Tulsa Metropolitan Area Planning Commission
Wednesday, November 1, 2000
1:30 p.m.
Francis Campbell City
Council Room
Plaza Level, Tulsa Civic
Center
Members Present Members
Absent Staff Present Others Present
Boyle Carnes Bruce Boulden, Legal
Collins Horner Dunlap Counsel
Harmon Huntsinger
Hill Matthews
Jackson Stump
Ledford
Midget
Pace
Westervelt
The notice and agenda of said meeting were posted in the
Reception Area of the INCOG offices on Monday, October 30, 2000 at 11:00 a.m.,
posted in the Office of the City Clerk at 10:50 a.m., as well as in the office
of the County Clerk at 10:45 a.m.
After declaring a quorum present, Chair Westervelt called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m.
CONTINUED ITEMS:
Application No.: PUD-432-E detail site
plan
Applicant: Jack Kelley (PD-4)
(CD-4)
Location: Southeast corner of East 11th
Street and South Utica
Staff Recommendation:
Applicant has requested a continuance to November 15, 2000.
There were no interested parties wishing to speak.
TMAPC Action; 7
members present:
On MOTION of BOYLE, the
TMAPC voted 7-0-0 (Boyle, Harmon,
Hill, Jackson, Ledford, Pace, Westervelt "aye"; no "nays";
none ”abstaining"; Carnes, Collins, Horner, Midget "absent") to CONTINUE PUD-432-E to November 15, 2000 at 1:30 p.m.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
REPORTS:
Committee Reports:
Mr. Harmon reported that he attended a meeting with the Brookside Pilot Program group and will be sharing the material with the Planning Commission in the near future.
Comprehensive Plan Committee
Mr. Ledford reported that there are some housekeeping amendments on the agenda today.
Director’s Report:
Mr. Stump reported that there are no agenda items on the City Council agenda this week.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
SUBDIVISIONS
LOT-SPLITS FOR WAIVER OF SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS:
L-19131 - Winston D. Tallent (AG) (PD-23) (County)
3434 South 177th West Avenue
Staff Recommendation:
The applicant has applied to split off three two-acre tracts from a 152-acre tract. All tracts meet the AG zoning district bulk and area requirements; however, the applicant will install an alternative sewage treatment system on the three tracts rather than a septic system, requiring a waiver of the Subdivision Regulations. Therefore, the applicant is asking for a waiver of Subdivision Regulation 6.5.4.(e) requiring a passing soil percolation test.
The applicant has split off four two-acre tracts previously (located within the two out-parcels), for a total of seven two-acre tracts on this quarter section (160 acres). Staff would recommend APPROVAL of the waiver of Subdivision Regulations and of the lot-split.
Interested Parties Comments:
Bill Boone, 16036 West 21st Street, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74107, stated that he lives north and east of the subject property. Mr. Boone requested information regarding what the alternative system will be. He explained that anything that flows will flow across his property.
TMAPC Comments:
Mr. Ledford stated that the alternative method could be whatever the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality has approved. Tulsa County has adopted the DEQ standards and as long as the applicant meets these standards, then he doesn’t have to have the traditional septic system.
Mr. Westervelt advised Mr. Boone that he should contact the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality regarding the alternative system.
Mr. Boyle advised Mr. Boone that he could contact his County Commissioner and discuss this issue.
TMAPC Action; 8 members present:
On MOTION of BOYLE TMAPC voted 8-0-0 (Boyle, Collins, Harmon, Hill, Jackson, Ledford, Pace, Westervelt "aye"; no "nays"; none ”abstaining"; Carnes, Harmon, Midget "absent") to APPROVE the waiver of Subdivision Regulations and the lot-split as recommended by staff.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
LOT-SPLITS FOR RATIFICATION OF PRIOR APPROVAL:
L-19116 – Albert E. Williams (2003) (PD-2) (CD-3)
3409 North Florence
L-19137 – Donald P. England
(773) (PD-21) (County)
2012 East 131st
Street South
L-19146 – City of Tulsa (294) (PD-17) (CD-6)
17401 East 11th
Street
L-19147 – City of Tulsa (294) (PD-17) (CD-6)
17117 East 11th
Street
Staff Recommendation:
Mr. Bruce stated that everything is in order and staff recommends APPROVAL of these lot-splits.
