CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Tuesday,
June 13, 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 |
|
Beach |
Jackere,
Legal |
|
Cooper Turnbo |
|
Butler Stump |
|
|
White,
Chair |
|
|
|
|
Perkins |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The notice and agenda of said meeting was posted in the Office of the City Clerk on Friday, June 9, 2000, at 4:00 p.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 1:07 p.m.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Case
No. 18779
stricken from the agenda.
Case
No. 18771
was withdrawn by the applicant.
Interested
Parties:.
No interested parties were present.
MINUTES:
On
MOTION of Dunham, the Board voted to
APPROVE the Minutes of April
11, 2000 (No. 793).
On
MOTION of Dunham, the Board voted to
APPROVE the Minutes of May 9,
2000 (No. 795).
Special Exception
to allow Use Unit 12, 13, and 14 in an IL district. SECTION 901. PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN INDUSTRIAL
DISTRICTS Use Unit 12, 13, 14, located at SE/c E. 51st St. & S.
Garnett.
Presentation:
The applicant,
Jeff Levinson, 35 E. 18th St., stating he is applying for allowance
of a range of general commercial retail uses in an IL district. He stated the property is currently
vacant.
Interested
Parties/Protestants:
None.
Board
Action:
On
MOTION
of Dunham,
the Board voted 5-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins, Cooper "aye"; no "nays";
no "abstentions"; no "absences") to APPROVE
Special Exception to
allow Use Unit 12, 13, and 14 in an IL district, subject to a site plan
approval, 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:
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance of
allowable height for existing outdoor advertising sign from 60 to 125. SECTION 1221.F.15. USE UNIT 21. BUSINESS SIGNS AND OUTDOOR ADVERTISING,
Use Conditions for Outdoor Advertising Signs, located South of SW/c E.
91st St. & US-169.
Presentation:
The applicant,
John Moody, stated he was representing Stokley Outdoor Advertising
Company, and YMCA of Greater Tulsa on this application. He explained that due to the increased
elevation of the South Broken Arrow Loop interchange they need to elevate the
existing outdoor sign. The sign is
already at the maximum height of 60.
Mr. Moody submitted a photo of the site (Exhibit A-1), the site plan (Exhibit A-2), and a letter
from the CEO of the YMCA of Greater Tulsa (Exhibit A-3). He stated that the hardship is the
topography, and the necessity of the Oklahoma Highway Department to increase the
elevation of the structure at this location.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. Cooper mentioned his concern for safety hazard. Mr. White asked for distance measurements from the bridge to the sign. Mr. Moody did not have that information. Mr. Moody submitted another photograph (Exhibit A-1). Mr. Cooper asked if staff were aware of any signs in the general area that were of this height or bigger. Mr. Stump did not know of any near this height, stating that there has not been this type of bridge structure there. Mr. Moody stated that the tallest structure of this type, that he is aware of is 108 on I-244 near Sheridan or Yale.
Protestants:
None.
Board
Action:
On
MOTION of
Dunham,
the Board voted 4-1-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins "aye"; Cooper "nays"; no
"abstentions"; no "absences") to APPROVE
a Variance
of allowable height for existing outdoor advertising sign from 60 to 125,
subject to meeting the spacing requirement, finding the hardship to be the
elevation of the Broken Arrow South Loop interchange, on the following described
property:
The W/2 of the E/2 of the
NW/4 lying N of the N right-of-way of US-169, less the E/2 of the NE/4 of the
NW/4 of the NE/4 of the NW/4, Section 19, T-18-N, R-14-E, City of Tulsa, Tulsa
County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance to allow
a detached accessory building in the front yard. SECTION 402.B.1.b. ACCESSORY USES IN
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, Accessory Use Conditions Use Unit 6; a Variance of the
required side yard from 5 to 2.
SECTION 403. BULK AND AREA
REQUIREMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS; and a Variance of the required front
yard from 50 to 355. SECTION
403. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN
THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, located at 263 E. 45th
Pl.
