CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT

MINUTES of Meeting No. 792

Tuesday, March 28, 2000, 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

Cooper

Beach

Prather, Legal

White, Chair

Turnbo

 

Butler

Stump

Parnell,

  Zoning Official

Perkins

 

 

 

 

The notice and agenda of said meeting was posted in the Office of the City Clerk on Monday, March 27, 2000, at 08:31 a.m., as well as in the Reception Area of the INCOG offices.

 

After declaring a quorum present, Chair White called the meeting to order at 1:05 p.m.

 

*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.

 

MINUTES:

      On MOTION of Turnbo, the Board voted 3-0-0 (Dunham, Turnbo, White "aye"; no "nays"; "no abstentions"; Cooper, Perkins "absent") to APPROVE the Minutes of February 22, 2000 (No. 790) as amended.

 

*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.

 

Case No. 18702

      Action Requested:

Special Exception under Section 1402.F permitting the change of the use of the property from the automobile service station, Use Unit 17, to Shopping Goods and Services, Use Unit 14, and Offices, Use Unit 11.  SECTION 1402.F. NONCONFORMING USE OF BUILDINGS, OR BUILDINGS AND LAND IN COMBINATION – Use Unit 14; a Special Exception under Section 1407.C modifying the parking requirements to permit the proposed uses with the presently existing 19 parking spaces, or 12 parking spaces in the event the license agreement with the City should be terminated.  SECTION 1407.C.  PARKING, LOADING AND SCREENING NONCONFORMITIES; In the event the non-conforming status of the property as to parking is determined to have ended by virtue of non-use, a Variance of the provisions of Section 1402.D to permit the non-conforming status of the property as to parking to continue.  SECTION 1402.D.  NONCONFORMING USE OF BUILDINGS, OR BUILDINGS AND LAND IN COMBINATION; In the event the non-conforming status of the property as to parking is determined to have ended by virtue of non-use, and the variance of the provisions of Section 1402.D is denied; a Variance of the requirements of Section 1214.D to permit the proposed landscape design service and retail sales and office uses with the presently existing 19 off-street parking spaces, or with 12 off-street parking spaces, in the event the license agreement with the City should be terminated.  SECTION 1402.D.  NONCONFORMING USE OF BUILDINGS, OR BUILDINGS AND LAND IN COMBINATION and SECTION 1214.D. USE UNIT 14.  SHOPPING GOODS AND SERVICES, Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements; located at SW/c E. 41st St. & S. Harvard.

 

      Presentation:

        Mr. Beach stated that the applicant has withdrawn this request.

 

*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.

 

Case No. 18688

      Action Requested:

Appeal of the issuance of Certificate of Appropriateness for the construction of new structures in the Historic Preservation Area.  SECTION 1055.F. APPEAL OF PRESERVATION COMMISSION ACTION, located at 218 & 222 E. 18th St.

 

      Presentation:

        Applicant faxed a letter of withdrawal to the Board.

 

*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.

 

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

 

Case No. 18625

     Action Requested:

     Special Exception to permit the Use Unit 5, Private School Recreation and Athletic Facilities and Fields as shown on the site plan in the OM, OL and RM-1 zoning districts applicable to the site.  SECTION 1205.C. USE UNIT 5.  COMMUNITY SERVICES AND SIMILAR USES, Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements.  – Use Unit 5; a Variance of the off-street parking requirements in Use Unit 5, Section 1205.C of the Zoning Code to permit the 720 off-street parking spaces provided for the football and soccer stadium bleachers to satisfy the combined off-street parking requirements for the football/soccer stadium, the athletic facilities building and the baseball and softball fields.  SECTION 401.  PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS and SECTION 601.  PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN OFFICE DISTRICTS; and a Variance of the requirement that high schools shall have their principal vehicular entrance and exit on an arterial street. SECTION 1205.B.2.a. USE UNIT 5. COMMUNITY SERVICES AND SIMILAR USES, Use Conditions, located on the E side of S Wheeling & N of E. 78th St.

