkins, Cooper "aye", no
"nays", no "abstentions", Turnbo "absent") to APPROVE
Variance of lot width from required 200
to 135 on Tract A and 100 on Tract B; a Variance of lot area
from 2 acres to 1.89 acres on Tract A; and a Variance of land
area per dwelling unit from 2.2 acres to 2.0 acres on Tract A to permit a lot
split, per survey submitted, finding the hardship to be the configuration of
the lot, on the following described property:
The S/2 S/2 N/2 SW/4 NW/4 of Section 12, T-18-N, R-12-E of
the IBM, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action Requested:
Special Exception to allow Use Unit 15
(to test fishing rods and reels for Zebco) in a CS zoned district. SECTION 701. PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS Use Unit 15,
located 9810 E. 42nd St. S.
Presentation:
Victor Johnson, 9726 E. 42nd
St., Ste. 100, stated he asked the marketing director to present the case. A brochure of Tech-Ridge Park (Exhibit E-1)
was submitted to the Board.
Patrick Coates, 2808 E. 27th
Pl., stated he is the Marketing Director at the park where the subject property
is located. He stated they were
discussing the possibility of Zebco moving into one of their office buildings
in Tech-Ridge Park. Zebco would be the
only tenant in the Seminole building, which backs up to the Broken Arrow
Expressway. He stated the work would
include testing rods and reels, research and development, paint booth, and 95%
general office use.
Comments
and Questions:
Mr. White questioned Mr. Beach about
the paint booth regarding Code requirements.
Mr. Beach replied that prohibition to paint booths is for automobiles in
a use unit 17. Mr. Cooper asked if all
of the 5% of the use unit 15 is indoors.
Mr. Coates informed the Board that plan to build a casting pond about
four feet deep, and 20 by 40 yards for testing the rods and reels, that would
be fenced and lighted. He stated that
they would need an overhead door
Interested
Parties:
There were no interested parties who wished to
speak.
Board
Action:
On Motion of Dunham, the
Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Perkins, Cooper "aye", no
"nays", no "abstentions", Turnbo "absent") to APPROVE
a Special Exception to allow Use Unit 15 (to test fishing rods
and reels for Zebco) in a CS zoned district, on the conditions indoor testing
will not exceed more than 20% of the building, and testing permitted on the
pond to be constructed outdoors, on the following described property:
A part of Lot 1, Block 2, Koger
Executive Center, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma, and being
more particularly described as follows, to-wit: Beg. at the mutual property
corner of Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, Koger Executive Center; thence S 62°0500 E along the
Sly right-of-way line of East 42nd Street South, a distance of
138.46; thence along a curve to the left, with a central angle at 31°4900 and a radius
of 225.00 a distance of 124.94; to a point; thence S 08°5400 E a distance
of 83.05; thence S 39°5000 E a distance of 244.93; thence S 52°3300 W a distance
of 67.98; thence S 22°5500 W a distance of 57.00 to a point on the Sly line of
Koger Executive Center; thence N 67°0500 W, along the Sly line of Lot 1, Block 2, Koger
Executive Center, said Sly line being the Nly right-of-way line of the Broken
Arrow Expressway, to the mutual rear property corner of Lots 1 and 2, Block 2,
Koger Executive Center; thence N 22°5500 E a distance of 265.00 to the POB.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action Requested:
Variance of required 200 setback from
an R district to 139. SECTION
1221.C.2.c. USE UNIT 21. BUSINESS SIGNS
AND OUTDOOR ADVERTISING, General Use Conditions for Business Signs Use Unit
14, located 7712 E. 71st St.
Presentation:
Regina Amini, 7106 E. 76th,
stated she owns Aminis Galleria and they were seeking to obtain a new sign.
Mir Khezri, 1801 N. Willow Ave.,
Broken Arrow, stated there is an existing sign on the property that does not
look good.
Mr. White out at 2:50 p.m.
The owner wants to replace it with a
sign (Exhibit F-1) as submitted to the Board.
There is an electronic variable message board included on the sign. He mentioned that the residential
neighborhood would not be able to see the message board.
Mr. White returned at 2:52 p.m.