Presentation:
The applicant,
Glen Lafarlette, 263 E. 45th Pl., stated he would like to
build a detached garage, because the houses are old and built small, an there is
no room to add on. He stated that
there are five carports in the 200 block of 45th Place, and in the
200 block of 45th Court there are five carports.
Comments and
Questions:
Ms. Perkins asked if the applicant had a photograph of the type of carport he planned to build. Mr. Lafarlette provided a photograph (Exhibit B-1). Mr. Cooper asked about the basis and reasoning for recent decisions made regarding detached versus attached garages. Mr. Beach covered the considerations of the ordinances in light of this request and the setback requirements. Mr. Cooper questioned the applicant about the request for a variance from 5 to 2 on the side yard. Mr. Lafarlette explained he wanted to construct the carport to fit the existing driveway. Mr. White asked about the original garage, if it was enclosed when the house was purchased. The applicant replied in the affirmative.
Protestants:
Clayton
Lewis,
255 E. 45th Pl., stated that he would rather not see a storage
building built in the front yard.
Mr. White informed him that it is only a carport. He withdrew his opposition after seeing
the photograph of the proposed carport.
Board
Action:
On
MOTION
of Dunham,
the Board voted 4-1-0, (White, Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins "aye"; Cooper "nays"; no
"abstentions"; no "absences") to APPROVE
a Variance
to allow a detached accessory building in the front yard; a
Variance of the required side yard from 5 to 2; and a
Variance of the required front yard from 50 to 355, with the
condition that the carport remain open and without sides, finding the hardship
to be that there are numerous similar carports in the area, and the placement of
the existing house, on the following described property:
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Special Exception to permit a mini-storage with residence and office in a CS/RM-1/RM-2 zoned districts to include a reduction of the perimeter setbacks to 5 and to use perimeter buildings to meet the screening requirements. SECTION 401. PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS; SECTION 404. SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, REQUIREMENTS; and SECTION 701. PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS Use Unit 16, located 6400 Block S. Peoria.
Presentation:
The applicant,
Wayne Alberty, stated he was representing the owners, Frank and Bonnie
Wong. He stated that they live in
California and invested in real estate here. They had obtained approval of a Special
Exception by the Board in 1996 to permit a mini-storage but did not secure all
of the approvals needed in time to get a building permit. The applicants now ask the Board to
reinstate the previous approval for approximately 77,000 square feet of
mini-storage with an office-residence on the frontage of the property.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. White asked if this is the same owner as in 1996. Mr. Alberty replied in the affirmative, explaining that Mr. Hood owned the south lot previously, but it was purchased by the Wongs. Mr. Stump asked Mr. Alberty if he planned to meet all of the requirements of a mini-storage in an RM-1 district. The applicant responded in the affirmative.
Protestants:
Jonathan
Rikeman,
pastor of Riverside Baptist Church, 6363 S. Peoria Ave., stated that his concern
is that even with a light rain, the area floods. He stated they do not oppose a
mini-storage but they are concerned as to the effect it would have on the
stormwater drainage.
Roberta
Carr,
16 E. 26th Pl, stated that she owns 11 acres in the area of the
subject property. She stated
concern for the stormwater drainage, and the proximity to the golf course.
Joe
Macaruso,
1410 E. 64th St., stated he lives around the corner from the site of
the proposed mini-storage buildings.
He added his concerns regarding the lighting for the facility, the
security for the residences, and the noise level. He stated his concern that the
neighborhood has not had the benefit of seeing the site plan, and reminded the
Board that the
golf course in the area is a tourist attraction.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. White asked how long Mr. Macaruso had
lived at the present location. He
replied that he rebuilt his house in 1992.
Mr. White suggested they give him a copy of the site plan to review. Mr. Macaruso received the copy but
stated that seeing what the actual buildings would look like is different. He indicated that the area is one of the
more attractive areas of Tulsa, and would like to see more screening and be
reassured of plans regarding security, operating hours, and the impact on their
private lives.
