COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT

MINUTES of Meeting No. 253

Tuesday, June 19, 2001, 1:30 p.m.

County Commission Room
Room 119

County Administration Building

 

 

MEMBERS PRESENT  MEMBERS ABSENT  STAFF PRESENT    OTHERS PRESENT

 

Alberty, Chair

Walker

Butler

West, Co. Inspec.

Tyndall

Dillard, Vice Chair

Fernandez

 

Hutson

 

 

 

 

The notice and agenda of said meeting were posted in the Office of INCOG, 201 W. 5th St., Suite 600, Friday, June 15, 2001 at 8:00 a.m., as well as at the City Clerk’s office, City Hall.

 

After declaring a quorum present, Chair Alberty called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m.

 

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

 

MINUTES:

On MOTION of Hutson, the Board voted 3-0-0 (Alberty, Tyndall, Hutson “aye”, no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Walker, Dillard “absent”) to CONTINUE the May 15, 2001 minutes to the next County Board of Adjustment meeting, June 19, 2001. 

 

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

 

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

 

Case No. 1847

      Action Requested:

         Variance of Section 240.2.E to permit an accessory building of 2,400 sq. ft. in an RS district.  SECTION 240.2. YARDS, Permitted Yard Obstructions -- Use Unit 6; and a Variance to permit the accessory use on a lot adjoining the principal dwelling unit (under common ownership) as the principal and only use on the lot, located 742 N. Willow St.

 

      Presentation:

         Diane Fernandez, stated that this case was re-advertised, and it would have been heard by the City of Sand Springs but they did not have a quorum for this particular Board of Adjustment referral. 

 

         Ronald Shipman, 724 Willow St., Sand Springs, stated he wants to build a building for equipment for a small siding business, including trailers and equipment.  He owns four lots, and his house is on one of them.  He stated that the building would be 260’ from the street and at the bottom of a six-foot drop-off to prevent disrupting the view for anyone.   He added that he would be willing to put in trees for screening.  He discussed with neighbors and they are in support. 

 

      Comments and Questions:

         Mr. Alberty asked for a hardship.  Mr. Shipman stated the hardship would be security.  A number of things have been stolen from him.  Mr. Alberty asked what type of business Mr. Shipman has.  He replied it is a siding business.  Mr. Alberty asked where he runs his business.  Mr. Shipman replied he runs it out of his home.  He takes customer phone calls and goes out to the customers home, the customers do not come to his home. 

 

      Interested Parties:

         There were no interested parties present who wished to speak.

 

      Board Action:

         On MOTION of Tyndall, the Board voted 3-0-0 (Alberty, Tyndall, Hutson “aye”, no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Walker, Dillard “absent”) to DENY a Variance of Section 240.2.E to permit an accessory building of 2,400 sq. ft. in an RS district; and a Variance to permit the accessory use on a lot adjoining the principal dwelling unit (under common ownership) as the principal and only use on the lot, for lack of hardship and finding it would cause substantial detriment to the public good or impair the purposes, spirit, and intent of the Code, or the Comprehensive Plan.

 

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

 

NEW APPLICATIONS

 

Case No. 1866

      Action Requested:

         Variance to permit an accessory structure on a lot that does not contain a principal dwelling unit to permit a lot split.  SECTION 420.  ACCESSORY USES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS -- Use Unit 6, located 6505 W. 42nd St.

 

      Presentation:

         Ms. Fernandez, informed Board that a letter was submitted to the Board regarding the Sand Springs Board of Adjustment action in support of the application. 

 

         Gene Crawford, 6505 W. 42nd St., stated he built a garage without a permit and was not aware of the restriction.  He wanted to get a lot-split to build a new house on the other lot. 

 

 

      Comments and Questions:

         Mr. Alberty asked for the schedule for construction.  Mr. Crawford responded that it is eminent. 

 

      Interested Parties:

         Ron Wirch, stated he is a broker and represents Stratford Estates subdivision.  He is aware of the garage Mr. Crawford has built.  The homes in this area are custom-built 2,900 to 3,000 square foot homes.  They have already purchased property around this property for residential development.  They are interested in the type of home to be built.  He spoke in favor of the variance judging the quality of the garage Mr. Crawford built. 

