CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Tuesday,
June 27, 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 |
Jackere,
Legal |
|
Perkins Turnbo |
|
Butler Stump |
Ackermann,
Zoning
Official |
|
White,
Chair |
|
|
Parnell,
Neighborhood Insp. |
The notice and agenda of said meeting was posted in the Office of the City Clerk on Friday, June 23, 2000, at 8:11 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 1:00 p.m.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
MINUTES:
On
MOTION of Dunham, the Board voted to
APPROVE the Minutes of May
23, 2000 (No. 796).
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Mr. Beach
informed the Board that the applicant is Roy Johnsen, the location is 13521 E.
11th St. Councilman Art Justis made the request for continuance. It was not a timely request. Mr. Johnsen had no objection to a
continuance.
Interested
Parties/Protestants:
No one objected
to a continuance.
Board
Action:
On MOTION
of Perkins, the Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins "aye";
no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Cooper "absences") to CONTINUE Case
No. 18742 to the BOA hearing on July 11, 2000.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Mr. Beach
informed the Board that Andy Flynn is the applicant, and the location is S of
SW/c E. 11th St. & S. 145th E. Ave. Robert Flynn, an attorney, asked for a
continuance for at least three weeks, which would be July 25, 2000. It was not a timely
request.
Robert
Flynn, stated that he just received the application information the day
before from his uncle and has not had time to prepare.
Board
Action:
On MOTION
of Perkins, the Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins "aye";
no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Cooper "absences") to CONTINUE Case
No. 18790 to the BOA hearing on July 25, 2000.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance of the
landscape requirements.
SECTION
1002. LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS,
located at 2604 E. Apache.
Chairman White, stated he would abstain from this case.
Presentation:
Mike
Richardson, 2604 E. Apache, with Shortys Auto Electric, stated his request.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. Beach reminded the Board that they granted a Special Exception to allow this business to go into this CS district. At that time the applicant withdrew the request for a landscape variance, and would submit a landscape plan in accordance with Chapter 10 requirements. A landscape plan has been submitted and is deficient in a three sections of Chapter 10.
Protestants:
None.
Board
Action:
On
MOTION
of Perkins,
the Board voted 3-0-1 (Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins, "aye"; no "nays"; White
"abstained"; Cooper "absent") to APPROVE
a Variance
of the landscape requirements, per plan submitted pertaining to the existing
paved area, finding the hardship to be the pavement already existing, on the
following described property:
A tract of land that is part of the N/2 of N/2 of NW of Section 29, T-20-N, R-13-E of the IBM, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, Oklahoma, said tract of land being described as follows, to wit: starting at the NE/c of NW of said Section 29; thence S 88°5616 W along the Nly line of the NW for 1190; thence S 1°0454 E and parallel with the Wly line of Section 29 for 50 to the POB of said tract of land; thence continuing S 1°0454 E and parallel with the Wly line of Section 29 for 358.68; thence S 47°2829 W and parallel with the Nly right-of-way line of the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway for 213.45; thence N 1°0454 W and parallel with the Wly line of Section 29 for 465.03; thence N 43°5626 E for 49.48; thence N 88°5616 E and parallel with the Nly line of the NW of Section 29 for 125 to the POB of said tract of land.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance of minimum street frontage requirement in a CS district of 150 to 12 for proposed lot-split. SECTION 703. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS Use Unit 17; and a Variance of the maximum display surface area for a sign from 24 square feet to 90 square feet subject to a limitation that the southern tract created by the lot split would be allowed only one monument sign with a maximum of 24 square feet of display surface area and located at least 50 feet from the south property line. SECTION 1221.D. USE UNIT 21. BUSINESS SIGNS AND OUTDOOR ADVERTISING, CS District Use Conditions for Business Signs, located at 9141 S. Yale.