The following
protestants stated the same oppositions as listed above:
Elizabeth
Burnson, 1309 E. 66th Pl., Chris Willis, 1348 E. 64th St.,
and Rebecca Macaruso, 1410 E. 64th St.
Applicants
Rebuttal:
Mr. Alberty
stated that this property is subject to a re-plat, and the applicant has to
comply with the city ordinances. He
added that they would not be using any perimeter or overhead lighting, only
wall-pack interior lighting.
Mr. White stated
that only the abutting property owners would be notified for the re-plat. The Board discussed the items of
opposition listed above.
Board
Action:
On MOTION
of Dunham, the Board voted 4-1-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins "aye";
Cooper "nay"; no "abstentions"; no "absences") to APPROVE a
Special Exception to permit a mini-storage with residence and
office in a CS/RM-1/RM-2 zoned districts to include a reduction of the perimeter
setbacks to 5 and to use perimeter buildings to meet the screening
requirements, per plan, with no exterior lighting extending above the building
lines that would diffuse on the adjoining neighborhood, and no open air storage,
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 3, Valley View Addition, and Lot 7, Block 3, less the W 155.00 of S 147.20 of Lot 7 Block 3, Valley View Addition, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance of
required 3 setback to 2 to construct an accessory building on an existing
slab. SECTION 402.B.1.c. ACCESSORY
USES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, Accessory Use Conditions; and a Variance to
permit exceeding the 20% rear yard coverage. SECTION 210.B.5. YARDS, Permitted
Obstructions in Required Yards, located at 467 S. 105th E.
Pl.
Presentation:
The applicant,
Larry Covert, stated he represents the owners, Charles and Sue Wells at
467 S. 105th Pl. E. He
stated the owner wants to construct an enclosed garage on an existing 24 X 24
slab. The hardship is that the slab
already exists on the property.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. Cooper asked
if the slab was poured as long ago as five months or five years. Mr. Covert replied, more like five
months. The aerial photo of the
property was taken in the winter of 1998-1999, and the slab was not in the
photo.
Mr. White asked
what the hardship is on the 20% rear yard coverage. The applicant replied that the existing
slab is six feet off of the east property line. In order to meet the rear yard
setback, it would have to approximately seven feet off of the property line, for
1400 square feet rear yard, less 20% accessory building. He stated it is his understanding that
the encroachment is 56 square feet.
Mr. White inquired if the 20% figure could be met if the building was
moved to the west by one foot.
Protestants:
Jason
Turner,
10537 E. 5th St., submitted a petition of opposition (Exhibit
C-1). He stated that he and his
wife have owned a home there for five years. He stated their concerns about the
effect this application would have on the value of property and flooding
problems. He added that they are
opposed to the large size of the proposed structure. He stated that the rear yard fence line
is a place of communication among the neighbors, and they do not want to lose
that visibility. Mr. Turner also
indicated that they are concerned about open-air storage and future use changes,
to a rental apartment or other use.
He advised the Board of construction on the subject property in the last
year of a double driveway, which extends to the property line on Lot #13, an
attached carport over the double driveway, and the slab was poured in October
1999.
Nancy
Craten,
stated she is representing the Mingo Valley Neighborhood Association. She stated that their opposition is to
the massive nature of the building.
She repeated concern regarding a future change of use and the
encroachment on the neighbors property.
She informed the Board that there is not a neighborhood association for
that area, but the Mingo Valley Neighborhood Association wants them to know that
they back them in this effort.
Applicants
Rebuttal:
The applicant
stated he had nothing more to share.
Board
Action:
On MOTION
of Dunham, the Board voted 5-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins, Cooper
"aye"; no "nays"; no "abstentions"; no "absences") to DENY a
Variance of required 3 setback to 2 to construct an accessory
building on an existing slab; and a Variance to permit exceeding
the 20% rear yard coverage, finding a lack of hardship.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance of
allowable size for detached accessory building from 750 square feet to 900
square feet. SECTION 402.B.1.d.
