CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT

MINUTES of Meeting No. 803

Tuesday, September 12, 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

 

Butler

Boulden, Legal

White, Chair

 

 

 

Perkins

 

 

 

Turnbo

 

 

 

 

The notice and agenda of said meeting was posted in the Office of the City Clerk on Thursday, September 7, 2000, at 2:35 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 1:00 p.m.

 

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

 

MINUTES:

On MOTION of Turnbo, the Board voted 5-0-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins, Cooper "aye"; no "nays"; no "abstentions"; no "absences") to APPROVE the Minutes of July 25, 2000 (No. 800) as corrected.

 

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

 

Case No. 18842

    Action Requested:

      Variance of the required 10’ side setback to 5’ for construction of a single-family dwelling in an RM-2 zone.  SECTION 403.  BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS – Use Unit 6, located1543 S. Frisco.

 

    Presentation:

      The builder (Name and address not stated) for Robert Bell, Jr., presented the case.  He gave the reasons for this request as follows: 16’ utility easement on south border narrows the lot and a 10’ setback; a radical slope to the property from east to west prevents elongating the house without several sets of separate steps; public good would be enhanced by a quality residence of over 2,500 square feet; utility poles within five feet of the house on south side, house is placed directly against a 16’ utility pole.

 

    Protestants:

      None.  

 

    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 Variance of the required 10’ side setback to 5’ for construction of a single-family dwelling in an RM-2 zone, finding the hardship to be the 16’ utility easement on the south side of the property and the size of the lot, on the following described property:

 

    S 40.0’ of Lot 7, Block 1, Riverford Addition and vacated portion of East 16th Street being 29.0’ adjacent to S line of Lot 7, Block 1, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.

 

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

 

Case No. 18843

    Action Requested:

      Variance to allow a detached accessory building in the required front yard.  SECTION 402.B.1.b. ACCESSORY USES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, Accessory Use Conditions – Use Unit 6; and a Variance of the front yard setback of 25’ down to 5’ for construction of a carport.  SECTION 403.  BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, located 417 S. 75th E. Ave.

 

    Presentation:

      Mr. and Mrs. Wayne Webb, 417 S. 75th E. Ave., came before the Board to present their request.  Mrs. Webb stated that they plan to have a professional install a carport.  She stated that it would be open on the sides.

 

    Comments and Questions:

      Mr. White asked if the side yard on the north would be the same as for the house.  Mrs. White replied in the affirmative. 

 

    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 a Variance to allow a detached accessory building in the required front yard; and a Variance of the front yard setback of 25’ down to 5’ for construction of a carport, on the condition that the sides of the subject carport remain open, finding the number of carports existing in the area, and 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, on the following described property:

 

    Lot 4, Block 19, Tommy-Lee Addition, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.

 

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

 

Case No. 18844

    Action Requested:

      Special Exception to allow a single-family dwelling in an OM district.  SECTION 601.  PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN OFFICE DISTRICTS – Use Unit 6, located 1309 S. Terrace Dr.

 

    Presentation:

      Jonathon Sutton, address not stated, attorney for Edward Winterhalder, stated that the applicant purchased and obtained a building permit to do the required repair and improve the property.  The house was built in 1980 and has since then been used as a single-family dwelling.  It was split at one time and could have been used as a duplex, but the applicant has prepared it as one entire unit for a single-family dwelling.  The homes surrounding are single-family dwelling units and this property would add to the value of those homes. 

 

    Comments and Questions:

      Mr. Dunham asked if it was to be built per the plan submitted.  Mr. Sutton replied in the affirmative. 

 

    Protestants:

      Maria Barnes, 1319 S. Terrace Dr., stated that she lives next door to the subject property.  She is in favor of the variance.  She asked that the applicant share his plans with the neighborhood, and that he be required to repair curbs and sidewalks that have been damaged during his construction work. 

 

      Don Barnham, 1910 E. 13th, stated he is the president of the Terrace Drive Neighborhood Association.   He is involved in seeking residential zoning for the whole area. 

 

      Thomas Buckley, 1301 Terrace Dr., stated that he is for the application, and appreciates what the applicant has done with the house.

 

    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 Special Exception to allow a single-family dwelling in an OM district, per plan with the exception that the word duplex on the plan be stricken and replace with single-family dwelling, 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:

 

    S 55’ of Lot 7, Block 10, of the Resubdivision of Block 6 and Lots 1-3, Block 4, Terrace Drive Addition, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.