There were no interested parties wishing to speak.
TMAPC Action; 8 members present:
On MOTION of BOYLE, the TMAPC voted 8-0-0 (Boyle, Collins, Harmon, Hill, Jackson, Ledford, Pace, Westervelt "aye"; no "nays"; none ”abstaining"; Carnes, Horner, Midget "absent") to RATIFY these lot-splits given prior approval, finding them in accordance with Subdivision Regulations as recommended by staff.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
FINAL PLAT:
Cedar Ridge Park (PUD-628/Z-6467-SP-4) (PD-18) (CD-8)
Northeast corner of South Mingo and Highway 169
Staff Recommendation:
Mr. Bruce stated that all release letters have been received and everything is in order; therefore, staff recommends APPROVAL of the final plat for Cedar Ridge Park.
There were no interested parties wishing to speak.
TMAPC Action; 8 members present:
On MOTION of BOYLE TMAPC voted 8-0-0 (Boyle, Collins, Harmon, Hill, Jackson, Ledford, Pace, Westervelt "aye"; no "nays"; none ”abstaining"; Carnes, Horner, Midget "absent") to APPROVE the final plat for Cedar Ridge Park as recommended by staff.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Mr. Midget in at 1:37 p.m.
Mr. Ledford announced that he
will be abstaining from the following item.
Phillips 66 Centre No. 57348 (PUD-569) (PD-18) (CD-8)
Southeast corner of 81st Street and Highway 169
Staff Recommendation:
Mr. Bruce stated that all release letters have been received and everything is in order; therefore, staff recommends APPROVAL of the final plat for Phillips 66 Centre No. 57348.
There were no interested parties wishing to speak.
TMAPC Action; 9 members present:
On MOTION of BOYLE TMAPC voted 8-0-1 (Boyle, Collins, Harmon, Hill, Jackson, Midget, Pace,
Westervelt "aye"; no "nays"; Ledford ”abstain";
Carnes, Horner "absent") to APPROVE the final plat for Phillips 66 Centre No.
57348 as recommended by staff.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
PRELIMINARY PLAT:
Woodland Valley Office
Park (PUD 397 – B) (PD-18)
(CD-7)
South of the southeast corner of East 61st Street South and South 91st East Avenue
Staff Recommendation:
The site is bounded on the east, south and northwest by vacant land. South 90th East Avenue bounds the west with a portion of the parcel abutting 61st Street in the north. Single-family residential development is to the west across 90th Avenue.
The site is bounded by unplatted land to the northeast, Blocks 4 and 5 of the Gleneagles development to the east, unplatted land to the south (the remainder of the PUD). A bank is located to the northwest.
The PUD contains four separate Development Areas, Areas A through E. It appears that this plat lies in portions of Areas B, C and D.
The proposed use will be office.
The site is bounded on the west by 90th East Avenue and on the north by 61st Street South. Access will be to 90th East Avenue and 61st Street South. East 61st Street is a secondary arterial. The plat indicates 50’ of right-of-way on the south side of the centerline.
The internal system ends in hammerhead turnarounds at the eastern and southern boundaries.
The site is bounded by a water line along the east side of 90th East Avenue.
The site is bisected by an east/west sewer line in the northern third of the site.
The plat indicates a drainage easement along the south side of 61st Street.
A 17.5’ utility easement bounds the property on the south and east and along a portion of the northern boundary.
1. Streets
and Access:
·
Eshelman,
Traffic, discussed the use of hammerheads on public streets, indicating that additional
review was required prior to approval of a layout. Discussion occurred
regarding the use of an “eyebrow” rather than hammerhead in the northeast.
·
Somdecerff,
Streets, indicated that book and page reference should be provided for the 61st
Street ROW.
·
Calkins, Fire,
indicated that 300’ was the maximum length for a hammerhead. Anything over 300’ needed a cul-de-sac.
(Note: the preliminary plat
has been amended to include an “eyebrow” rather than a hammerhead.)