 

     Presentation:

  Charles Norman stated he represented the applicant, Victory Christian Center and School, in this case.  The application includes approximately 25 acres on the west side of the drainage channel, which is part of the old Joe Creek creek-bed on the west side of Lewis Avenue.  This application was continued on two occasions.  He stated that one permitted the applicant to discuss the location of the proposed football stadium with the developer of the townhome project located immediately to the north, and second as a result of additional planning by the school administrators.  Mr. Norman explained that the proposed football and soccer field would be immediately west of the existing baseball field and softball field as shown in the most current site plan.  The stadium bleachers will be designed to accommodate no more than 2,800 fans, and 700 off-street parking spaces would be temporary until the high school is instructed. Mr. Norman indicated that the various ballgames would not occur at the same time.  This would meet the requirement for one car per every four stadium seats.  Mr. Norman described the proposed lighting standards would result in virtually no spillover lighting to the west, and directed downward as indicated by the exhibit to the Board.  Mr. Norman stated that the applicant requests a variance of requirement for high schools to be located adjacent to an arterial street.  In this instance, he explained there is access to Lewis Avenue from the west side of the campus over an existing roadway.  He pointed out the Wheeling, to the west, is a collector street with center medians and turn bays and is adequate to handle the traffic resulting from normal school activities.  Mr. Norman added that copies of the plans have been provided to the developer of the property to the north and they are satisfied and in support of the application.

 

     Comments and Questions:

       Ms. Turnbo had a question regarding the staff comments on the proposed parking lot.  Mr. Beach replied that a question had been raised about the parking lot, that it might be gravel.  Mr. Norman stated that the applicant is aware of the requirements for a dust-free parking and would meet the requirements.

 

     Interested Parties/Protestants:

       None.

 

     Board Action:

        On MOTION of Dunham, the Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins, "aye"; no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Cooper "absent") to APPROVE a Special Exception to permit the Use Unit 5, Private High School Education and Athletic Buildings and Athletic Facilities and Fields as shown on Phase I and Phase II Site Plans in the OM, OL and RM-1 zoning districts; a Variance of the off-street parking requirements in Use Unit 5, Section 1205.C of the Zoning Code to permit the minimum of 700 off-street parking spaces provided for the 2800 capacity football and soccer stadium bleachers to satisfy the combined off-street parking requirements for the football/soccer stadium, the high school education and athletic facilities buildings and the baseball and softball fields; and a Variance of the requirement of Section 1205.B.2.a., that high schools shall have their principal vehicular entrance and exit on an arterial street, per plan labeled amended Exhibit C, finding the hardship to be the flood plane and the access already provided, on the following described property:

 

     Lot 1, Block 15, Kensington, Blocks 15 & 17 and Tracts 1-3, as described below:  Tract 1: A part of the S/2 NE of Section 7, T-18-N, R-13-E, being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a point on the S line of the NE of Section 7, T-18-N, R-13-E and 50’ W of the E line of said Section 7; thence N 89°48’42” W a distance of 880’ to the POB; thence S 0°10’03” W a distance of 370’; thence N 89°48’42” W a distance of 414.1’; thence N 89°48’42” W a distance of 414.1’; N 0°10’03” E a distance of 554.75’; thence S 89°48’42” E a distance of 364.10’; thence S 0°10’03” W a distance of 185’; thence S 89°48’42” E a distance of 50’ to the POB; Tract 2: A part of the S/2 NE of Section 7, T-18-N, R-13-E, more particularly described as follows:  Commencing at a point on the S line of the NE of said Section 7, T-18-N, R-13-E, and 50’ W of the E line of said Section 7; thence N 89°48’42” W a distance of 880’; thence S 0°10’03” W a distance of 370’; thence N 89°48’42” W a distance of 414.1’ to the POB; thence continuing N 89°48’42” W a distance of 392.43’; thence N 0°10’03” E a distance of 554.89’; thence S 89°48’42” E a distance of 392.43’; thence S 0°10’03” W a distance of 554.75’ to the POB; and Tract 3: A part of the S/2 NE of Section 7, T-18-N, R-13-E, more particularly described as follows:  Commencing at a point on the S line of the NE of Section 7, T-18-N, R-13-E, and 50’ W of the E line of said Section 7; thence N 89°48’42” W a distance of 880’; thence S 0°10’03” W a distance of 370’; thence N 89°48’42” W a distance of 806.53’ to the POB; thence continuing N 89°43’42” W a distance of 298.47’ to the E boundary of Block 13 Kensington Addition; thence continuing N 89°48’42” W a distance of 20’ to the Ely right-of-way of S. Wheeling Ave.; thence N 0°10’03” E along said right-of-way, a distance of 555’; thence S 89°48’42” E a distance of 20’ to a point on the Ely boundary of said Block 13, Kensington; thence continuing S 89°48’42” E a distance of 313.47’; thence S 0°10’03” W a distance of 554.89’ to the POB, all in the City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, Oklahoma, and being located in an OL, OM, RM-1 and PUD 128B zoned district.