 

      Board Action:

         On MOTION of Tyndall, the Board voted 3-0-0 (Alberty, Tyndall, Hutson “aye”, no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Walker, Dillard “absent”) to APPROVE a Variance to permit an accessory structure on a lot that does not contain a principal dwelling unit to permit a lot split, with the time period to begin construction of five months, finding the lots would be compatible with others in the area, on the following described property:

 

      A strip, piece or parcel of land lying in the E 330.00’ of the NE/4 NE/4 of Section 30, T-19-N, R-12-E, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma, said parcel being described as follows: commencing at the NW/c of said E 330.00’ of the NE/4 NE/4; thence S 00º45’13” E along the W line of said E 330.00’ of the NE/4 NE/4 a distance of 140.00’; thence N 88º58’52” E parallel to the N line of said NE/4 NE/4 a distance of 175.00’; thence N 88º58’52” E a distance of 29.52’; thence S 85º14’29” E a distance of 126.06’ to a point on the E line of Section 30, said point being 152.69’ S NE/c of Section 30; thence S 00º45’13” E along said E line a distance of 218.00’ to the POB, thence continuing S 00º45’13” E a distance of 179.31’; thence S 88º58’52” W a distance of 330.00’ of the NE/4 NE/4; thence N 00º45’13” W along said W line a distance of 106.56’ to a point of curve; thence along said curve to the left from which a tangent bears S 58º21’14” E with a radius of 37.5’ a distance of 52.15’; thence N 75º41’42” E a distance of 290.44’ to the POB.

 

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

 

Case No. 1867

      Action Requested:

         Special Exception to allow 190’ cellular tower in an AG zoned district.  SECTION 310.  PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN THE AGRICULTURE DISTRICT -- Use Unit 4; and a Special Exception of the required 110% from AG zoned district from 210’ to 59’ on north and 48’ on south (this is a monopole design).  SECTION 1204.3. USE UNIT 4.  PUBLIC PROTECTION AND UTILITY FACILITIES, Use Conditions, located N of NE/c W. 131st St. & S. Elwood.

 

      Presentation:

         Denny Redmon, 1535 S. Memorial Dr., Ste. 119, submitted a packet of exhibits (Exhibit B-1).  He stated Hemphill Corporation proposes to construct a 190’ monopole to serve the needs of the Glenpool area.  There are two other towers on the property owned by Cricket and AT&T.  The height of those towers does not accommodate the needs of their proposed carrier.  The surrounding property is zoned AG.  This facility would be designed to provide for collocation of six users.  An eight-foot chain-link security fence would surround the facility.  Access will be west of the existing AT&T fence from the gravel road.  The topography of the land is flat with a few trees.  The facility would be on a 75’ X 75’ tract on the ten-acre parent tract.   Landscaping will be done as required by Code. 

 

      Interested Parties:

         James Creekmore, 129th and S. Elwood, stated he lives across the street from the subject property.  His concerns were for any hazard to health at this distance and if the tower would interfere with television reception.  He complained that he didn’t like the presence of two towers and this would make three in front of his home. 

 

         The City of Jenks recommended approval of the application with the stipulation that landscaping with trees be provided around the entire compound as screening.   A letter was submitted to the Board (Exhibit B-2).

 

      Applicant’s Rebuttal:

         Mr. Redmon stated that the electromagnetic energy from these towers is emitted 190’ to 100’ in the air.  At this level it is not hazardous to health according to our federal government, and it does not cause interference with television reception. 

 

         The Board reviewed the Zoning Code requirements as provided in the agenda.

        

      Board Action:

         On MOTION of Hutson, the Board voted 3-0-0 (Alberty, Tyndall, Hutson “aye”, no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Walker, Dillard “absent”) to APPROVE a Special Exception to allow 190’ cellular tower in an AG zoned district; and a Special Exception of the required 110% from AG zoned district from 210’ to 59’ on north and 48’ on south (this is a monopole design), with the condition for landscaping to soften ground and visual effect on the north and west, 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:

 

      The S/2 N/2 SW/4 SW/4, Section 1, T-17-N, R-12-E, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.

