CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Tuesday,
December 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 |
Prather,
Legal |
|
Cooper Turnbo |
|
Butler |
Ballentine,
Neighborhood Insp. |
|
White,
Chair |
|
|
|
|
Perkins |
|
|
|
The notice and agenda of said meeting was posted in the Office of INCOG, at 201 W. 5th St., Suite 600, on Friday, December 8, 2000, at 2:04 p.m., as well as at the City Clerks office, City Hall.
After declaring a quorum present, Chair White called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
MINUTES:
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 Minutes of November
14, 2000 (No. 807) as amended.
MINUTES:
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 Minutes of November
28, 2000 (No. 808) as amended.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Case
was withdrawn by the applicant.
Action
Requested:
Case
was withdrawn by the applicant.
Action
Requested:
Case was stricken
from the agenda due to error in preparation of the case
map.
Action
Requested:
Case was stricken
from the agenda due to error in preparation of the case
map.
Action
Requested:
Mr. Beach stated
the applicant has requested a Continuance to January 9, 2001.
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. 18896 to the next hearing on January 9, 2001.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Mr. Beach stated
that an Interested Party made a timely request for Continuance. They asked for more time to retain
counsel and discuss alternatives with the applicant.
Presentation:
Kevin C.
Coutant, 320 S. Boston, stated that there are some last minute discussions
going on. He stated that the
applicant could agree to a continuance on all of the application except for the
Special Exception for church use.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. White stated
that this case would be heard in place on the agenda.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Mr. Beach stated
that the applicant has contemplated changes to his application, and had intended
to be present. Mr. Beach added that
due to a medical emergency the applicant could not attend this hearing. He requested a Continuance to January 9,
2001.
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 Continue
Case No. 18933 to the next hearing on January 9, 2001.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Case
No. 18935
Action
Requested:
Mr. Beach stated
that an interested party asked for a Continuance to January 23, 2001. The staff was asked to attempt to
contact the applicant and let him know. Mr. White stated that the Board
would hear this request when they come to it on the agenda.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Special Exception to waive the screening requirement. SECTION 1228.C. USE UNIT 28. JUNK AND SALVAGE YARDS, located 13805 E. Apache.
Presentation:
Paul
Mauldin, 13805 E. Apache, stated he is the owner of the subject
property. He stated that he has
discussed the application with his neighbors and they did not object.
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 Special Exception to waive the screening requirement, 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 1, Sewell Industrial District, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance of
setback requirements for parking and structure parking. SECTION 1302.B.
SETBACKS; a Special Exception for church use. SECTION 401. PRINCIPAL USES
PERMITTED IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Use Unit 5;and a Variance of height
limitation from 35 to 51. SECTION 403. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, located 4102 East 61st
Street.
Presentation:
Kevin C.
Coutant, 320 S. Boston, stated he represented Kirk of the Hills Presbyterian
Church. He reminded the Board that
the church is located on two parcels of land, one zoned RS-3 and the other
RM-1. Mr. Coutant asked that the
Board take action on the request for a Special Exception for church use per the
amended site plan, and allow a Continuance on the rest of the application.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. Cooper asked
if the amended plan would change the sanctuary size. Mr. Coutant replied that it would
not. Ms. Perkins asked if there
would ever be services simultaneously in the sanctuary and new chapel. Mr. Coutant responded that they would
not be used at the same time.
Interested
Parties:
Jim Goodwin, P.O. Box 3267, Tulsa, stated he represented the Livingston Park South Homeowners Association. He informed the Board that the association was in full support of use request.
Mr. White commented that the
Board received one letter of protest from a resident regarding the parking
structure, which would be presented at a future
hearing.
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
Special Exception for church use as it relates to the amended site
plan, to include the kitchen, porte-cochere and chapel, 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; and
CONTINUE the remainder of the application to January 9, 2001, on
the following described property:
The N 396 of the W 660 of
Lot 2, Section 4, T-18-N, R13-E of the IBM, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State
of Oklahoma, and all of Livingston Park Block 1, less and except the portion
thereof subsequently platted as Livingston Park South.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance of the
hard surface parking to allow gravel.
SECTION 222. MOTORIZED
VEHICLES Use Unit 8, located 1610 S. Boston Ave.
Presentation:
Emily
Malone, 1612 S. Boston, stated that the subject property is at a low point
where storm water flows from the north, south, east, and west. Ms. Malone submitted photographs
(Exhibit B-1) showing how the area flooded four years ago. She stated her concern that the flooding
problem worsened since some new businesses were built nearby with paved parking
lots. She also pointed out that a
storm water drain was vacated when it collapsed and was not repaired. She stated her opinion that it would be
better to not pave her parking lot until the flooding problem could be
corrected.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. Dunham
commented that the subject property is not in the 100-year flood plain. Mr. Beach commented that there is a
requirement in the Code that states after January 1, 1999, all non-conforming,
non-paved parking lots must be paved.
He also observed that the flooding shown in the photographs indicates
that the absence of paving did not alleviate the flooding problem then. He added that the presence or absence of
pavement of such a small area would not be significant in affecting the
possibility of flooding.
Interested
Parties:
No
one was present that wished to speak.