Presentation:
The applicant,
Anthony Miller, 1722 S. Carson, Suite 3101, stated he represented GTB
Properties, LLC. This case was
continued from 5/23/00, which involved a variance of the subject property
frontage. An issue regarding the
signage plan came up and so lot lines were redrawn and a signage plan was added
as part of this request. A site
plan, and other documentation were submitted (Exhibit A-1). He went over the request for action and
stated the hardship to be the unique shape of the property.
Protestants:
Sharon
Fichtenburg,
4915 E. 92nd St., stated she lives in the Bradford Oak Homeowners
area adjacent (south) of the subject property. She requested to know how this action
would affect drainage to the south of the property, and parking in this
area. She stated that they
have been flooded with mud and dirt for the last year, as truckloads of dirt
have been brought in. She was
told there would be a retaining wall constructed, but she has not been informed
as to what type of wall it would be.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. White informed Ms. Fichtenburg that Stormwater Management would have to approve the design. She asked for more information regarding the direction of the flow of water, and whether there will be openings allowing water through to the lots on the south. She also wanted to know where the new sign would be located. Mr. White asked Mr. Miller to show her the plan.
Mr. White asked
Mr. Stump to address the Stormwater Managements position on such matters. Mr. Stump stated that they basically
couldnt worsen a situation with their development than was the previous
condition. Any increased flooding
caused by new development would have to be controlled to prevent an increase
flowing onto neighbors property downstream.
Applicants
Rebuttal:
Mr. Miller stated
he would provide the information regarding the retaining wall construction. There will be parking next to the south
lot line and no dirt.
Comments
and Questions:
Mr. Beach stated
that the application was advertised correctly but if the Board grants the
variance but the relief would go to both Tracts A and B, because Tract A also
does not meet the 150 frontage requirement. He also indicated that it would not be
appropriate to approve per plan because he did not provide a 5 landscape strip
across the south boundary line between the parking lot and the property
line. There would need to be a
modification of the site plan.
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 minimum street frontage requirement in a CS district of 150 to 12 for
proposed lot-split. SECTION
703. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN
THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS Use Unit 17, per plan submitted for both Tracts A and
B; and a Variance of the maximum display surface area for a sign
from 24 square feet to 90 square feet subject to a limitation that the southern
tract created by the lot split would be allowed only one monument sign with a
maximum of 24 square feet of display surface area and located at least 50 from
the south property line, be APPROVED per plan, understanding that
this in no way eliminates the necessity for the applicant to meet the landscape
requirements, and finding that these variances 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:
Beginning at the SW/c Lot 3, Hunters Glen Addition, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma; thence N 0°0000 E for 150.00; thence N 89°5443 E for 255.00; thence N 0°0000 E for 169.70; thence S 89°5443 W for 85.00; thence N 0°0000 E for 130.00; thence N 89°5443 E for 244.00; thence S 0°0000 W for 449.70; thence S 89°5443 W for 414.00 to POB.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance of
allowed spacing between signs from 100 to 50 and 75. SECTION 1003.B.2.b.(3)
ADMINISTRATION, Certification of Installation Use Unit 12, located Northeast
of the NE/c E. 71st St. & Yale.
Presentation:
The applicant,
John Moody, stated that he represented the Hyde Park Homeowners
Association. He stated the
action requested and reminded the Board of the severe topography of the area,
creating a hardship.
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
Variance
of allowed spacing between signs from 100 to 50 and 75, finding the hardship
to be the topography of the land, on the following described
property:
Reserve A, Hyde Park Second, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance of
one-story height limit for a detached accessory building to
two-story. SECTION
210.B.5. YARDS, Permitted Obstructions in Required Yards Use Unit 6; and a
Variance to allow two dwelling units on one lot of record. SECTION
207. ONE SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING PER
LOT OF RECORD, located at 1390 E. 26th St.