During last winter the sign requiring
manually placed letters could not be changed because the letters were frozen to
the sign.
Comments
and Questions:
Mr. Dunham asked for the height of the
sign. Mr. Khezri replied 28 tall. Mr. Dunham stated the maximum height allowed
is 25. Mr. Khezri responded that there
is an exception, stating Title 42, Section 1221.E.1, permits a height of 25,
unless the sign is setback one foot for each foot of height exceeding
25. He added that they plan to setback
the sign for the added height. He
provided a copy of a letter (Exhibit F-2) from the sign inspector to the Board. Mr. Cooper asked for the hardship. Mr. Khezri stated that the sign is located
in the largest commercial district and unfortunately has residential zoning
right across the street. He felt that
the new sign would be a great improvement over the old sign. Mr. Beach asked for the height of the wall
around the residential area. Mr. Khezri
estimated the wall to be eight feet in height.
Mr. Cooper out at 3:01 p.m. and
returned at 3:03 p.m.
Mr. Khezri explained that the
electronic sign is three feet by ten feet.
Ms. Perkins asked if the electronic sign would just have two lines or
more for messages. Mr. Khezri responded
that the only thing that would scroll is within the three by ten foot
electronic sign, and everything else is stationary.
Interested
Parties:
There were
no interested parties who wished to speak.
Board
Action:
On Motion of Dunham, the
Board voted 3-1-0 (White, Dunham, Cooper "aye", Perkins
"nay", no "abstentions", Turnbo "absent") to APPROVE
a Variance of required 200 setback from an R district to 139,
per plan, on the conditions of the sign inspectors specifications, namely that
it not exceed 202 square feet, a 66 setback from the property line, that the
area for variable message sign not exceed three feet by ten feet, 70° horizontal and 30° vertical, finding
the hardship to be that 71st St. is a unique commercial street and
the only residential property affected by this is the property to the north
with an eight foot fence around it, and the variable message board is less
square footage than the existing sign, on the following described property:
Lot 1, Block 1, Home Improvement Center Addition, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action Requested:
Variance of Section 403A as to the
height of a portion only of four of the eleven buildings comprising the
Palazzo-Tulsa Apartment Complex.
SECTION 403.A. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS,
Bulk and Area Requirements in the RE, RS, RD, RT and RM Districts Use Unit 8,
located 660 W of NW/c E. 51st St. & 145th E. Ave.
Presentation:
William B. Jones, 15 E. 5th
St., Suite 300, stated he is the attorney for the applicant. His client bought the subject property,
planned and built the apartment complex after review and approval of the plans
by the City of Tulsa. He stated that
certificates of occupancy were issued after City of Tulsa agreed that it met
requirements of the zoning code. In
September this year the permanent lender required a zoning endorsement to the
title policy. It was discovered that
the three-story buildings exceeded the 35 height limitation for a straight
RM-1 building. The underwriter for the
title insurance company required that an application be made for a variance to
this code. Mr. Jones noted that the
other three-story apartment buildings in the city were located in a planned
unit development where the height limit is higher. He indicated that this case would not set a precedent because
there are other three-story complexes in the city that exceed 35 in height. He noted there are no single-family homes
around this property and it would not be injurious to the neighborhood. A site plan (Exhibit K-1) was submitted to
the Board.
Interested Parties:
There were no
interested parties who wished to speak.
Board Action:
On Motion of Dunham, the
Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Perkins, Cooper "aye", no
"nays", no "abstentions", Turnbo "absent") to APPROVE
a Variance of Section 403A as to the height of a portion only of
four of the eleven buildings comprising the Palazzo-Tulsa Apartment Complex,
per plan, finding it is the same plan approved by the City of Tulsa, and this
is a typical development for this type of project, and if there was an error
made it was probably made by the City inspection staff, on the following
described property:
Lot 1, Block 1, Palazzo-Tulsa Addition, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*
Action Requested:
Special Exception to allow a Use Unit
17 (automobile rental service) in a CS zoned district. SECTION 701. PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS Use Unit 17;
and a Variance of the total required parking spaces for center to use community
parking during hours not utilized by the comedy club. SECTION 1217.D. USE UNIT 17.