 

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

 

Case No. 1868

      Action Requested:

         Variance of the required 30’ frontage on a public street to 0’.  SECTION 207.  STREET FRONTAGE REQUIRED -- Use Unit 6, located 11201 N. 41st E. Ave.

 

      Presentation:

         Roger McMillan, stated the applicant asked him to speak on his behalf as he is not fluent in English.  He submitted an Quit Claim Deed, map, affidavit,  photos and grants of easements (Exhibits C-1, C-2, C-3, C-4, C-5, and C-6).   He commented that other variances have been approved north of the property.             

 

      Comments and Questions:

         Mr. Alberty asked if the property would stay under one ownership.  Mr. McMillan replied it is for one dwelling and one ownership.  He added that  Mr. Gomez does not plan to develop the land for more homes.  Mr. McMillan stated that he has hauled gravel to help Mr. Gomez maintain the road.        

      Interested Parties:

         Jim Spears, stated that he warned Mr. Gomez that he might have trouble getting utilities and access because Mr. Delk had problems previously.  Mr. Spears had complaints that Mr. Gomez has built buildings, prepared for a rodeo pen on the property, has a lot of traffic to his place that is suspicious in nature, and other loud and disorderly conduct.  Mr. Gomez offered to buy Mr. Spears’ property for less than he paid for it.  He identified easements to Mr. Alberty that he and Mr. Delk have maintained. 

 

         Tom Baker, 3821 E. 106th St. N., Sperry, Oklahoma, was interested in the purpose of the variance requested.   Mr. Alberty responded that the Code requires access to a publicly dedicated roadway.  The County Inspector could not issue a permit for construction unless the applicant gets a variance.  He asked if it is known what Mr. Gomez plans to develop.  He stated there is a horse track on the property. 

 

         Mr. Alberty allowed Jim Spears to speak again.  Mr. Spears informed the Board that Mr. Gomez had moved a doublewide mobile on the property and put in a lagoon already. 

 

         Bill Parker, stated he lives on 116th St. and he has noticed unusual traffic to this property.  The dirt roads are not conducive to much traffic.  He has noticed an arena and stated that there are several structures on the property.  He stated that the property is landlocked. 

 

      Comments and Questions:

         Mr. Alberty asked Mr. West if he knew of any permits issued for construction on the subject.  Mr. West replied that he was not aware of any.  He added that the applicant was supposed to go to the Board of Adjustment two or three years ago, but never did. 

 

      Applicant’s Rebuttal:

         Mr. McMillan stated that Mr. Gomez went through all the right channels for utilities and lagoon system, except for electricity.  He then was informed he needed a building permit.  Mr. Gomez has paid for asphalt for the road improvement, with no reimbursement from the neighbors.  He has hauled numerous loads of gravel for the road also.  He stated that if Mr. Gomez’ land is landlocked then the Delk and Spears property is also landlocked. 

 

      Board Action:

         On MOTION of Hutson, the Board voted 3-0-0 (Alberty, Tyndall, Hutson “aye”, no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Walker, Dillard “absent”) to CONTINUE Case No. 1868 to the meeting on July 17, 2001 to determine if the easements connect and provide roadway easement to 116th St.

 

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

 

Case No. 1869

      Action Requested:

         Variance of required 30’ of frontage on a public street or dedicated right-of-way.  SECTION 207.  STREET FRONTAGE REQUIRED -- Use Unit 6, located 4136 S. 78th W. Ave.

 

      Presentation:

         Ms. Fernandez stated that the legal description has been revised.  It is surrounded by AG zoning and there is no access to 78th W. Ave.  78th W. Ave. is not a County maintained road. 

 

         Patricia Sullivan, 406 Angus Dr., Sand Springs, Oklahoma, stated the property was given to her.  She stated that the road is private, the lake is at the back of the property.  The previous owner offered a 40’ private road to be dedicated but the County did not accept it. 