2. Sewer:
·
Bolding,
Wastewater, indicated that the line on the east could not be tapped and that a
new sanitary sewer line would have to run to the south. Additional easements
would be required.
3. Water:
·
Lee, Water,
indicated that the hammerhead would be preferable to the cul-de-sac, but that the
line could be looped and that a cul-de-sac was acceptable.
4. Storm
Drainage:
·
McCormick,
Stormwater: no comment
5. Utilities:
·
No comment.
ADDITIONAL STAFF COMMENTS:
During review it became apparent that a large portion
of the plat was within portions of the PUD in which housing and apartments were
the approved land uses. The proposed
use of the lots being platted was office.
Since that time the PUD has been amended to allow office use in the
platted area.
At the meeting of April 4, 2000 the engineer (Sack) withdrew the plat
until such time as the PUD could be amended.
At that time the Commission indicated that the “current fees for the
preliminary plat shall be applied when the preliminary plat is re-filed and it
will not have to return to TAC”.
Mr. Sack has requested that the preliminary plat be reactivated and
heard by TMAPC; staff has amended the original application to address the
currently requested action.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of the preliminary plat subject to the following:
WAIVERS OF SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS:
1. None needed.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
1. Sanitary sewer line and easement to satisfaction of Public Works.
2. Turnarounds and cul-de-sac lengths to satisfaction of Public Works and Fire Department.
3. Dedications, restrictions and covenants in accordance with Section 1107F of the Zoning Code.
STANDARD CONDITIONS:
1. Utility easements shall meet the approval of the utilities. Coordinate with Subsurface Committee if underground plant is planned. Show additional easements as required. Existing easements shall be tied to or related to property line and/or lot lines.
2. Water and sanitary sewer plans shall be approved by the Public Works Department prior to release of final plat. (Include language for W/S facilities in covenants.)
3. Pavement or landscape repair within restricted water line, sewer line, or utility easements as a result of water or sewer line or other utility repairs due to breaks and failures, shall be borne by the owner(s) of the lot(s).
4. Any request for creation of a Sewer Improvement District shall be submitted to the Public Works Department prior to release of final plat.
5. Paving and/or drainage plans (as required) shall be approved by the Public Works Department.
6. Any request for a Privately Financed Public Improvement (PFPI) shall be submitted to the Public Works Department.
7. A topo map shall be submitted for review by TAC (Subdivision Regulations). (Submit with drainage plans as directed.)
8. Street names shall be approved by the Public Works Department and shown on plat.
9. All curve data, including corner radii, shall be shown on final plat as applicable.
10. Bearings, or true N/S, etc., shall be shown on perimeter of land being platted or other bearings as directed by the Public Works Department.
11. All adjacent streets, intersections and/or widths thereof shall be shown on plat.
12. It is recommended that the developer coordinate with the Public Works Department during the early stages of street construction concerning the ordering, purchase and installation of street marker signs. (Advisory, not a condition for plat release.)
13. It is recommended that the applicant and/or his engineer or developer coordinate with the Tulsa City/County Health Department for solid waste disposal, particularly during the construction phase and/or clearing of the project. Burning of solid waste is prohibited.
14. The owner(s) shall provide the following information on sewage disposal system if it is to be privately operated on each lot: type, size and general location. (This information to be included in restrictive covenants on plat.)
15. All lots, streets, building lines, easements, etc., shall be completely dimensioned.
16. The key or location map shall be complete.
17. A Corporation Commission letter, Certificate of Non-Development, or other records as may be on file, shall be provided concerning any oil and/or gas wells before plat is released. (A building line shall be shown on plat on any wells not officially plugged. If plugged, provide plugging records.)
18. A "Letter of Assurance" regarding installation of improvements shall be provided prior to release of final plat. (Including documents required under 3.6.5 Subdivision Regulations.)
19. Applicant is advised to of his responsibility to contact the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regarding Section 404 of the Clean Waters Act.
20. If the owner is a Limited Liability Corporation (L.L.C.), a letter from an attorney stating that the L.L.C. is properly organized to do business in Oklahoma is required.
21. All other Subdivision Regulations shall be met prior to release of final plat.
The applicant indicated his agreement with staff’s recommendation.