Mr. White noted that the Board had received a letter of opposition from
Mapleview Associates.
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 the hard surface parking to allow gravel, finding a
lack of hardship.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance of setback from Southwest Boulevard from 50 to 40 to permit a sign. SECTION 1221.C. USE UNIT 21. BUSINESS SIGNS AND OUTDOOR ADVERTISING, General Use Conditions for Business Signs Use Unit 11, located 2420 Southwest Blvd.
Presentation:
James
Adair, 7508 E. 77th, stated he was representing Community
Bank. Mr. Adair stated the
request. The hardship is that the
bank building is set back 40 and if the sign is set back 50 it would not be
visible.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. Cooper asked
staff if a removal contract is needed.
Mr. Beach stated technically it was needed because of the Major Street
and Highway Plan. Mr. Dunham
commented that a removal contract would effect the location of the building
also. He asked the applicant if he
would be agreeable to the removal contract. Mr. Adair replied in the
affirmative.
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 a
Variance of setback from Southwest Boulevard from 50 to 40 to
permit a sign, per plan with the condition that if a removal contract is
required, the applicant will grant it, finding the hardship to be the existing
building has a 40 setback, on the following described
property:
Lots 1 - 12, Block 5,
Clintondale Addition, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma, and
together with that portion of W. 24th St. lying between Southwest
Blvd. and the E lane of the Red Fork Expressway, being more particularly
described as: Beg. at the NE/c of Lot 3, Block 5, thence W a distance of 200 to
the NW/c of Lot 6, Block 5, thence NEly to the SW/c of Lot 8, Block 4, thence E
along the S line of said Block 4, a distance of 150; thence S a distance of 60
to the POB.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Special Exception
to allow a manufactured home in an AG zoned district. SECTION 301. PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN THE
AGRICULTURE DISTRICT Use Unit 9; and a Variance to allow it permanently,
located 2102 E. 43rd St. N.
Presentation:
Keith
Rash, 2101 E. 43rd St. N., stated his request. His wife, Pamela
Rash, gave a little history of ownership in the family.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. White asked
if the mobile would be new. Ms.
Rash replied in the affirmative.
Mr. White commented that staff had a question about the frontage. He also asked if they were getting a
separate title for this tract or would it remain in the same ownership. She responded that it is already in
their name. Mr. Beach stated that
he could not find record that 43rd is a public street. Ms. Rash replied that the City of Tulsa
paved the road.
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 a
Special Exception to allow a manufactured home in an AG zoned
district, subject to requirements for tie downs, skirting, DEQ permit, all
necessary permits and inspections; According to the Code, the Variance for
permanent placement of mobile home in an AG zoned district was not needed, and
was therefore stricken, on the following described
property:
A tract of land situated in
the SE/4 NE/4 of Section 18, T-20-N, R-13-E, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State
of Oklahoma, more particularly described as follows: Beg. at a point 1,322.5 N
and 770 W of the SE/c of the SE/4 NE/4 thereof; thence Sly parallel to the E
line of SE/4 NE/4 a distance of 171; thence Wly parallel to the S line of SE/4
NE/4 a distance of 550; thence Nly parallel to the E line of SE/4 NE/4 a
distance of 171; thence Ely parallel to the S line of SE/4 NE/4 a distance of
548 to the POB.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance of the
required rear yard setback from 25 to 11 for new construction. SECTION 403. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Use Unit 6, located 2223 E. 24th
St.
Presentation:
Martin
Brown, 3904 S. Sandusky, stated he is an architect representing David and
Janie Scott. He stated that the
request is to preserve mature trees on their property and to remain consistent
with other homes in the neighborhood. The hardship would be in keeping
the existing curb cut, original drive location, and repeat the original garage
orientation.
Interested
Parties:
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 rear yard setback from 25 to 11 for new
construction, per plan, finding the hardship to be it would be more harmonious
with the neighborhood to keep the garage in the back and keep the historic
significance of the street, on the following described
property:
Lots 15 and 16, Block 1,
Wildwood, an Addition to the City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of
Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Case
No. 18935
Action
Requested:
Variance of the
required 50 setback from centerline of street to 45 to add addition to
existing building approved per plan.
SECTION 903. BULK AND AREA
REQUIREMENTS IN THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS Use Unit 2, located 10111 E.
45th Pl.
Presentation:
Sam
Stokely, 10111 E. 45th Pl., stated he wanted to add on to an
existing building, because of his growing business and increased vandalism. He would like to keep a clean and
uniform appearance. He indicated
the hardship was the configuration of the lot, the closeness of the
expressway. Mr. Stokely added that
three other buildings have received the same approval in the same general
area.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. Cooper asked
if the applicant had read the staff comments regarding the setback from the
centerline of the highway service road.
Mr. Beach informed the applicant that the northeast corner of the new
addition would be closer than the required setback from the service road, and
would require more relief if the Board approved the application today. Mr. Stokely stated he would like to mention
another hardship that if he has to use another building plan, he would not be
able to move the trucks straight through the building, causing a safety
hazard.