ACCESSORY USES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, Accessory Use Conditions Use Unit 6;
located SE/c E. 44th St. & Quaker.
Presentation:
Paul Lang,
1315 E. 44th St., stated he was representing the owner of the subject
property. Mr. Lang informed the
Board that the owner needs such a large garage to store, three personal vehicles
and a truck he uses on his job. He
described the situation of only a one-car attached garage, narrow streets, small
lots. The owner has had vehicles
hit while parked on the street.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. Jackere asked
what kind of truck he has. Mr. Lang
replied that it is a Ύ ton pick-up.
Mr. White asked if the owner is working commercial operations out of this
structure. Mr. Lang replied in the
affirmative, and he works on other sites throughout the city. Ms. Perkins asked if he would be
storing other materials or equipment on this site. Mr. Lang responded that he would
not. Mr. Cooper asked for the
hardship. Mr. Lang replied that he
cannot park all four vehicles in front of his home and has to park around the
corner.
Protestants:
None.
Board
Action:
On MOTION
of
Dunham, the Board voted 5-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins, Cooper "aye"; no
"nays"; no "abstentions"; no "absences") to DENY a
Variance of allowable size for detached accessory building from
750 square feet to 900 square feet, finding lack of a
hardship.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance of
Section 903, a setback from abutting R district from 75 to 50 on the south
boundary and from 75 to 45 on the east boundary. SECTION 903. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE
INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS Use Unit 25, located 1400 Block E. 1st
St.
Presentation:
The applicant,
Lou Reynolds, 2727 E. 21st St., stated that the subject
property is zoned commercial but it abuts a residential district on the east and
the south. The setbacks limit the
use of the property.
Protestants:
Maria
Barnes,
2252 E. 7th St., stated she is the president of the Kendall-Whittier
Neighborhood Association, and she is unclear what the proposed use would be.
Ms. Barnes also asked if there
would be screening for the residential properties. Mr. Stump stated that a six foot
screening fence would be required on the south and east boundaries. She stated she had not seen any
plans
Comments and
Questions:
Mr.
White offered the site plan to Ms. Barnes, which includes a privacy fence.
Protestants:
Joann
Tumelson,
1633 S. Gary Ave., stated that she opposed a variance.
Applicants
Rebuttal:
Mr. Reynolds stated that the property is being purchased by Tulsa Tent and Awning Company to build an industrial building and construct canvas awnings.
Mr.
Stump stated as a matter of clarification, that the 50 setback from the
property line would really be a 60 setback from the R district, on the southern
boundary. It would be from 75 to
60 on the south boundary. Mr.
Dunham added then that the east boundary would remain the same.
Board
Action:
On MOTION
of Dunham, the Board voted 5-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins, Cooper
"aye"; no "nays"; no "abstentions"; no "absences") to APPROVE a
Variance of Section 903, a setback from abutting R district from
75 to 60 on the south boundary and from 75 to 45 on the east boundary, per
plan with the exception of the setback on the south, on the condition that a
solid fence be constructed on the south and east; any lighting would have to be
directed inward and away from the adjoining neighbors; the hours of operation be
7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday, and finding the hardship to be
the size of the lot, on the following described property:
Lots 4, 5, & 6, Block 14, Lynch & Forsythes Addition, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance of requirement that a sign shall not exceed 2/10 square feet of display surface area per lineal foot of street frontage, for a proposed sign of 59 square feet. SECTION 602.B.4.c. ACCESSORY USES PERMITTED IN OFFICE DISTRICTS, Accessory Use Conditions Use Unit 5, located 7401 S. Memorial
Presentation:
The applicant,
T.L. Daniels, with Oklahoma Neon at 6550 E. Independence, stated he was
representing Woodland Hills Four-Square Church. He stated that the church is located on
a major traffic artery with high volume and speed making it difficult for the
recommended signage to be effective in identifying the property and the services
offered. They are
located immediately adjacent to a commercial property Ryans Steakhouse on the
north, which has larger signs, and further north are larger signs for retail
establishments in the area.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. White asked Mr. Daniels to reiterate the hardship. He replied that the high traffic volume, speed of the traffic and competition of larger retail signage.