AUTOMOTIVE AND ALLIED ACTIVITIES, Off-Street Parking and Loading
Requirements, located SW/c E. 69th St. S. & S. Lewis.
Presentation:
Sherry
Johnson, 3301B S. Meridian, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, stated she was
representing Avis Rent A Cars. The
parking space allotment shows 207 spaces are available without the Tulsa Comedy
Club, and adding the club would be 253 spaces.
She stated she has obtained approval from the landlord of the Spectrum
Shopping Center and the Tulsa Comedy Club since they are not open the same
hours as the club.
Comments and Questions:
Mr. Dunham asked how many cars would be
parked at this site. Ms. Johnsen stated
they shuttle cars to and from the airport, and there would probably be no more
than ten cars at a time. She informed
the Board that any maintenance would be handled from the airport location. Mr. Dunham asked how many employees would be
at this location. She stated these
types of locations have one full-time employee and some part-time
employees. He also asked about the
hours of operation. Ms. Johnson stated
the hours would be Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., and Saturday
and Sunday, 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. She
added that the club hours are 7:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m. Wednesday through
Saturday.
Interested Parties:
Steve Schuller, 500 OneOk Plaza,
100 W. 5th St., stated he was there as attorney for Tile Stone
Distributors across 69th St.
His client is opposed to the application because of the heavy traffic
and safety hazards. He stated there is
a reason for the zoning code requirement regarding automotive uses in a CS
district, and it is because of the additional automotive traffic caused by
those uses. He noted that no hardship
has been shown for a more than 20% reduction in the number of parking
spaces. No unique or peculiar circumstances
were shown that are not generally applicable to the surrounding
businesses. He indicated that this
would increase traffic congestion with the rental cars shuttled back and forth
to the airport, employee cars, and customer cars. He considered this a detriment to the public good and would be
further injurious to the neighborhood.
He asked that if the Board was inclined to approve the application that
they require a condition that occupancy under a special exception and variance
not be permitted unless and until the City of Tulsa install signal lights at 69th
and Lewis to eliminate the traffic hazard.
Steve Haas, 2315 E. 69th
St., expressed concern that the Spectrum parking lot cannot hold all of the
needed parking when the Tulsa Comedy Club has a big turnout.
See sign-in sheet (Exhibit L-1).
Applicants Rebuttal:
Ms. Johnson stated that Radio Shack has
been running a business in this location with customer coming and going. She reminded the Board that it is a retail
shopping center, where traffic in and out is expected throughout the day.
Board Action:
On Motion of Dunham, the
Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Perkins, Cooper "aye", no
"nays", no "abstentions", Turnbo "absent") to APPROVE
a Special Exception to allow a Use Unit 17 (automobile rental
service) in a CS zoned district, finding 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; and a Variance of
the total required parking spaces for center, on the conditions that an
automobile rental service would have no more than ten cars on the lot for
rental at any one time; that days and hours of operation be Monday through
Friday 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m, Saturday and Sunday 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.,
finding the literal enforcement of the code would create a hardship for this
property because the major parking user is a use that does not open until 6:30
p.m. and if that condition should ever cease to be, the user of that space would
have to come before the Board of Adjustment for approval for a parking
variance, on the following described property:
Lot 1, Block 2, Lewis Village, and the N 195.00 of the SE/4 SE/4 SE/4 of Section 6, T-18-N, R-13-E, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*
Action Requested:
Approval of an amended site plan to add a 40 x 40 x 12 storage building. SECTION 401. PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Use Unit 5, located 10310 S. Sheridan.
Presentation:
Jeff Steen, 404 W. Broadway,
Broken Arrow, stated he was representing South Tulsa Baptist Church.
Comments and Questions:
Mr. White determined that the applicant
needed to inform the interested parties about the proposal out side of the
hearing before it is heard. The case
was tabled until later in the meeting.