 

      Comments and Questions:

         Mr. Alberty determined that the road is in place.  Ms. Fernandez explained that the history shows her property is slightly smaller than five acres.  Mr. Alberty suggested the 40’ roadway easement be dedicated and filed on record, even though Tulsa County would not maintain it. 

 

      Interested Parties:

         There were no interested parties present who wished to speak.

 

      Board Action:

         On MOTION of Hutson, the Board voted 3-0-0 (Alberty, Tyndall, Hutson “aye”, no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Walker, Dillard “absent”) to APPROVE a Variance of required 30’ of frontage on a public street or dedicated right-of-way, contingent on filing 40’ dedicated roadway easement, finding 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:

 

      S/2 S/2 NW NW NW, less E 20’ for road; and N/2 S/2 NW NW NW, less E 20’ for road; and S 330’ W 640’ SW NW NW; and NW NW, less E 680’ and less N 660’ W 640’ and less S 330’ W 640’ SW NW NW, all in Section 30, T-19-N, R-12-E, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.

 

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

 

Case No. 1870

      Action Requested:

         Special Exception to allow a Use Unit 2 fire works tent in an RS zoned district from June 20, 2001 to July 5, 2001.  SECTION 410.  PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS and SECTION 1202.3. USE UNIT 2.  AREA-WIDE SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES, Use Conditions -- Use Unit 2; and a Variance of all-weather surface for temporary use.  SECTION 1340.D.  DESIGN STANDARDS FOR OFF-STREET PARKING AREAS, located 6605 W. 7th St.

 

      Presentation:

         John Tittle, Jr., 10545 Hectorville Rd., Mounds, Oklahoma stated he was told he needed a tent permit to sell fireworks.  He leased the property in February 2000 and has a contract with property owner.  He has operated fireworks stands for the last five years.  He would like to sell fireworks from June 20, 2001 to July 5, 2001. 

 

      Interested Parties:

         Judy Ford, 473 S. 65th W. Ave., was concerned about the all-weather surface.  Mr. Alberty explained that he wants a variance from having to have an all-weather surface.  She asked if this application would be for just this season this year.  Mr. Alberty responded it would be for just these dates.  She asked about hours of operation and the size of the tent.  Mr. Alberty stated no hours have been specified and the tent is 30’ X 58’. 

 

         Robert Jenkins, 6436 W. 6th, was concerned about safety, stating that in past years fireworks were set off too close to the tent. 

 

         Gwendolyn Jenkins, 6436 W. 6th, stated concern regarding the bike trail in close proximity to the stand.  She stated that in the past the fireworks would be set off too close to her house and her hen house also.  She is opposed for safety reasons.

 

      Applicant’s Rebuttal:

         Mr. Tittle informed the Board that he has a more responsible person managing the stand this year. 

 

      Board Action:

         On MOTION of Tyndall, the Board voted 3-0-0 (Alberty, Tyndall, Hutson “aye”, no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Walker, Dillard “absent”) to APPROVE a Special Exception to allow a Use Unit 2 fire works tent in an RS zoned district from June 20, 2001 to July 5, 2001; and a Variance of all-weather surface for temporary use, finding 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:

 

      A part of the SE/4 SE/4 of Section 6, T-19-N, R-12-E of the IBM, described as follows: Beg. at the SE/c of the said described above land, thence W 776.5’; thence N 561’; thence E 776.5’; thence S 561’ to POB, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.

 

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

 

Case No. 1871

      Action Requested:

         Special Exception to allow Use Unit 2 fire works stand in an AG zoned district, June 20, 2001 to July 5, 2001.  SECTION 310.  PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN THE AGRICULTURE DISTRICT -- Use Unit 2; and a Variance of all-weather surface for temporary use, located 13607 E. 111th St.

 

      Presentation:

         John Tittle, Jr., 10545 Hectorville Rd., Mounds, Oklahoma, stated the same people have run this stand for the last three years.  They are very conscientious operators.  He has a lease and contract for the tent at this location. 

 

      Interested Parties:

         Ellen Neal, 11206 S. 92nd E. Ave., Bixby, Oklahoma, wanted to know if this location was within the city limits.  Mr. Alberty replied it was not. 