Presentation
Amber
Forrest, 1390 E. 26th St., owner of the property, submitted photographs.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. White commented that new construction on this property is about 50% complete. Mr. Beach inquired how the applicant could get this far into construction without a building permit. Ms. Forrest indicated that they had applied for a building permit, but they had not received the permit yet. Mr. Beach stated that he has a deficiency letter from Kurt Ackerman, dated April 18, 2000. Mr. White asked when this construction began. Ms. Forrest replied construction began after they applied for the permit. Ms. Perkins asked if construction was started before they got the permit. Ms. Forrest responded that they didnt start the construction; they started the demolition because the old structure was rotted through in the back. Mr. Stump stated that the second request in the application would require advertisement for additional relief if they intended to grant it. Mr. Stump also informed the Board that if they approved a two-story detached accessory building per plan, the proposed building exceeds 750 square feet.
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
Variance of one-story height limit for a detached accessory
building to two-story, without a kitchen, finding that it would not cause
substantial detriment to the public good or impair the purposes, spirit and
intent of the Code, or the Comprehensive Plan, with additional relief; and to
DENY a Variance to allow two dwelling units on one
lot of record, finding that it would impair the purposes, spirit, and intent of
the Code, or the Comprehensive Plan; and to CONTINUE the case if
additional relief on the size of the accessory building is needed, on the
following described property:
(Note: It was subsequently
determined that due to the size of the principal structure, no additional relief
was needed.)
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Special Exception
of Section 404 to allow a home occupation (office) in an R zoned district.
SECTION 404. SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES
IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, REQUIREMENTS Use Unit 11, located at 8942 E.
58th St.
Presentation:
Warren
Morris, 2532 E. 46th Pl., an attorney, stated that his client is
an expert on trees. Mr.
Morris stated that his client evaluates the worth of trees in their
locations. He has a to a lot of
paperwork that he would like to do at home. He does not have outside employees, and
no customers come to his home.
No sign would be used, no equipment would be parked or used at this
location.
Protestants:
Virginia
Crisco,
8217 E. 56th Pl., listed several home occupations in this
neighborhood, and stated that none of them have felt the need to get this
exception. She informed the Board
that she has seen vehicles with large equipment parked at this house. She stated her concern for the market
value of the residential property, if this application is approved. She
also added her concern that this action would potentially draw more traffic
through the neighborhood.
Chair White,
informed the Board that three letters of protest (Exhibits C-1 through C-3) were
submitted. He commented that one
letter states that the applicant is advertised in the white pages of the phone
book under Metropolitan Forestry, and has a lawn spraying business, and is
storing lawn fertilizers and other chemicals at his residence. There is also reference is made to a
furniture restoration business being operated from the same
address.
Jim
Morgan,
8942 E. 58th St., the applicant, stated that he has an advertisement
in the yellow pages for his business, as a tree appraiser and
tree diagnosis. He stated he is not
and never has been in the furniture restoration business.
Comments and
Questions:
Ms. Perkins asked if he stores fertilizer, equipment, or supplies at his residence. Mr. Morgan replied that he does not store these items. Ms. Turnbo asked if he kept trucks with heavy equipment in his driveway. He replied that he has a pick-up truck with a cover, and his lawn is well landscaped. Mr. Jackere asked Mr. Morgan to list the types of services he provides, which Mr. Morgan listed. Mr. Dunham inquired and advised the applicant on the requirements for a home business.
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 of Section 404 to allow
a home occupation (office) in an R zoned district, with the conditions to meet
all guidelines for home occupation, no employees, no storage of supplies,
merchandise, heavy equipment or vehicles relating to the business, no signage,
no customers to his office, finding that it will be in harmony with the spirit
and intent of the Code, and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or
otherwise detrimental to the public welfare, on the following described
property:
Lot 3, Block 6, Woodland View Park
3rd, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Special Exception
to permit a mobile home in an RS-1 district. SECTION 401. PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICTS Use Unit 9; and a Special Exception of one-year time limit to
permanent. SECTION 404.E.1. SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES IN RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICTS, REQUIREMENTS, located at 18325 E. 21st
St.