Interested
Parties:
Allen
Craft,
(no address given) stated that he owned property next door to the subject
property. His concern was that the
new addition would obstruct the view, and it is not a good location for a
helicopter pad. Mr. Craft stated
his concern for helicopter accidents and the danger of fuel storage. He
mentioned that the map used for the application was inaccurate; and added that
there is room to construct the building further back. Mr. Craft commented that the
Stokely property is kept immaculate.
He also described the applicants approach to him as a neighbor,
regarding the application.
Applicants
Rebuttal:
Mr. Stokely
stated that he used a map provided by INCOG, and it was accurate. He also commented that wherever they add
on would block the view. Mr.
Stokely stated that an addition to the building would further block the noise
and wind from the helicopter.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. White asked
about the height of the building and the nearness to the billboard. Mr. Stokely responded that the building
would be 20 high, same as the existing structure. Mr. Beach stated that the building would
not encroach on the billboard. Mr.
Cooper asked if the applicant had discussed his plans with the Oklahoma Highway
Department regarding their plans for the highway interchange. Mr. Stokely replied that he had and they
show no plans that would encroach further on his property.
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 Variance of the required 50
setback from centerline of street to 45 to add addition to existing building,
per plan, finding the hardship to be the configuration of the lot, and the fact
that this same setback relief has been given to other properties in the area,
and that a Continuance be given for additional relief to the hearing on January
23, 2001, on the following described property:
A part of Lots 1 and 2, Block
1, Ideal Brick Industrial Tracts, an addition to the City of Tulsa, Tulsa
County, State of Oklahoma, and an unplatted tract lying between said Lots 1 and
2, and all being more particularly described as follows, to-wit: Commencing at
the SW/c of Lot 1, Block 1, Ideal Brick Industrial Tracts, according to the
recorded plat thereof; thence N 89Ί5307 E a distance of 176.00; thence N
0Ί1007 E a distance of 60.00 to a point, said point being on the N
right-of-way line of E. 45h Pl. S.; thence N 89Ί5307 E a distance of 225.86
to the POB; thence N 00Ί0653 W a distance of 343.29 to a point on the S
right-of-way line of the Broken Arrow Expressway (Oklahoma Highway 51); thence S
51Ί5500 E, along said Sly right-of-way line a distance of 166.24 to a point;
thence S 22Ί2532 E along said right-of-way line a distance of 259.95 to a
point on the N right-of-way line of E 45th Pl. S.; thence S 89Ί5307
W along said right-of-way line a distance of 229.33 to the POB, and containing
50,000.27 square feet, or 1.1479 acres, more or less.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Special Exception
to previously approved site plan to include a new building. SECTION 301. PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN
THE AGRICULTURE DISTRICT Use Unit 5, located E. 96th St., W side of
S. Garnett.
Presentation:
Scott
Baker,
8413 S.2nd Avenue, Broken Arrow, stated that the building they were
referring to is for church and school property for Grace Fellowship.
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
a Special Exception
to previously approved site plan to include a new building, per plan, on
condition that all conditions as previously listed on March 23, 1999 for Case
No. 18352, 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 1, Grace Fellowship Church and School, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance of the
required setback from 33rd Pl. from 65 to 59.5 from center of
street to construct an enclosed porch.
SECTION 403. BULK AND AREA
REQUIREMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Use Unit 6, located 2607 E.
33rd Pl. S.
Presentation:
Gary
Baker, 2607 E. 33rd Pl. S., stated that he did not plan to
construct an enclosed porch, just a covered porch attached to the house. Mr. Baker described the plan to enlarge
the porch. The hardship is the
shape of the lot.
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
a Variance
of the required setback from 33rd Pl. from 65 to 59.5 from center
of street to construct a porch, per plan, on condition that it remain open,
finding the hardship to be the configuration of the lot, 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 12, Block 1, Timberland Addition, City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance of setback from the street from the required 50 to 25 to permit a sign. SECTION 1221.C.6. GENERAL USE CONDITIONS FOR BUSINESS SIGNS, located 1438 S. Indianapolis Ave.
Presentation:
Ronald D.
Flanagan, 2745 E. Skelly Dr., Ste. 100, stated he represented Eastside
Christian Church. He stated that
they want to put up a pole marquee sign on the parking lot. He pointed out that 15th
Street is an arterial street but the unique situation is that the street is
offset to the south, leaving an extremely wide right-of-way on the north side of
15th Street. In 1960 the
church requested a reverse parking agreement to allow parking on city
right-of-way, and it was approved.
Mr. Flanagan mentioned that 15th Street would be widened by
about two feet, and the City engineers requested they place the sign at least
ten feet back. The church has filed
for a license agreement to allow the sign on right-of-way.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr. Dunham
mentioned that the proposed sign is larger than allowed in an RS-3 zoned
district, and the applicant would need to request additional relief.
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
a Variance
of setback from the street from the required 50 to 25 to permit a sign,
subject to a license agreement with the City of Tulsa, finding the hardship to
be the offset in the right-of-way, to CONTINUE the balance of the
application to the hearing on January 23, 2001, on the following described
property:
Lots 3, 4, 5 and 21, Block 3;
and Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, Block 4, Summit Heights Addition to the City of
Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.