Interested
Parties/Protestants:
None.
Board
Action:
On MOTION of Cooper, the Board voted 5-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins, Cooper "aye"; no "nays"; no "abstentions"; no "absences") to APPROVE a Variance of requirement that a sign shall not exceed 2/10 square feet of display surface area per lineal foot of street frontage, for a proposed sign of 59 square feet, per plan submitted, finding the hardship to be the proximity to the dense retail, 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:
N 165 S/2 NW/4 SW/4 NW/4, Section 12 T-18-N, R-13-E, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Special Exception of the required number of parking spaces for the U.U. 12a from 20 spaces to 0 in shopping center. SECTION 1408.B.4. NONCONFORMITIES; ADULT ENTERTAINMENT ESTABLISHMENTS Use Unit 12a, located 424 S. Memorial.
Presentation:
Terry Hood, owner of the Play-Mor Lounge, stated his request for a Special Exception.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr.
White asked how long the bar has been there. Mr. Hood stated it has been there 22
years. It was re-application for a
liquor license that prompted this request.
In response to further questions, Mr. Hood explained that employees and
customers park their cars in the shopping center parking spaces, both properties
are under one owner; and the hours of operation are from 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m.
Protestants:
Peggy
Daley,
412 S. Memorial, stated she has owned her property at this location since 1993,
adjacent to the bar. She described
destruction of her own property by the beer trucks crossing her property; she
stated that the owner of the building has been parking on her lot, and indicated
that at night her parking lot is full.
City Councilor
Roscoe Turner,
stated that the area is in transition for improvement. He stated that if the bar is going to be
there it needs to comply with the ordinance.
Carl
White
stated he owns the property at 416 and 424 S. Memorial for 12 years. He went to the library and looked up the
subject property, and it has been there since 1968. He informed the Board that the building
is about 4,000 square feet, the bar uses 1500 square feet, and he uses the
rest. He added that he has two
employees and they park on the Chiropractors lot with his permission. Mr. White stated that they do not
need any more parking spaces because most of the business is done by phone and
mail. (Exhibit F-3) A letter of intent was submitted from Mr.
White.
Interested
Parties:
Andi Bahlinger, stated that she was the courier for the
application, and her name was used as the applicant. She submitted 3 different permits from
the City (Exhibit F-2) that were obtained for the bars that have operated on the
subject property. The usage has
been the same, under different tenants.
Comments
and Questions:
Mr. Cooper asked
if the number of parking spaces has changed in the last 20 years. Ms. Bahlinger replied that the number of
spaces has not changed but the marking of the spaces has changed.
Board discussion
ensued.
Board
Action:
On MOTION of Turnbo, the Board voted 5-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins, Cooper "aye"; no "nays"; no "abstentions"; no "absences") to APPROVE a Special Exception of the required number of parking spaces for the U.U. 12a from 20 spaces to 7 in shopping center, with a limit of 1500 square feet in the bar, 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, on the following described property:
Beg. 200 S of NE/c of SE; thence W 175 S 119.2 E 175 N 119.2 to POB, Section 2, T-19-N, R-13-E, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Case
No. 18770
Action Requested:
Variance of side
yard requirement of 10 to 46 in an RS-1 district to permit expanding an
existing garage. SECTION 403. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Use Unit 6, located at 2138 E. 27th
St.
Presentation:
Thomas Mason, 2146 E. 46th, stated his request, and added that other neighbors have enlarged their garages to two and three-car garages. (Exhibit G-1, Site Plan)
Interested Parties:
None.
Board Action:
On MOTION of Dunham, the Board voted 5-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins, Cooper "aye"; no "nays"; no "abstentions"; no "absences") to APPROVE the Variance of side yard requirement of 10 to 46 in an RS-1 district to permit expanding an existing garage, per plan, finding 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 6, Block 6, Forest Hills Addition to the City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Case
No. 18772