 

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

 

Case No. 18845

    Action Requested:

      Special Exception to permit a doublewide mobile home in an RS-3 District.  SECTION 401.  PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS – Use Unit 9; and a Special Exception of 1-year time limit to permanent.  SECTION 404.E.1.  SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, REQUIREMENTS, located 4238 N. Delaware Ave.

 

    Presentation:

      Granville W. Jenkins, 11522 E. 23rd, Apt. 6, stated that he has been looking for property for a mobile home he purchased in October last year.  He stated he has contacted City of Tulsa and will get on the City water and sewer service.  He has been making improvements on the land and it is not in a flood zone. 

 

    Comments and Questions:

      Mr. White stated he had a letter from the seller, that he is selling it to Mr. Jenkins for the placement of a mobile home.  Mr. White added he had one letter of protest from a resident in the area about a block to the south.  Mr. Dunham asked if this would be the applicant’s home or a rental property.  Mr. Jenkins stated that he would be living there.  Ms. Perkins asked about the plans for setting up the mobile.  Mr. Jenkins replied it would be on a foundation with stem walls, tie-downs.  

 

      In the Board’s discussion of the case, Mr. White mentioned the standing letter from City Councilor regarding objection to mobile homes in the district. It was found that some areas where there was a concentration of mobiles would be acceptable for new applications. 

 

    Board Action:

      On MOTION of Dunham, the Board voted 4-1-0 (White, Dunham, Turnbo, Perkins, "aye"; Cooper no "nays"; no "abstentions"; no "absences") to APPROVE a Special Exception to permit a double wide mobile home in an RS-3 District; and a Special Exception of 1 year time limit to permanent, per plan on the condition that it be skirted and on a permanent foundation, noting that it is a modular home, 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:

 

    Beg. 30’ W of the SE/c of the N/2 NE/4 SE/4 NW/4; thence W 144.24’, N 128’; thence Ely 114.24’ S 123.3’ to the POB, in Section 17, T-20-N R-13-E, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma

 

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

 

Case No. 18846

    Action Requested:

      Approval of a modification to a previously approved site plan to add a nurses’ station on the south side, located S of SE/c E. Admiral Pl. & S. Garnett.

 

    Presentation:

      Calvin Nichols, 2121 S. Columbia, stated that the existing hospital is a non-conforming use due to a zoning change.  He added that one of the requirements was that any additions would require Board of Adjustment (BOA) approval.  The proposal is for a small 343 square foot nursing station addition to the south wing.  It has been designed by an architect, approved by the governing Board for state hospitals, and meets all the requirements of the City of Tulsa Building Codes. 

 

    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 a modification to a previously approved site plan to add a nurses’ station on the south side, per plan submitted, on the condition that no further expansion can be done without BOA approval, on the following described property:

 

    A tract of land that is part of Lot 1, Block 1, Western Village Heights, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma and part of Government Lot 5, and part of the SW/4 of the NW/4 of Section 5, T-19-N, R-14-E, said tract of land being more particularly described as follows, to-wit: Beg. at the NW/c of said Lot1; thence due N parallel with and 50’ Ely of the Wly line of said Section 5 for 370.00’; thence S 89Ί53’0” E parallel with the Nly line of said Lot 1 of Western Village Heights for 680’; thence due S parallel with the Wly line of said Section 5 for 375.00’ to the NE/c of said Lot 1; thence S 9Ί34’38” W along the Ely line of Lot 1 for 226.74’; thence N 89Ί53’0” W parallel to the Nly line of Lot 1 for 360.25’; thence due S parallel with the Wly line of Lot 1 for 147.84’; thence N 89Ί53’0” W parallel to the Nly line of Lot 1 for 282.03’ to a point on the Wly line of Lot 1; thence due N along said Wly line for 371.50’ to the POB of said tract of land.

 

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

 

Case No. 18847

    Action Requested:

      Special Exception to allow a mini-storage in a CS district.  SECTION 701.  PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS – Use Unit 16; and a Variance of 75’ setback from an R district down to 0’ for a mini-storage.  SECTION 903.  BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS, located N side of Virgin, E of Sheridan.      