There were no interested parties wishing to speak.
TMAPC Action; 9 members present:
On MOTION of BOYLE TMAPC voted 9-0-0 (Boyle, Collins, Harmon, Hill, Jackson, Ledford, Midget,
Pace, Westervelt "aye"; no "nays"; none ”abstaining";
Carnes, Horner "absent") to APPROVE the preliminary plat for Woodland Valley
Office Park subject to special conditions and standard conditions as
recommended by staff.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Application No.: Z-6790 ol
to om
Applicant: Jeffrey Dunn (PD-18)
(CD-2)
Location: Northeast corner of East 74th
Street South and South Lewis Avenue
Staff Recommendation:
RELEVANT
ZONING HISTORY:
Z-6586 April 1997: A request to rezone the subject tract from RS-1 to CS in order to continue a martial arts school. All concurred in denial of CS and OL zoning was approved.
BOA-17635 April 1997: An appeal of the Code Enforcement official’s decision for the determination and the continued use of a non-conforming martial arts school on the subject tract. The Official’s decision was upheld.
Z-5942 May 1984: All concurred in approval of a request to rezone a one-acre tract located on the northeast corner of East 75th Street South and South Lewis Avenue from RS-1 to OM.
Z-5672/PUD-293 September 1983: A request to rezone a 2.5-acre tract located east of the northeast corner of East 75th Street South and South Lewis Avenue and abutting the subject tract on the southeast corner from RS-1 to RM-2 for multifamily use was denied. All concurred in approval of RD zoning of the property subject to a PUD being filed which would reduce the density of units to 26.
Z-5805/PUD-329 August 1983: All concurred in approval of a request to rezone the tract located south of the subject property on the southeast corner of East 74th Street and South Lewis Avenue from RS-1 to OM with a PUD for office development.
SITE ANALYSIS: The subject property is approximately one acre in size and is located on the northeast corner of East 74th Street South and South Lewis Avenue. The property is sloping, partially wooded, contains a vacant office building and is zoned OL.
STREETS:
Existing Access MSHP Design. Exist. No. Lanes Surface Curbs
South Lewis Avenue 100¢ 4 lanes Paved Yes
The Major Street Plan designates South Lewis Avenue as a secondary arterial street. The City of Tulsa 1998 – 1999 traffic counts indicate 27,500 trips per day on South Lewis Avenue at East 71st Street South.
UTILITIES: Water and sewer are available to the subject property.
SURROUNDING AREA: The subject tract is abutted on the north and east by condominiums, zoned RS-3/PUD-124; to the south by an office building, zoned OM/PUD329; and to the west across South Lewis Avenue by offices zoned OM.
RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The District 18 Plan, a part of the Comprehensive Plan for the Tulsa Metropolitan Area, designates the subject property as Low Intensity – No Specific Land Use.
According to the Zoning Matrix the requested OM is not in accordance with the Plan Map.
Based on existing development, trends in the area and the Comprehensive Plan, staff cannot support the requested OM for the subject site, and therefore recommends DENIAL of OM for Z-6790.
Ms. Matthews stated that if the Planning Commission should approve this application, then the Planning Commission should direct staff to prepare housekeeping amendments.
TMAPC Comments:
Mr. Westervelt asked why an OL/PUD wasn’t filed. In response, Ms. Matthews stated that it would be the applicant’s choice whether to file a PUD.
Mr. Stump stated that he is not sure what floor area ratio the applicant is seeking. He indicated that with a PUD the FAR could be up to a .4 FAR, and with OM it could be a .5 FAR.
Applicant’s Comments:
Jeffrey Dunn, 1723 East 71st, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74136, stated that the reason for not filing and OL/PUD application is because the FAR requirements for the OL district would not meet his needs. He explained that the OM district would allow him .5 FAR. He indicated that his client is planning to develop the subject property in a two-phase process.
Mr. Dunn stated that Phase I will be located on the northernmost portion of the subject property and it will be a single-story dental office complex. In the next few years his client proposes to develop a two-story facility on the southern portion of the subject property. The two-story proposal would not be allowed in the OL district. Mr. Dunn concluded that the height issues and the FAR requirements are the reasons for submitting this application as an OM zoning change.