 

      Board Action:

         On MOTION of Hutson, the Board voted 3-0-0 (Alberty, Tyndall, Hutson “aye”, no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Walker, Dillard “absent”) to APPROVE Special Exception to allow Use Unit 2 fire works stand in an AG zoned district, June 20, 2001 to July 5, 2001; and a Variance of all-weather surface for temporary use, 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:

 

      E/2 SE SE SW Section 28, T-18-N, R-14-E, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.

 

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

 

Case No. 1872

      Action Requested:

         Variance to permit two dwelling units on one lot of record.  SECTION 208.  ONE SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING PER LOT OF RECORD -- Use Unit 9, located 4848 W. 26th St.

 

      Presentation:

         Karen Suitor, 6727 W. 26th St., proposes to place a doublewide mobile home on the backside of the subject property.  She stated that previously a singlewide mobile was put in there.  The septic is in good working order.  The utilities connections are present, and it has a gravel driveway.   She had new water and gas lines put in. 

 

      Comments and Questions:

         Mr. Alberty asked if there are other doublewide mobile homes in the neighborhood.  Ms. Suitor replied that there are several single and doublewide homes in the area.  Mr. Alberty recognized there was no density issue in this case.

 

      Interested Parties:

         There were no interested parties present who wished to speak.

 

      Board Action:

         On MOTION of Tyndall, the Board voted 3-0-0 (Alberty, Tyndall, Hutson “aye”, no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Walker, Dillard “absent”) to APPROVE a Variance to permit two dwelling units on one lot of record, with conditions for DEQ approval, skirting, tie-downs and building permit, finding 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:

 

      NW NW NW SW Section 16, T-19-N, R-12-E, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.

 

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

 

Case No. 1873

      Action Requested:

         The applicant has requested to withdraw the application.  Ms. Fernandez stated the staff requests a refund of $160.00 to the applicant.

 

      Board Action:

      On MOTION of Hutson, the Board voted 3-0-0 (Alberty, Tyndall, Hutson “aye”, no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Walker, Dillard “absent”) to APPROVE a REFUND of $160.00 to the applicant. 

 

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

 

Case No. 1874

      Action Requested:

         Special Exception to allow a single-wide manufactured home in an RS zoned district.  SECTION 410.  PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS -- Use Unit 9, located W of NW/c W. 57th St. & S. 97th E. Ave.

 

      Presentation:

         J.C. Doyle, 9919 W. 57th St., stated he bought the lot next door.  He had previously obtained a special exception for a doublewide mobile home.  Now they need an exception for a singlewide.   He added there are several mobile homes in the area. 

 

      Interested Parties:

         There were no interested parties present who wished to speak.

 

      Board Action:

         On MOTION of Hutson, the Board voted 3-0-0 (Alberty, Tyndall, Hutson “aye”, no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Walker, Dillard “absent”) to APPROVE a Special Exception to allow a singlewide manufactured home in an RS zoned district or a doublewide, 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:

 

      W 100’ Lot 4, Block 1, Hill Top Addition, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.

 

 

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

 

Case No. 1875

      Action Requested:

         Variance to permit more than one single-family dwelling or mobile home on one lot of record to permit three dwelling units.  SECTION 208.  ONE SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING PER LOT OF RECORD -- Use Unit 6, located  2543 E. 86th St. N.

 

      Presentation:

         William Domres, 2425 W. Hwy. 66, Sapulpa, Oklahoma stated he proposes to place a doublewide mobile home on his father’s land.  There are currently two dwellings on the property.

 

      Comments and Questions:

         Mr. Alberty asked if the applicant had checked the flood plain.  Mr. West stated the location is in the 100-year flood plain.  He would just need to elevate the home to be one foot above.  Mr. Alberty noted there were greater than ten acres of property.  Mr. Alberty advised Mr. Domres to get a percolation test.  Mr. Domres replied that it has been done. 

 

      Interested Parties:

         There were no interested parties present who wished to speak.

 

      Board Action:

         On MOTION of Hutson, the Board voted 3-0-0 (Alberty, Tyndall, Hutson “aye”, no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Walker, Dillard “absent”) to APPROVE a