A letter of
opposition (Exhibit G-1) was submitted to the Board.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*
Action Requested:
Variance of the required front yard in
an RM-2 district from 10 to 9 for the existing apartment structure. SECTION 403.A. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN
THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, Bulk and Area Requirements in the RE, RS, RD, RT and
RM Districts Use Unit 8; a Variance of the (west) required side yard in an
RM-2 district from 10 to 2 for the existing southwesterly portion of the
existing apartment structure, and from 10 to 5 for the remainder of the
existing apartment structure. SECTION
403.A. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, Bulk and Area
Requirements in the RE, RS, RD, RT and RM Districts; a Variance of the land
area requirement in an RM-2 district from 16,000 sq. ft. to 15,000 sq. ft. for
the existing apartment structure and its associated property areas consisting
of Lots 16 and 17. SECTION 403.A. BULK
AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, Bulk and Area Requirements
in the RE, RS, RD, RT and RM Districts; a Variance of the livability space
requirement in an RM-2 district from 2,000 sq. ft. to 1,100 sq. ft. for the
existing apartment structure and its associated property areas consisting of
Lot 16 and 17. SECTION 403.A. BULK AND
AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, Bulk and Area Requirements in
the RE, RS, RD, RT and RM Districts; a Variance in the 40 setback requirement
for parking areas of six or more spaces to 25 from the centerline of E. 41st
Pl. S. for the existing southernmost accessory parking stalls. SECTION 1302. SETBACKS; and a Special Exception to permit required off-street
parking to be located on a lot other than the lot containing the principal
use. SECTION 1301.D. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS, located S & E of
SE/c E. 41st St. & S. Peoria.
Presentation:
Mr. Dunham determined from Darin Akerman that this case is to improve existing conditions, with no intention to add on or change the existing conditions. Mr. Akerman responded that they are clearing the title on the property. A site plan was submitted (Exhibit M-1).
Darin Akerman, 6111 E. 32nd
Pl., stated he is with Sizemore, Weisz and Associates, representing Coury
Properties, owner of the subject property.
Ken Smith, 4554 S. Harvard, with
Riggs, Abney, stated he was representing the current property owner, purchased
from Coury Properties.
Interested Parties:
There were no
interested parties who wished to speak.
Board Action:
On Motion of Dunham, the
Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Perkins, Cooper "aye", no
"nays", no "abstentions", Turnbo "absent") to APPROVE
a Variance of the required front yard in an RM-2 district from
10 to 9 for the existing apartment structure; a Variance of the
(west) required side yard in an RM-2 district from 10 to 2 for the existing
southwesterly portion of the existing apartment structure, and from 10 to 5
for the remainder of the existing apartment structure; a Variance
of the land area requirement in an RM-2 district from 16,000 sq. ft. to 15,000
sq. ft. for the existing apartment structure and its associated property areas
consisting of Lots 16 and 17; a Variance of the livability space
requirement in an RM-2 district from 2,000 sq. ft. to 1,100 sq. ft. for the
existing apartment structure and its associated property areas consisting of
Lot 16 and 17; a Variance in the 40 setback requirement for
parking areas of six or more spaces to 25 from the centerline of East 41st
Place South for the existing southernmost accessory parking stalls, finding it
will not cause substantial to the public good or impair the purposes, spirit,
and intent of the Code, or Comprehensive Plan; and a Special Exception
to permit required off-street parking to be located on a lot other than the lot
containing the principal use, per plan, finding 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, and finding this is to improve
existing conditions, that no new construction is planned, these are basically
non-conforming uses that have been present for a long time and to enforce the
code at this time would create a hardship for the property, on the following
described property:
Lots 16 and 17, Block 1, Jennings-Robards Addition, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*
Action Requested:
Variance of the (east) side yard
requirement in an RM-2 district from 10 to 4 for the easternmost existing
apartment structure located upon Lots 5 and 6.