Presentation:
The applicant,
Le Letran, 12104 E. 30th St., stated he would like to place a
mobile home on the subject property on a permanent basis. In answer to questions from the Board,
Mr. Letran replied that he has not selected a mobile home but it will probably
be used and two or three bedrooms.
He plans to set it up as permanent, but would like to save enough to
build a home later on, but no specific plan for when.
Protestants:
Enola
Collins,
18343 E. 21st St., stated she has a large three-bedroom rock house on
7 ½ acres behind the subject property.
She opposes a mobile home because it would depreciate the surrounding
property value. She
added that there are no utilities except electricity in the area at this
time.
Applicants
Rebuttal:
Mr. Letran stated
that because he does not know what the time frame will be for constructing a new
house, he asked for permanent, though he does not plan for it to be
permanent. He stated that
there is only one residence next to his property, the water reservoir and
treatment plant is across the street, and a ballpark down the road. He estimates it would take five years to
save enough to build a home.
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 a mobile home in an RS-1 district; and
a Special Exception of a one-year time limit be extended to three
years, subject to tie-downs, skirting, and meet all other City requirements for
driveway, required permits, utilities, with the time limit beginning from
todays date, June 27, 2000, 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:
SE/4 SE/4 SW/4 of Section 12,
T-19-N R-14-E of the IBM, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of
Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance to allow gravel parking to be open Thursday through Saturday nights for 12 months as overflow parking for bar on Lot 3. SECTION 1303. DESIGN STANDARDS FOR OFF-STREET PARKING AREAS Use Unit 10, located 1237 S. Memorial
Presentation:
Michael
Smith, 1229 S. Memorial, stated he leased property from Tulsa Billiards for
overflow parking. He has discussed
with the owner about purchasing that lot, and stated it is in a flood
plane. He stated that he received a
citation from Neighborhood Inspections that the lot needed to be paved and a
screening fence constructed between the R-1 and commercial property.
Comments and
Questions:
Ms. Parnell pointed out that the case was advertised for the wrong property. Mr. White agreed that it was not advertised properly, and will have to be continued.
Board
Action:
On MOTION
of Turnbo, the Board voted 4-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins "aye";
no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Cooper "absent") to CONTINUE Case No.
18784 to the Board of Adjustment hearing on July 25, 2000.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Appeal of Neighborhood Inspections refusal to issue a citation for a structure improperly erected along the creek bed. SECTION 1605. APPEALS FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL Use Unit 6, located 7349 Sleepy Hollow Dr.
Presentation:
Roger Eldredge, 2900 Mid Continent Tower, stated he is representing his client, Cindy Lowe, the owner of the property immediately adjacent to the structure, which is the subject of this appeal. He submitted binders (Exhibit D-1) including photos, and survey. Mr. Eldredge described the locale and pointed out the structure and the materials used for the structure.
Chair White stated he would
abstain from this case.
Interested
Parties:
Jeff
Levinson,
35
E. 38th St., stated he represents Mr. and Mrs. Sutton who have spent
almost $20,000 to construction of a retaining wall on Fred Creek for a bank
stabilization project. He described
the process they went through to do the job properly and listed the plans for
the finishing the project.
Dave
Keglobits,
3898 E. 72nd St., stated that he lives north and east of the
structure. He stated complaints of
ruined natural beauty and prospective flooding.
Tom
Ernst,
1714 S. Florence Ave., landscape architect, contacted by Dr. Lowe. He described the failing structure and
submitted photos (Exhibit D-2).
Melissa
Mooney,
3848 E. 72nd, stated that her property is two doors downstream from
the Lowes property. She described
the ecological decline of the creek, to the point of stinking, and death of the
fish.
Applicants
Conclusion:
Mr. Eldredge,
stated there are right and wrong ways to retain the erosion, and this was not a
permitted structure under the ordinances.
He added that from February to May there was no work done on the
structure.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. Jackere stated that the Code does not traditionally regulate bank stabilization structures. Ms. Turnbo commented that the owner went through the proper channels.