 

    Presentation:

      Mr. Beach, reminded the Board that one of the conditions for mini-storage use is that it be located with frontage on and access to an arterial street, and this site does not have that.  He stated that if it were approved today the applicant would need to come back in the future for a variance of that requirement

 

      Tom Christopoulos, 12113 S. Memorial Dr., Bixby, stated the request to place a mini-storage on this site.  He informed the BOA that they had opened several other mini-storage businesses in the area, and this one would be similar in design.  He provided some photos (Exhibit D-2, D-3).   They plan to meet all of the landscape requirements of the City of Tulsa.  He described the surrounding properties are: 75’ of residential that is still farmland, and all around it is industrial and on the back is a highway that abuts the airport. 

 

    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 a Special Exception to allow a mini-storage in a CS district, per plan, subject to the landscape requirements, and all other requirements of the Code; and a Variance of 75’ setback from an R district down to 0’ for a mini-storage, finding the hardship to be that the property is zoned RS-3, but is undeveloped and probably won’t be developed for residential; an to CONTINUE the balance of this application to the meeting of October 10, 2000 for the additional relief, on the following described property:

 

    A part of the W/2 NW/4 of Section 26, T-20-N, R-13-E, IBM, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma, being more particularly described as follows, to-wit:  Commencing at the SW/c of said W/2 NW/4 of Section 26; thence N 01Ί18’08” W along the W line of said Section 26, for a distance of 40.00’; thence N 88Ί45’25” E parallel to and 40.00’ N of the S line of said W/2 of the NW/4 for a distance of 200.00’ to the POB, being a 3/8” iron pin with cap; thence N 01Ί18’08” W parallel to the W line of said Section 26, a distance of 650.00’ to a 3/8” iron pin with cap; thence N 88Ί45’25” E parallel to the S line of said W/2 NW/4, a distance of 209.06’ to a 3/8” iron pin with cap; thence S 10Ί23’18” W, a distance of 510.58’ to a 3/8” iron pin with cap; thence S 88Ί08’32” E, a distance of 27.98’ to a 3/8” iron pin with cap; thence S 01Ί18’08” E parallel to the W line of said Section 26, a distance of 148.39’ to a 3/8” iron pin with cap; thence S 88Ί45’25” W parallel to and 40.00’ N of the S line of said W/2 NW/4, a distance of 133.54’ to the POB.

 

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

 

Case No. 18848

    Action Requested:

      Variance of the required setback from centerline of South Memorial from 110’ to 82’ for the expansion of a non-conforming structure.  SECTION 903.  BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS – Use Unit 17; and a Variance to allow expansion of non-conforming structure.  SECTION 1405.  STRUCTURAL NONCONFORMITIES, located 3708 S. Memorial.

 

    Presentation:

      Wayne Alberty, 201 W. 5th St., Ste. 570, stated he is that he was representing C & C Harley Davidson, and the owner Larry Wolford.  He stated that he and others in his firm are the architects and planners of this project.  They originally planned to build within the 50’ setback, however after presentation of the plan, the owners felt they needed additional square footage.  The area where relief is needed would be the UPS delivery area to line up the canopy to line up with the face of the existing building. 

 

    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 a Variance of the required setback from centerline of South Memorial from 110’ to 82’ for the expansion of a non-conforming structure, per plan; and a Variance to allow expansion of non-conforming structure, finding the structure is existing and addition will be in line with the existing structure, and that this improvement 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:

 

    Part of Lot 1, Block 1, Dotson Center, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma, being more particularly described as follows, to-wit: Beg. at the SE/c of said Lot 1, Block 1, said point also being the NE/c of Lot 2, Block 1, Dotson Center, thence N 0Ί03’00” E and along the E line of said Lot 1, Block 1, for 154.67’; thence due W for 240.00’; thence S 0Ί03’00” W and parallel to the E line of said Lot 1, Block 1 for 261.11’ to a point on the S line of said Lot 1, Block 1 for 45.42’; thence S 64Ί40’07” E and along the S line of said Lot 1, Block 1 for 45.42’; thence N 37Ί41’29” E and continuing along the S line of said Lot 1, Block 1, for 235.00’ to the POB.

 

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

Case No. 18849

    Action Requested:

      Special Exception to permit a transitional living center.  SECTION 901.  PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS – Use Unit 2/9; a Special Exception to permit a manufactured home in an IL zoned district.  SECTION 901.  PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS; located 5624 S. 107th E. Ave.5624 S. 107th E. Ave.