SECTION 403.A. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS,
Bulk and Area Requirements in the RE, RS, RD, RT and RM Districts Use Unit 8;
a Variance of the rear yard requirement in an RM-2 district from 10 to 0 for
the easternmost existing apartment structure located upon Lots 5 and 6. SECTION 403.A. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN
THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, Bulk and Area Requirements in the RE, RS, RD, RT and
RM Districts; a Variance of the (west) side yard requirement in an RM-2
district from 10 to 5 for the existing apartment structure located upon Lots
6 and 7. SECTION 403.A. BULK AND AREA
REQUIREMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, Bulk and Area Requirements in the RE,
RS, RD, RT and RM Districts; a Variance of the land area requirement in an RM-2
district from the 83,800 sq. ft. to 76,506 square ft. for the existing
apartment structures located upon Lots 1 - 7 and inclusive of the existing two
bedroom single-family dwelling unit located upon Lot 8. SECTION 403.A. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN
THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, Bulk and Area Requirements in the RE, RS, RD, RT and
RM Districts; a Variance of the (east) side yard requirement from 10 to 1.5
and the (north) rear yard requirement from 10 to 2 for the accessory concrete
block garage structure located upon Lot 8.
SECTION 403.A. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS,
Bulk and Area Requirements in the RE, RS, RD, RT and RM Districts; a Variance in
the 40 setback requirement for parking areas of six or more spaces to 35 from
the centerline of East 41st Street South for the existing parking
stalls located along the northern property lines of Lots 1 5. SECTION 1302.B. SETBACKS; a Variance in the 40 setback requirement for parking
areas of six or more spaces to 30 from the centerline of South Quincy Avenue
for the existing southernmost parking stall located west of the existing
apartment building located upon Lots 1 and 2 and part of Lot 3. SECTION 1302.B. SETBACKS; a Variance in the 40 setback requirement for parking
areas of six or more spaces to 25 from the centerline of East 41st
Place South for the existing parking stalls located south of the existing
apartment structures located upon Lots 6 and 7. SECTION 1302.B. SETBACKS; a Variance in the 92 parking space
requirement to 52 parking spaces for the existing apartment structures and the
single-family dwelling unit located upon Lots 1 - 8. SECTION 1208.D. USE UNIT 8.
MULTIFAMILY DWELLING AND SIMILAR USES, Off-Street Parking and Loading
Requirements, located SE/c E. 41st St. & S. Quincy.
Presentation:
Darin Akerman, 6111 E. 32nd
Pl., stated he is with Sizemore, Weisz and Associates, representing Coury
Properties, owner of the subject property.
Ken Smith, 4554 S. Harvard, with
Riggs, Abney, stated he was representing the current property owner, purchased
from Coury Properties. A site plan was
provided (Exhibit N-1).
Interested Parties:
There were no
interested parties who wished to speak.
Board Action:
On Motion of Dunham, the
Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Perkins, Cooper "aye", no
"nays", no "abstentions", Turnbo "absent") to APPROVE
a Variance of the (east) side yard requirement in an RM-2
district from 10 to 4 for the easternmost existing apartment structure
located upon Lots 5 and 6; a Variance of the rear yard
requirement in an RM-2 district from 10 to 0 for the easternmost existing
apartment structure located upon Lots 5 and 6; a Variance of the
(west) side yard requirement in an RM-2 district from 10 to 5 for the
existing apartment structure located upon Lots 6 and 7; a Variance of
the land area requirement in an RM-2 district from the 83,800 sq. ft. to 76,506
square ft. for the existing apartment structures located upon Lots 1 - 7 and
inclusive of the existing two bedroom single-family dwelling unit located upon
Lot 8; a Variance of the (east) side yard requirement from 10 to
1.5 and the (north) rear yard requirement from 10 to 2 for the accessory
concrete block garage structure located upon Lot 8; a Variance in
the 40 setback requirement for parking areas of six or more spaces to 35 from
the centerline of East 41st Street South for the existing parking
stalls located along the northern property lines of Lots 1 - 5; a Variance
in the 40 setback requirement for parking areas of six or more spaces to 30
from the centerline of South Quincy Avenue for the existing southernmost
parking stall located west of the existing apartment building located upon Lots
1 and 2 and part of Lot 3; a Variance in the 40 setback
requirement for parking areas of six or more spaces to 25 from the centerline
of East 41st Place South for the existing parking stalls located
south of the existing apartment structures located upon Lots 6 and 7; and a Variance
in the 92 parking space requirement to 52 parking spaces for the existing
apartment structures and the single-family dwelling unit located upon Lots 1
8, per plan, finding it will not cause substantial to the public good or impair