Mr. Dunn stated that the FAR requirements and OL requirements would apply if he had filed a PUD with the OL underlying zoning and that would hinder his client’s development.
Mr. Dunn commented that he misunderstood and thought that the proposal was within the Comprehensive Plan and stems from the fact that the subject property is surrounded by more intensive uses. Mr. Dunn described the surrounding uses that he considered to be intensive.
Mr. Dunn stated that he has submitted information to the Esplanade Condominium Owner’s Association. He indicated that the President of the Esplanade Condominium Owner’s Association is in favor of the subject project.
There were no interested parties wishing to speak.
TMAPC Comments:
Mr. Boyle stated that he understands staff’s objections to the proposal, but given the uses in the subject area, OM is probably an appropriate use.
TMAPC Action; 9 members present:
On MOTION
of BOYLE, the TMAPC voted 8-1-0 (Boyle, Collins, Harmon, Hill,
Jackson, Ledford, Midget, Pace "aye"; Westervelt "nay";
none ”abstaining"; Carnes, Horner "absent") to recommend APPROVAL of the OM zoning for Z-6790 as requested and direct staff to amend the
Comprehensive Plan.
Legal Description for Z-6790:
Beginning at the Southwest corner
of the NW/4, NW/4, Section 8, T-18-N, R-13-E of the IBM, Tulsa County, State of
Oklahoma, according to the U. S. Government survey thereof; thence North along
the West line of said Section 8, 165¢;
thence East 264¢;
thence South 165¢;
thence West 264¢ to
the Point of Beginning, less the West 35¢ thereof, From OL
(Office Low Intensity District) To OM (Office Medium Intensity District).
* * * * * * * * * * * *
ZONING PUBLIC HEARING
Application No.: cz-273 rs
to cs
Applicant: John D. Bishop (PD-9)
(County)
Location: Northeast
corner of West 31st Street South and South 65th West
Avenue
Staff Recommendation:
RELEVANT
ZONING HISTORY:
CBOA-1192 November 1993: The County Board of Adjustment approved a special exception to permit a church and accessory uses that included five care home units and two existing dwellings. The property is located on the northwest corner of West 31st Street South and South 57th West Avenue.
CBOA-946 January 1990: The County Board of Adjustment approved a special exception to permit an addition to the existing Berryhill School located at 3128 South 63rd West Avenue and north of the subject tract. The property is zoned RS and AG.
CZ-186 December 1990: A request to rezone a three-acre tract located west of the southwest corner of West 21st Street and South 49th West Avenue from RS to IH or CH was denied. IL zoning was approved.
SITE ANALYSIS: The subject property is approximately .86 acre in size and is located on the northeast corner of West 31st Street South and South 65th West Avenue. The property is flat, partially wooded, contains a convenience store that has operated on the property for many years, and is zoned RS.
STREETS:
Existing Access MSHP Design. Exist. No. Lanes Surface Curbs
South 65th West Avenue 100¢ 2 lanes Paved No
West 31st Street South 100¢ 2 lanes Paved No
The Major Street Plan designates South 65th West Avenue and West 31st Street South as secondary arterial streets. The Tulsa County Traffic Counts 1993 – 1994 indicate 3,556 trips per day on South 65th West Avenue at West 31st Street South.
UTILITIES: Water is available to the subject property and sewer is by septic systems.
SURROUNDING AREA: The subject tract is abutted on the north, south and east by public schools, zoned RS and AG; and to the west by single-family dwellings and agricultural land, zoned AG and RS.
RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The District 9 Plan, a part of the Comprehensive Plan for the Tulsa Metropolitan Area, designates the subject property as Low Intensity – Residential.
According to the Zoning Matrix the requested CS is not in accordance with the Plan Map.
Although the Comprehensive Plan does not support commercial zoning on the subject tract, the subject property is located in an area that fits the definition of a Type I Node within the Development Guidelines. As noted previously, the convenience store has operated on the site for some time. Based on that fact and its location at the intersection of two secondary arterial streets, staff can support the rezoning of CZ-273 and therefore recommends APPROVAL of CS zoning.