 

*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.

 

Case No. 18650

     Action Requested:

Variance of side yard requirement from 5’ and 10’ to 1’ and 4.7’ to allow a lot split.  SECTION 403.  BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS – Use Unit 6, located at 1516 E. 21st St.

 

     Presentation:

       The applicant, Mike Marrara, 9936 E. 55th Pl., stated that he was hired to do a survey at 1516 E. 21st St. for the owner, before landscaping and constructing a fence.  He informed the Board that the survey identified that the garage on the property to the east was actually encroaching on the subject property.  Mr. Marrara stated that the actual lot lines did not coincide with where the property line appeared to be.  He suggested that a lot split would adjust the lot line to take care of the encroaching garage and create a new line that parallels the side of that garage and the stucco wall currently in place.  He added that all of the improvements at this point have been on the property for quite some time. 

 

     Protestants:

       None.

 

     Board Action:

       On MOTION of Turnbo, the Board voted 3-0-1 (, Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins "aye"; no "nays"; White "abstains"; Cooper "absent") to APPROVE the Variance of side yard requirement from 5’ and 10’ to 1’ and 4.7’ to allow a lot split, finding the hardship that it is an existing lot and a very small variance so there can be two houses on this tract. 

 

     Lots 10 & 11, Block 2, Terwilleger Heights, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, Oklahoma

 

*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.

 

Case No. 18651

      Action Requested:

       Special Exception to permit parking vehicles awaiting repair on gravel parking surface if located behind the building setback line SECTION 222. MOTORIZED VEHICLES; Special Exception to modify or remove screening requirement with respect to adjoining R zoned district SECTION 212.C. SCREENING WALL OR FENCE; and an Appeal from determination of Neighborhood Inspector of “not meeting parking requirements”. SECTION 1217.C.1. USE UNIT 17. AUTOMOTIVE AND ALLIED ACTIVITIES, Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements, located E of NE/c E. 11th St. & 107th E. Ave.

 

     Presentation:

       Stephen Schuller, 500 OneOk Plaza, 100 W. 5th St., represented John and Susan Sharp, owners of Sharp Automotive group, that has a discount auto repair on the subject property.  He stated the subject property is zoned CS, as are the properties in both directions on the same side of 11th Street, the property on the south directly across the street is zoned CS, the property behind the subject property to the north is RS-3, but contains a commercial or industrial facility known as Whitco Spring Sales.  He described this portion of 11th Street as a six-lane and grass median.  In 1988 this property was approved for a Special Exception for use unit 17 automotive uses.  He stated that the applicants have several automotive sales businesses, and this one would be to service and repair autos for sale at their sales facilities.  Mr. Schuller stated that the applicants are not in the business of salvage, and they are motivated to complete the repairs to sell the cars.  He indicated that the since the facility on the RS-3 zoned property is industrial there would not be any point to screen from a residential property.  He stated that would be consistent with this Board’s previous action, Case No. 13934 in 1986, which waived the screening requirement for the property next door to the west of the subject property.  Mr. Schuller submitted photographs of the property, dead-end street and the gravel parking, taken a little over a month ago. 