the purposes, spirit, and intent of the Code, or Comprehensive Plan, and
finding this is to improve existing conditions, that no new construction is
planned, these are basically non-conforming uses that have been present for a
long time and to enforce the code at this time would create a hardship for the
property, on the following described property:
Lots 1 - 8, Block 2, Jennings-Robards Addition, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*
Action Requested:
Variance of the front yard requirement
in an RM-2 district from 10 to 6 for the most easterly existing apartment
structure located upon Lots 4 and 5 and 8 for the most northwesterly existing
apartment structure located upon Lots 2 and 3 and part of Lot 1. SECTION 403.A. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN
THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, Bulk and Area Requirements in the RE, RS, RD, RT and
RM Districts Use Unit 8; a Variance of the land area requirement in an RM-2
district from the 51,200 sq. ft. requirement to 46,267 sq. ft. for the existing
apartment structures and their associated property areas consisting of Lots 1 -
5 and the easterly 25 of vacated South Quincy Avenue. SECTION 403.A. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN
THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, Bulk and Area Requirements in the RE, RS, RD, RT and
RM Districts; a Variance of the single-story limitation to multifamily
dwellings which are within 50 of an RE or RS district to allow for the
existing two-story apartment structures located upon Lots 2 - 5 and part of Lot
1. SECTION 403.A. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS
IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, Bulk and Area Requirements in the RE, RS, RD, RT
and RM Districts; a Variance in the 54 parking space requirement to 53 parking
spaces for the existing apartment structures located upon Lots 1 5. SECTION 1208.D. USE UNIT 8. MULTIFAMILY DWELLING AND SIMILAR USES,
Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements; a Variance in the 40 setback
requirement for parking areas of six or more spaces to 25 from the centerline
of East 41st Place South for the existing northernmost parking
stalls located upon Lot 1 and 5 and the easterly 25 of vacated Quincy
Avenue. SECTION 1302.B. SETBACKS, located S & E of SE/c E. 41st
St. & S. Quincy.
Presentation:
Darin Akerman, 6111 E. 32nd
Pl., stated he is with Sizemore, Weisz and Associates, representing Coury
Properties, owner of the subject property.
Ken Smith, 4554 S. Harvard, with
Riggs, Abney, stated he was representing the current property owner, purchased
from Coury Properties. A site plan was
submitted (Exhibit 0-1).
Interested Parties:
There were no
interested parties who wished to speak.
Board Action:
On Motion of Dunham, the
Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Perkins, Cooper "aye", no
"nays", no "abstentions", Turnbo "absent") to APPROVE
a Variance of the front yard requirement in an RM-2 district from
10 to 6 for the most easterly existing apartment structure located upon Lots
4 and 5 and 8 for the most northwesterly existing apartment structure located
upon Lots 2 and 3 and part of Lot 1; a Variance of the land area
requirement in an RM-2 district from the 51,200 sq. ft. requirement to 46,267
sq. ft. for the existing apartment structures and their associated property
areas consisting of Lots 1 - 5 and the easterly 25 of vacated South Quincy
Avenue; a Variance of the single-story limitation to multifamily
dwellings which are within 50 of an RE or RS district to allow for the
existing two-story apartment structures located upon Lots 2 - 5 and part of Lot
1; a Variance in the 54 parking space requirement to 53 parking
spaces for the existing apartment structures located upon Lots 1 - 5; and a Variance
in the 40 setback requirement for parking areas of six or more spaces to 25
from the centerline of East 41st Place South for the existing
northernmost parking stalls located upon Lot 1 and 5 and the easterly 25 of
vacated Quincy Avenue, per plan, finding it will not cause substantial
detriment to the public good or impair the purposes, spirit, and intent of the
Code, or Comprehensive Plan, and finding this is to improve existing
conditions, that no new construction is planned, these are basically
non-conforming uses that have been present for a long time and to enforce the
code at this time would create a hardship for the property, on the following
described property:
Lots 1 - 5, Block 3, Jennings-Robards Addition and the E 25 of vacated S. Quincy Ave. lying W of and adjacent to Lot 1, Block 3, Jennings-Robards Addition, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*
Action Requested:
Variance of required off-street parking
from 47 spaces to 18 spaces. SECTION
1212.D. USE UNIT 12. EATING ESTABLISHMENTS OTHER THAN DRIVE-INS,
Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements; and a Special Exception to allow
required parking to be located on a lot other than the principal use lot. SECTION 1301. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Use Unit 12, located S of SW/c E. 17th
St. & S. Boston.