Board
Action:
On MOTION
of Turnbo, the Board voted 3-0-1(Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins "aye"; no
"nays"; White "abstained"; Cooper "absent") to Uphold the decision of the
Administrative Official of Neighborhood Inspections in Case 18785. The Appeal was DENIED.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance of
required parking for existing apartment complex from 226 spaces to 204
spaces. SECTION 1208.D. USE UNIT
8. MULTIFAMILY DWELLING AND SIMILAR
USES, Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements, located 9743 E.
12th St.
Presentation:
The applicant,
Robert Buss, 502 W. 6th St., attorney for the landowner,
stated the request, with some historical information.
Protestants:
Mr. White stated
that a letter of protest (Exhibit E-1) was submitted.
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 required parking for existing apartment complex from
226 spaces to 204 spaces, finding that it is an existing condition that has been
there for close to thirty years, on the following described
property:
All of B&W Apartments
Addition, a Re-subdivision of part of Block 4, Amended Plat of Ruth-Anne Acres,
being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: Beg. at a set
3/8 iron rod at the SW/c of the above described B&W Apartment Addition;
thence N 00Ί0800 W along the W line thereof a distance of 415.00 to a found
3/8 iron rod at the NW/c thereof; thence N 90Ί0000 E along the N line a
distance of 460.00 to a found 3/8 iron rod at the NEly/c thereof; thence along
the Nly and Ely lines thereof S 00Ί0800 E a distance of 20.00 to a found 3/8
iron rod; thence N 90Ί0000 E a distance of 82.63 to a found 3/8 iron rod;
thence S 00Ί0800 E a distance of 35.00 to a found 3/8 iron rod; thence N
90Ί0000 E a distance of 19.90 to a found 3/8 iron rod on the E line thereof;
thence S 00Ί2320 E along said E line a distance of 360.00 to a found chiseled
X in concrete at the SE/c thereof; thence S 90Ί0000 W along the S line
thereof a distance of 51.00 to a found 3/8 iron rod; thence N 00Ί0000 E a
distance of 200.00 to a found 3/8 iron rod; thence S 90Ί0000 W a distance of
102.00 to a found 3/8 iron rod; thence S 00Ί0000 W a distance of 200.00 to
a found 3/8 iron rod on the S line thereof; thence S 90Ί0000 W along said S
line a distance 411.16 to the POB, containing 4.83 acres of land, more or less;
together with a driveway easement for ingress and egress from the N line of said
B&W Apartments Addition, Nly to the S Right-of-Way of E. 11th St.
described as follows: An easement for ingress and egress, 36 in width, the
centerline which is described as follows: Beg. at the NW/c of that tract of land
described as follows, to-wit: the N 155 of Lot 12, Block 4, Amended Plat of
Ruth-Anne Acres, thence in an Ely direction along the N property line of the
above-described tract for a distance of 128, thence Sly to a point on the S
line of the above-described tract, which is 125 E of the SE/c of the
above-described tract, said point being the point of ending; and together with
two 15 strips of land being the E 15 of the E 33 and the W 15 of the W 33
of a 66 strip of land, the centerline of which is described as follows: Beg. at
the NW/c of that tract of land described as follows, to-wit: The N 155 of Lot
12, Block 4, Amended Plat of Ruth-Anne Acres, thence in an Ely direction along
the N property line of the above-described tract for a distance of 128 to the
POB, thence Sly to a point on the S line of the above-described tract, which is
125 E of the SW/c of the above described tract, said point being the point of
ending, all being located in the City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of
Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Case No. 18788
Action
Requested:
Variance of
Section 222, to allow temporary parking on gravel parking lot for six months
until paving can be provided.
SECTION 222. MOTORIZED
VEHICLES Use Unit 17, located 9140 E. 11th
St.
Presentation:
The applicant, Arthur Crabb, 2794 E. 93rd St., stated his request.