 

     Comments and Questions:

       Ms. Turnbo asked how many parking spaces are on the paved parking in front.  Mr. Schuller replied that they are required to have at least five and they have five or more in front.  Ms. Turnbo asked Ms. Parnell when another set of pictures was taken.  Ms. Parnell replied that they were taken about six weeks ago.  Ms. Turnbo informed Mr. Schuller that the pictures show a car parked in the right-of-way, with one wheel in the street, and several cars parked outside the chain link fence in the right-of-way.  He stated that he informed the applicant that parking cars in that manner would not be permissible.  Ms. Turnbo also noted that there is a citation for not cutting weeds and not maintaining the property.  She asked if he is going to keep the property maintained.  Mr. Schuller stated he did not see any when he was there on Saturday, and the rear parking lot is graveled, so it appears that is under control.  Mr. White asked how many lots the business uses.  Mr. Schuller replied two or three sales businesses in addition to this repair business.  Ms. Turnbo asked how many cars could be parked on the gravel parking lot.  He responded that he did not know. 

 

     Protestants:

       Nancy Craten, representing Western Village and Mingo Valley Neighborhood Associations, stated they have several concerns regarding this property.  She stated that they have been aware of this property for some time, when too many cars were parked there.  She explained that when the use unit 17 was granted the neighborhood understood that it was for camper sales.  She stated that there is a lot of difference in camper sales and what is now located there.  She indicated that they are running Eastside Towing out of the back part of the property, with a big sign on the side, which is also visible from 11th Street.  She mentioned that the cars in back are visible from 11th Street, because Ditch Witch sits back from the street.  She stated that Ditch Witch is a beautiful facility with attractive grounds.  She pointed out that there is a picture of a large, beautiful home in the back of the subject property, and the association would like to protect this home and others that could located in that area.  She also called attention to the pictures of cars that were parked on the property this past weekend, with dates on some of the windows of the cars.  She stated that the grass was growing up around the cars and it looked bad, and the pictures show that grass is starting to grow up there again. 

 

     Comments and Questions:

       Mr. White informed the Board that this past weekend there were approximately 45 vehicles in the lot behind and about 15 in the front. 

 

     Protestants:

       James Mautino, 14628 E. 12th Street, on the Board of Tower Heights Neighborhood Association, stated he counted 60 cars, boats and trailers in the back and roughly 30 cars in front on Sunday.  He stated that some of the vehicles would require a lot of work, including bodywork.  He reminded the Board that there is no bodywork facility there, and the repair shop only has two bays.  He pointed out that some of the cars have the trunks open and windows broken, and do not look like cars being prepared to sell. 

 

     Interested Parties:

       Mildred Whiten, 10883½ E. 11th Street, stated she is the owner of Whitco Springs.  She informed the Board that as long as she has lived there she has seen a great many changes in the area.  She reminded them of the flood in 1984, and it took a long time to clean up the area.  She stated that Mr. Sharp has tried to clean up and built a new fence, and put in gravel.  She does not object to the application. 

 

     Comments and Questions:

       Mr. White asked if Ms. Whiten lives in the house.  Ms. Whiten replied that she does live there.  He asked also about the chain link fence, stating that the requirement is for a 6’ privacy fence.  Ms. Whiten does not see a need for that type of fence.  Ms. Perkins asked if it would make a difference to her if she tried to sell her property. 

 

     Protestants:

       John Roy, 9018 E. 38th Street, stated he was representing the East Tulsa Mingo Valley Association, stated that he had nothing further to add to the other interested parties.

 

       Eck Ruddick, 14673 E. 11th Pl., stated that Eastside Towing was on Mingo, and according to a neighbor at that location, the business had moved to the subject property on east 11th Street with a chain link fence around it.  He found the Eastside Towing sign was on the subject property for the towing business, and a chain link fence around the property.  He asked the Board to deny this application. 

 

     Applicant’s Rebuttal:

        Mr. Schuller, states he has not seen a lot of what was described by the neighbors and suggested that the poor conditions no longer exist on the property.  He stated that this is a CS zoned property, and if a towing business exists on the property it would be a violation of the zoning code, and he informed his clients.  Mr. Schuller suggested a continuance to allow him time to discuss the towing service with his clients, who are out of town this week.  He stated that the application is for a gravel parking lot at back, consistent with the neighboring business, waiver of a screening fence where vegetation already provides screening, and an appeal from the Neighborhood Inspectors notice of “not meeting parking requirements”. 