Presentation:
Roy D. Johnsen, 201 W. 5th
St., Suite 501, stated he was representing the Loft of Tulsa, LLC, owned by
Pastor Arthur and his wife. He
explained they propose to build a coffee house on the subject property and the
only place in the code it seems to fit is as a coffee shop. He stated that under the restaurant
classification in the CH zoned district, the parking requirement is one space
per 100 of space occupied, which would mean 20 spaces for this project. Mr. Johnsen pointed out the unique
circumstances in the near downtown area where a CH zone is within a mixed use
of office, entertainment facilities, and multi-family dwellings. He described the coffee house called The
Loft, will have no alcohol, no smoking, and would be designed for young adults
for entertainment. The difference in
the parking need will be eleven spaces.
Mr. Johnsen mentioned a lot across the alley to the west that has ten
spaces, owned by the same owner of the building. He pointed out that if the Board granted the special exception
to permit the use of those spaces and grandfather the one for 225 requirement
it would only be one space difference.
The existing building has been there for more than fifty years. He felt his client would be an excellent
tenant, and it would be an opportunity to use vacant space in the downtown area
without detriment to any other properties.
His client contacted a number of other neighbors in the area and all
indicated support except for Mr. Pinkerton, who owns a building immediately to
the north and occupies as a law office.
Mr. Johnsen stated his client is willing to accept some conditions
pertaining to the hours of operation.
They propose morning hours from 6:30 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. on Monday through
Saturday. He indicated that two
restaurants, one of which is immediately adjacent to the subject property, are
not open those hours. The owner of
Steam Roller Blues has verbally agreed to The Loft customers using their
parking lot. The evening hours proposed
would be 5:30 p.m. to 11:00 p.m Sunday through Thursday and 5:30 p.m. to 1:00
a.m. on Friday and Saturday. He stated
the hours would not conflict when there are currently parking problems on other
properties. It is a hardship that the
ordinance has changed, properties in a near downtown area that have been
grandfathered, and mixed uses. Mr.
Johnsen submitted photographs (Exhibit H-1) to the Board.
Comments and Questions:
Mr. Dunham verified the days and hours
of operation as stated above and that no alcoholic beverages would be
served. Mr. Johnsen also mentioned that
it would not be a full restaurant, but specialty coffees, bagels, and such
would be served. Mr. Cooper asked if
there is a tie-agreement with the lot in the back and the subject property, and
if not would he object to one. Mr. Johnsen
stated the same person owns both properties, and the applicant would not object
to a tie-agreement.
Interested Parties:
Jim Pinkerton, 1502 S. Boulder,
stated his concern regarding the shortage of parking. The building on the subject property has four different
businesses and has eleven parking places.
Two of the businesses are a cleaners and a hair salon. He stated that he is concerned about the
morning hours the most. He stated the
one neighboring business pays him for two parking spaces because the employees
could not find a place to park when they came to work in the morning. He already has a problem with customers for
the Steam Roller Blues parking in his lot.
Applicants
Rebuttal:
Mr. Johnsen reminded the Board that the
vacant lot of the building owner is just behind the building and not a block
away. The restaurant parking lot next
door is not full in the mornings. He
suggested that a lunchtime business would cause more spill over parking because
the other two restaurants have lunchtime business. He pointed out to the Board that on the backside of the buildings
on the east side of Boston is an alley to a large parking lot, plus a number of
those businesses have parking in the rear.
The construction company across the street, auto repair shop, and the
two restaurants do not object to this application.