 

    Presentation:

      Scott McGinness, Assistant Director of the HOW Foundation Drug and Alcohol Rehabilitation Center, 5649 S. Garnett, stated he understood that they do not need the Special Exception to permit a transitional living center due to a recent change in the zoning code.  He stated that the second request is for the manufactured home on the subject property to use as a transitional living center.  It would be occupied by up to nine men, which would include a live-in staff supervisor.  Mr. McGinness added that the facility would be for men that have successfully completed the long-term drug and alcohol rehabilitation center, but want to continue to live in a drug and alcohol free environment and start transitioning themselves back into society.

 

    Comments and Questions:

      Mr. White asked if the home would still be placed at the back of the property as shown in the plan.  Mr. McGinness responded that it would, and the only change would be that the home they have found is 56’ long rather than the 48’ they had proposed.   He stated that they would place it on an existing concrete slab.  Mr. Dunham asked if the warehouse would remain on the property.  Mr. McGinness stated that it would, but it was not cost effective to convert to a living center.

 

    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 Special Exception to permit a manufactured home in an IL zoned district, finding that it will be in harmony with the spirit and intent of the Code, and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare, on the following described property:

 

    Lot 1, Block 2, Golden Valley Addition, less beg. at the SW/c said Lot 1, thence N 01Ί22’02” W for 161.46’; thence N 88Ί42’21” E for 352.35’; thence S 05Ί15’01” W for 162.53’; thence S88Ί42’30” W for 333.62’ to POB and Lot 2, Block 2, Golden Valley Addition, less beg. at the SW/c said Lot 2, thence N 01Ί22’02” W for 161.46’; thence N 88Ί42’30” E for 333.62’; thence S 05Ί15’01” W for 162.53’; thence S 88Ί42’36” W for 314.89’ to POB, all being in the City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.

 

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

Case No. 18850

    Action Requested:

      Special Exception to allow a 6’ high decorative wall/fence within the required front yard.  SECTION 210.B.3. YARDS, Permitted Obstructions in Required Yards – Use Unit 6, located 2516 E. 28th St.

 

    Presentation:

      John Walton, architect for the project, (no address stated) presented for Ralph Klumpp.  He stated that the owner would like to have the option on the side property lines to make the fence more than four feet inside the 35’ setback.  Mr. Beach responded that it is within the front yard and approval of the application would allow that height.  

 

    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 a Special Exception to allow a 6’ high decorative wall/fence within the required front yard, per plan submitted, on the condition that along the front property line the fence would be four feet except as it approaches the gates could increase to six feet on the following described property:

 

    Lot 1, Block 2, South Lewis Park Addition and the W 60’ of the N/2 of Lot 2, Block 3, Woody Crest Addition, more particularly described as follows, to-wit: Beg. at the NW/c of said lot thence S along the W line of said lot a distance of 260.26’ to a point, said point being the SE/c of Lot 1, and the NE/c of Lot 5, Block 2, South Lewis Park Addition; thence S 88Ί41” E a distance of 60’ to a point; thence N a distance of 252.20’ to a point on the N line of said lot; thence N 80Ί 33” W a distance of 61’ to the POB, save and separate that portion of the N/2 of said lot previously deeded to the city for street purposes, all in the City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.

 

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


Case No. 18851

    Action Requested:

      Variance of front yard from 25’ to 20’ to permit an addition.  SECTION 403.  BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS – Use Unit 6, located 4644 S. Vandalia.

 

    Presentation:

      Richard Amatucci, 4644 S. Vandalia Ave., stated he and his wife are the owners of the subject property.  He stated that they are requesting the variance because of the irregular shape of the lot.  He informed the Board they want to build a 700 square foot  addition to the south and the east of the existing structure.  He submitted a site plan, and a first floor plan (Exhibits M-1, M-2).  

 

    Comments and Questions:

      Ms. Turnbo asked if it was just the corner of the proposed structure near Vandalia Avenue that is in question.  He replied in the affirmative.

 

    Protestants:

      A neighbor (Name and address not given) stated her desire to see the plans.  Ms. Turnbo suggested they continue the case later in the hearing to give them time to go over the plans for the neighbor’s review outside the room.

 

    Board Action:

      Mr. White stated that case would be heard later, so the hearing could continue.

 

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

 

Case No. 18852

    Action Requested:

      Variance to allow outdoor display and open-air storage of merchandise within 300’ of an R zoned district on the north.   SECTION 1214.C. USE UNIT 14.  SHOPPING GOODS AND SERVICES, Use Conditions – Use Unit 14, located 11212 E. Admiral Pl.

 

    Presentation:

      Judy Mitts, 11212 E. Admiral Pl., stated that she has worked for Leggett Supply for 21 years.  She stated that they have had outdoor storage of fiberglass steps, porches, water pipes and similar items for manufactured homes.  