If TMAPC is inclined to find CS zoning to be appropriate, staff should be directed to prepare appropriate amendments to the District 9 Plan.
The applicant
indicated his agreement with staff’s recommendation.
There were no interested parties wishing to speak.
TMAPC Action; 9 members present:
On MOTION of MIDGET, the
TMAPC voted 9-0-0 (Boyle, Collins,
Harmon, Hill, Jackson, Ledford, Midget, Pace, Westervelt "aye"; no
"nays"; none ”abstaining"; Carnes, Horner "absent") to
recommend APPROVAL the CS zoning for CZ-273 as recommended by
staff and direct staff to prepare appropriate amendments to the District 9
Plan.
Legal Description for CZ-273:
Beginning 245¢ N and 35¢ E of the southwest corner SW/4, thence South on curve 78.5¢, thence E 47.4¢ S on curve 164.7¢ S 50¢ N 231.16¢ W 257.16¢ S 100¢ to Beginning Section 17, T-19-N, R-12-E, Tulsa County State of Oklahoma From RS (Residential Single-family District) To CS (Commercial Shopping Center District).
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Application No.: CZ-274 AG
to re
Applicant: Louis F. DeSilvio (PD-14)
(County)
Location: Northeast
corner of East 176th Street North and North 129th East
Avenue
Staff Recommendation:
RELEVANT
ZONING HISTORY:
CBOA-1590 July 1998: The County Board of Adjustment approved a variance of the setback from the abutting street (North 129th East Avenue) from 85¢ to 45¢ on the subject property in order to construct a single-family dwelling.
CBOA-1570 May 1998: The County Board of Adjustment denied a request for variances of the lot area, land area, average lot width and size to allow a lot-split to create four tracts on the subject tract.
SITE ANALYSIS: The subject property is approximately 9.3 acres in size and is located on the northeast corner of East 176th Street North and North 129th East Avenue. The property is sloping, partially wooded, contains a single-family dwelling, and is zoned AG.
STREETS:
Existing Access MSHP Design. Exist. No. Lanes Surface Curbs
East 176th St. North 100’ 2 lanes Paved No
North 129th East Avenue 100’ 2 lanes Paved No
The Major Street Plan designates East 176th Street North and North 129th East Avenue as secondary arterial streets.
UTILITIES: Rural Water District 3, Washington County serves water in this area and sewer is by private septic systems.
SURROUNDING AREA: The subject tract is abutted on the north, south, and east by vacant property, zoned AG and to the west and southwest by scattered single-family dwellings, zoned AG.
RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The District 14 Plan, a part of the Collinsville Comprehensive Plan, designates the subject property as` Rural Residential - Agriculture.
The Collinsville Comprehensive Plan Intensity Policies state that development in Rural Residential areas is recommended to be non-urban or large-lot residential uses. The Collinsville Planner has submitted a letter supporting the rezoning, and therefore the TMAPC staff recommends APPROVAL of RE zoning for CZ-274.
Applicant’s Comments:
Louis DeSilvio, 17707 North 129th East Avenue, Collinsville, Oklahoma 74021, stated that before the Planning Commission approves this application he wanted to make sure he was on the right track. He explained that his family has owned the subject property for 60 to 70 years. He stated that he would like to give his children a piece of the ground in order to build homes on the subject property.
Mr. DeSilvio cited the various applications he has filed and that have been denied in the past. He commented that he could have saved expenses if he had been granted a waiver.
TMAPC Comments:
Mr. Westervelt stated that the Planning Commission has no authority to grant a waiver.
Mr. Boyle stated that the Planning Commission could grant the request before them today.
Mr. Midget informed Mr. DeSilvio that the only action the Planning Commission can consider today is what is advertised and before the Planning Commission today. In response, Mr. DeSilvio stated he understands the Planning Commission can only consider what is before them today.
Mr. Boyle asked Mr. DeSilvio if he wanted the Planning Commission to act on today’s request. In response, Mr. DeSilvio answered affirmatively.
There were no interested parties wishing to speak.