 

     Comments and Questions:

       Ms. Parnell, Neighborhood Inspector, stated the paperwork she submitted to the Board explains the problem.  She stated that Mr. Sharp does own Eastside Towing and has for years.  The number of cars parked on the property with a two-bay facility is excessive.  She suggested that he buys cars at auctions, and when they are delivered they are placed wherever they will fit when the lot is full.  The previous owner sold truck campers that were stored on racks very neatly, and did not use the back of the property. 

 

     Board Action:

       On MOTION of Dunham, the Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins "aye"; no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Cooper "absent") to DENY a Special Exception to permit parking vehicles awaiting repair on gravel parking surface if located behind the building setback line; a Special Exception to modify or remove screening requirement with respect to adjoining R zoned district; and an Appeal from determination of Neighborhood Inspector of “not meeting parking requirements”, on the following described property:

 

     S 300’ of Lot 8, Block 2, East Eleventh Park Sub., City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, Oklahoma

 

*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.

 

      Case No. 18680

     Action Requested:

       Variance of lot width requirement from 150’ to 122’.  SECTION 403.  BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS – Use Unit 6; a Variance of land area per dwelling unit from 26,250 SF to 8,995.60 SF for existing southerly home (second dwelling unit).  SECTION 403.  BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS; a Variance of side yard requirement from 15’ to 8.5’ for existing southerly home (second dwelling unit).  SECTION 403.  BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS; and a Variance to permit two dwellings on one lot of

     Case No. 18680 (continued)

 

       record.  SECTION 207.  ONE SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING PER LOT OF RECORD, located at 1320 E. 27th Pl. S.

 

     Presentation:

       Darin Ackerman, with Sisemore, Weisz and Associates engineering firm, represented the applicant.  He stated that a couple of different property owners are considering combining four existing lots in this location.  He explained that it is a matter of making them into two larger lots to more conform to the zoning district.  The second dwelling unit on the more westerly lot would be used for a cabana/pool house (accessory use) not for a permanent residence or rental usage. 

 

     Interested Parties:

       Ralph Smith, represented the Sorrells on the corner of Peoria and 27th Street, and stated the action would create a lot split.  They request a restriction that the second dwelling cannot be rented or subdivided as a dwelling on a separate lot. 

 

       Mark Medlin, 2807 S. Peoria, on the lot immediately to the south of the subject property.  He stated that his concern is the long alley that is being created to access Peoria, that there might be an increase of traffic or extra access.  Mr. Dunham asked if the alley already exists.  Mr. Medlin replied that it does exist, but the possibility exists for a greater number of people to use the access.  Mr. Medlin suggested that the same benefits could be achieved without using these variances, and with very little modification to the existing plan. 

 

     Comments and Questions:

       Mr. Beach stated that a lot could not be created to contain just the southerly house because they would not have frontage. 

 

     Applicant’s Rebuttal:

       Mr. Ackerman stated that he understands the restriction that would be put on the relief, in order to approve the application.

 

     Board Action:

       On MOTION of Dunham, the Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins "aye"; no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Cooper “absent") to APPROVE a Variance of lot width requirement from 150’ to 122’; a Variance of land area per dwelling unit from 26,250 SF to 8,995.60 SF for existing southerly home (second dwelling unit); a Variance of side yard requirement from 15’ to 8.5’ for existing southerly home (second dwelling unit); and a Variance to permit two dwellings on one lot of record, with restriction that the southernmost dwelling unit can only be used as an accessory use for the primary, and cannot be occupied on a permanent basis, per the lot lines of the lots as shown per plan, finding the hardship to be the situation already exists and the unusual configuration of the lot, on the following described property:

 

     All that part of Lot 3 in Section 18, T-19-N, R-13-E of the IBM, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma, described as follows:  Beginning at a point that is 1,650’ N and 30’ E of the SW/c of said Section 18; thence E 430.00’; thence N 315.00’; thence W 320.00’; thence S 194.00’; thence E 25.40’; thence S 101.00’; thence W 135.40’; thence S 20.00’ to the POB

 

*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.

 

Case No. 18684

     Action Requested:

Variance from 555.00 square feet allowable signage to 679.50 square feet on north face of building.  SECTION 1221.E. USE UNIT 21.  BUSINESS SIGNS AND OUTDOOR ADVERTISING, CG, CH, CBD, IL, IM, and IH Use Conditions for Business Signs – Use Unit 11, located at 110 W. 7th St.