 

    Comments and Questions:

      Mr. Dunham asked if the outdoor-storage area is to the east of the building where it was enclosed by a fence.  She responded that was correct.  He asked if storage would be there for 24 hours a day everyday.  She responded that he was correct.  Mr. White asked if there was anything stored outside of the fence.  She stated that right now they have some porches on display in the front of the building.  Mr. White asked if this application was generated in response to a Neighborhood Inspector’s complaint.  She replied in the affirmative.   Mr. Dunham stated that the Board would need to be clear about what the applicant wants in the way of outside storage.  Ms. Mitts stated that she would need the outside storage and could keep everything to the east of the building within the fence.  She stated that they would need to store fiberglass porches, wooden steps, water and sewer pipe, and blocking wood on a 24 hour per day basis. 

 

      Mr. Dunham questioned how close the subject property is to residentially zoned property.  Mr. Beach did not have adequate dimensions to answer.  Mr. White stated that for the record, there are ten different complaints listed by Neighborhood Inspections (Exhibit G-1).

 

    Protestants:

      Nancy Craten, 245 S. 120th E. Ave., stated that she was representing several different people today.  She read the letter (Exhibit G-2) of the official stand of the East Tulsa Mingo Valley Association regarding this application, requesting the BOA not to approve this application.  The letter stated that the property has been an eyesore for years.  It further stated that while other such businesses have operated with a decent premises and yet this one does not.  The letter also included that in 1998 this neighborhood association presented a certificate to the Oak Creek Village Mobile Home Dealership directly across the street east from this applicant’s premises.  The certificate was for being a good neighbor to neighborhoods in the area.    She also presented a letter from Branden Hazel, the general manager of Oak Creek Village, which stated that the aesthetic condition of the grounds belonging to Leggett Supply was very poor, appearing very unorganized and rundown.  The letter suggests the need for a higher and less revealing screening fence.  It was the manager’s concern that the poor appearance not only affects Leggett’s Supply business but also at Oak Creek Village.  Dr. Gainer, of Brookhaven was present but had to leave and gave Ms. Craten a written note that Brookhaven opposes the application due to the physical appearance of the property and the potential of the intended use to deteriorate the neighborhood.  Ms. Craten also presented two letters from neighbors in the area with the same concerns. 

 

    Comments and Questions:

      Mr. Dunham asked if an adequate screening fence would satisfy the neighborhood.  She replied if it was high, attractive, and actually screened the view of the outside storage.  Mr. White determined that an 8’ fence would work best. 

 

    Protestants:

      The following protestants came before the Board with the same complaints listed above:

      Wayne Bohanon, 10617 E. 1st St., member of the Wagon Wheel Homeowner’s Association

      Dominic White, 17717 E. Admiral Pl., owner of Fluid Specialties

 

    Rebuttal:

      Ms. Mitts stated that she just recently became the general manager and her plans are to clean the business up and keep it that way. 

 

    Comments and Questions:

      Mr. Dunham asked the applicant if they would be willing to put up a high wood fence, so the outside storage would not be visible from the street.   She replied that a wood fence would encourage theft and they already have a problem with theft with a chain link fence.   Mr. Cooper asked if she had anything to add to a hardship other than an economic hardship.  She stated that the only hardship is a financial one.

 

    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 DENY the Variance to allow outdoor display and open-air storage of merchandise within 300’ of an R zoned district on the north, finding a lack of hardship.

 

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

 

Case No. 18853

    Action Requested:

      Variance of required side yard on a non-arterial street from 15’ to 6.6’.  SECTION 403.  BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS – Use Unit 6, located 2902 S. Boston Ct.

 

    Presentation:

      Sonya Langley, 2902 S. Boston Ct., stated that she owns the subject property.  She is doing an extensive remodeling project, using B & B Custom Home and Remodeling.  She stated that her plans were to add an attached garage

 

    Comments and Questions:

      Mr. White stated that the staff comments questioned if the old driveway was to be removed.  She stated that she had not planned to remove the small portion of old driveway to the street because the original garage was converted and there was no garage there. 

 

    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 a Variance of required side yard on a non-arterial street from 15’ to 6.6’, per plan submitted, finding the hardship to be the configuration of the lot, on the following described property:

 

    Lot 1 and the N 15’ of Lot 2, Block 2, Travis Park Addition, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.

 

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