TMAPC Action; 9 members present:
On MOTION of MIDGET, the
TMAPC voted 9-0-0 (Boyle, Collins,
Harmon, Hill, Jackson, Ledford, Midget, Pace, Westervelt "aye"; no
"nays"; none ”abstaining"; Carnes, Horner "absent") to
recommend APPROVAL of RE zoning for CZ-274 as recommended by
staff.
Legal Description for CZ-274:
The West Half of the West Half of
the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 4, T-22-N, R-14-E, of
the IBM, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma, and located on the northeast corner
of East 176th Street North and North 129th East Avenue,
Tulsa, Oklahoma, From AG (Agriculture
District) To RE (Residential Single-family, Estate District).
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Application No.: pud-602-3 minor
amendment
Applicant: Eric G. Sack/Sack
and Associates (PD-18)
(CD-8)
Location: Northeast
corner of East 71st Street South and South 109th East
Avenue
Staff Recommendation:
The applicant is requesting a minor amendment to allow a lot-split and reallocation of floor area for Lot 2, Block 1, Eastside Market.
The approved subdivision plat in accordance with the PUD allows a maximum of 20,000 square feet of floor area for Lot 2, Block 1. The proposed allocation of floor area for each new lot will be a maximum floor area of 10,000 square feet. Tract “A” Abuelo’s restaurant, and Tract “B” Carrabba’s restaurant, will each have a 10,000 square foot floor area allocation.
The current standards allow one ground sign for each lot along the East 71st Street South frontage so there will be one additional ground sign permitted for the new lot to be created.
All other Planned Unit Development standards remain as approved for PUD-602.
Staff has reviewed the proposal and standards, especially in regard to setbacks, access, height, permitted uses, parking and floor area. Staff can recommend APPROVAL of the allocation of floor area as requested. The following conditions need to be approved for the proposal to create two new tracts:
1. The landscaped area for each individual tract needs to meet the 10% requirement for landscaping, number and spacing of trees per the PUD;
2. Mutual access and cross-parking agreements need to be filed to assure proper ingress and egress; each lot needs to have sufficient parking unless a common parking area is established;
3. Maintenance of the parking areas needs to be assured by each of the individual lot owners;
4. Subdivision Deeds of Dedication and Restriction need to be revised to the new approved standards;
5. The existing platted access points will be the only access points permitted.
Original site plan approval will have to be voided if these conditions are not met per the original PUD approval and no lot-split approved until the landscaping areas are per the PUD.
The applicant
indicated his agreement with staff’s recommendation.
There were no interested parties wishing to speak.
TMAPC Action; 9 members present:
On MOTION of BOYLE TMAPC voted 9-0-0 (Boyle, Collins, Harmon, Hill, Jackson, Ledford, Midget,
Pace, Westervelt "aye"; no "nays"; none ”abstaining";
Carnes, Horner "absent") to APPROVE the minor amendment of PUD-602-3 subject to
conditions as recommended by staff.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Application No.: PUD-567-C-3 Minor amendment
Applicant: William LaFortune (PD-18)
(CD-8)
Location: Southeast corner of East 71st and
South 109th East Avenue
Staff Recommendation:
The applicant has requested a minor amendment to Planned Unit Development
567-C to add a ground sign in Tract C-3 for a hotel to be constructed in Tract B of Development Area C. Tract C-3 will contain an Arco convenience store and gas station.
The application, which has been verbally amended to withdraw the amendment to sign height (item # 3), requests the following minor amendment:
1. To allow one additional ground sign on Tract C-3, limited to 40 square feet of display surface area and a height of five feet;
2. To allow a maximum of 179 square feet of display surface area for all ground signs to be located in Tract C-3;
3. To allow one of the ground signs to be 34 feet in height on Tract C-3.
The approved PUD allows one ground sign for each lot along the East 71st Street frontage with a maximum of 160 square feet of display surface area and a maximum of 25 feet in height.
Staff cannot support the original request to allow a 34-foot ground sign. Staff can support and recommends APPROVAL of a maximum of two ground signs on tract C-3 of Development Area C. One sign would have a maximum height of five feet and maximum display surface area of 40 square feet and would be for the exclusive use of the hotel to be constructed on tract B of Development Area C and the other sign would have a maximum height of 25 feet and a maximum