Comments and Questions:
Mr. Cooper asked about signage to indicate where customers can park. Mr. Johnsen replied they had not planned for parking signs nor did they have a contract for parking at the Steam Roller Blues. Mr. Dunham noted that Mr. Pinkerton already has a problem with parking in his lot and the coffee house is not open yet. Mr. White asked if the other three occupants would be in the building. Mr. Johnsen replied that the hair salon does not have morning hours. The cleaners will be there and the fourth space is vacant. Mr. Cooper asked Mr. Johnsen to repeat the hardship. Mr. Johnsen replied that the near downtown has unusual and peculiar facts, that the street system is not the typical residential blocks, office use without nighttime use, substantial on-street parking,
Mr. Pinkerton was also given a few more minutes to speak. He pointed out that the lot with ten extra spaces requires going through the restaurant parking lot, down the alley, and walk all of the way around the building. He indicated that his lot would be more convenient. He stated that they are debating the psychology of what people will do, yet he sees people park in his lot and walk around to the shopping center all of the time. Mr. Cooper asked if there were signs directing customers to park in the Steam Rollers parking lot, did he think that would make a difference. Mr. Pinkerton responded that he did not think it would help.
Board Action:
On Motion of Cooper, the
Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Perkins, Cooper "aye", no
"nays", no "abstentions", Turnbo "absent") to APPROVE
a Variance of required off-street parking from 47 spaces to 18
spaces; and a Special Exception to allow required parking to be
located on a lot other than the principal use lot, finding the hardship is the
nature of the neighborhood and the traffic use patterns of the various
establishments, with the conditions for a tie-agreement between this lot and
the lot to the west, limit the hours of the coffee shop from Sunday through
Thursday, 5:30 p.m. to 11:00 p.m., Friday and Saturday 5:30 p.m. to 1:00 a.m., on the following
described property:
Lots 1 and 2, and Lot 12 less and except the S 5 thereof of Lot 12, Block 2, Stutsman Addition, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
On Motion of Cooper, the
Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Perkins, Cooper "aye", no
"nays", no "abstentions", Turnbo "absent") to APPROVE
an amendment of the above conditions in Case No. 19239 to limit
the hours of the coffee shop from Sunday through Thursday, 4:30 p.m. to 11:00
p.m., Friday and Saturday, from 4:30 p.m. to 1:00 a.m.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*
Action Requested:
Approval of an amended site plan to add a 40 x 40 x 12 storage building. SECTION 401. PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Use Unit 5, located 10310 S. Sheridan.
Presentation:
Jeff Steen, 404 W. Broadway,
Broken Arrow, stated he was representing South Tulsa Baptist Church. The neighbors have addressed some concerns
that they would like some time to consider.
He asked for a continuance to December 11, 2001.
Board Action:
On Motion of Dunham, the
Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Perkins, Cooper "aye", no
"nays", no "abstentions", Turnbo "absent") to CONTINUE
Case No. 19235 to the meeting on December 11, 2001 regarding the property
described as follows:
Lot 1, Block 1, South Tulsa Baptist Church Addition, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*
Action Requested:
Variance of required setback from 89 to 78.5 to permit an addition to an existing building. SECTION 703. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS, located 4603 N. Cincinnati Pl.
Presentation:
Billy Lockridge, 851 N. Vancouver, stated he was representing
the applicant. He stated that they
propose to build a 900 garage addition to the existing building to be in line
with the existing building. A site plan
(Exhibit P-1) was submitted.
Comments and Questions:
Ms. Perkins asked what it is used
for. Mr. Lockridge replied it is leased
as a mechanic shop.
Interested Parties:
There were no
interested parties who wished to speak.
Board Action:
On Motion of Dunham, the
Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Perkins, Cooper "aye", no
"nays", no "abstentions", Turnbo "absent") to APPROVE
a Variance of required setback from 89 to 78.5 to permit
an addition to an existing building, per plan, finding the existing setback is
already at 78.5, on the following described property:
Lots 8 and 9, Block 11, Fairhill 2nd
Addition, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*
There being no further business, the
meeting was adjourned at 4:48 p.m.
Date
approved:______________________
__________________________________
Chair