 

     Presentation:

       The applicant, Brian Ward, 9520 E. 55th Pl., stated he seeks a variance for additional square footage for the building sign on the north elevation of the building at 110 W. 7th Street.  He stated that currently there is an existing Hillcrest sign and an Oxy logo on the uppermost part of the building.  The Oxy logo sign would be removed before the Vintage sign is put up.  He stated that the total square footage for the signs exceeds the allowable footage for the north side.  Mr. Beach explained that the Vintage sign should be counted as one word and the large V would measure the height of the sign.  Mr. Beach stated that the code reads, “the minimum rectangle that would encompass an individual word”.

 

     Board Action:

       On MOTION of Dunham, the Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins "aye"; no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Cooper "absent") to CONTINUE Case No. 18684 to the hearing on April 25, 2000, to allow the applicant to advertise for the proper relief, on the following described property:

 

Lot 1, Block 175, Original Town or Block 1, Cities Service, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma

 

*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.

 

Case No. 18686

     Action Requested:

      Variance of maximum allowable floor area for detached accessory building of 750 square feet to 960 square feet.  SECTION 402.B.1.d. ACCESSORY USES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, Accessory Use Conditions – Use Unit 6, located at 1012 N. Vandalia.

 

     Presentation:

       The applicant, John Niehaus, 1012 N. Vandalia, stated that he has a two-car garage and he needs an extra ten feet for tool storage on the back. 

 

     Comments and Questions:

       Mr. White stated that there is an existing structure there, and asked the applicant if he just wants to add to it.  Mr. Niehaus responded affirmatively.  Mr. White asked where he wanted to make the addition.  Mr. Niehaus replied that he would like to add ten feet to the west side.  Mr. Dunham asked for the current size of the garage.  Mr. Niehaus stated the existing structure is 24’ X 30’ and he wants to enlarge it to 24’ X 40’.  Mr. White asked where the driveway to the garage is located.  Mr. Niehaus stated he does not have one yet.  Mr. White asked where the driveway would be located.  Mr. Niehaus replied that it would come down the south side of the house.  Mr. Dunham asked if there is a garage attached to the house in addition to the one in the application.  Mr. Niehaus replied that he does have an attached garage also.  Ms. Turnbo asked for the size of the attached garage.  Mr. Niehaus stated it is a one-car garage. 

 

     Protestants:

       None.

 

     Board Action:

       On MOTION of Dunham, the Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins "aye"; no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Cooper "absent") to APPROVE a Variance of maximum allowable floor area for detached accessory building of 750 square feet to 960 square feet, with condition that it be used for personal use only and no commercial use to be permitted, and finding the hardship to be that there are several already in the neighborhood, for the following described property:

 

     Lot 6, Block 9, Modern Heights Addition, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma

 

*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.

 

Case No. 18687

     Action Requested:

        Variance of Section 210.B.5 to construct an accessory building in rear yard which exceeds the allowable coverage of 20%.  SECTION 210.B. YARDS, Permitted Obstructions in Required Yards – Use Unit 6, located at 1715 S. Detroit.

 

     Presentation:

       The applicant, Mike Lester, 2000 W. Detroit, # G, Broken Arrow, stated he is the contractor for the homeowners at this subject property address.  This home is located in the historical preservation district of the City of Tulsa.  He stated that they are doing some exterior repairs to their residence and they desire to remove the existing garage/ living quarters located at the rear of their property, and to construct a new garage only along the back property line.  Mr. Lester stated that the zoning requirement for the south property line would call for a three-foot setback from the property line, and the plan is to build it 4½ feet from the south property line and the proposed structure would be smaller than the existing.  The applicant submitted photographs and a letter to the Board. 

 

     Comments and Questions:

       Mr. Dunham asked if the historical preservation society is in support of this application.  Mr. Stump stated that they have concerns that the new garage will be built very close to the existing house, and not set back as they have traditionally been.  Mr. Dunham stated it is basically the same location with a little different configuration. 

 

     Protestants:

       None.