COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Tuesday,
July 16, 2002, 1:30 p.m.
|
Alberty,
Chair |
Tyndall |
Butler |
West,
Zoning Insp. |
|
Dillard,
Vice Chair |
|
Fernandez |
Blakely,
D.A. |
|
Walker |
|
|
|
|
Hutson |
|
|
|
The notice
and agenda of said meeting were posted in the Office of INCOG, 201 W.
5th St., Suite 600, Thursday, July 11, 2002 at 12:20 a.m., as well as
at the City Clerks office, City Hall.
After
declaring a quorum present, Chair Alberty called the meeting to order at 1:32
p.m.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
MINUTES:
On MOTION of Walker, the Board voted 4-0-0 (Alberty,
Dillard, Walker Hutson "aye"; no "nays", no "abstentions; Tyndall "absent") to
APPROVE the Minutes of June
18, 2002 (No. 265).
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Amendment of an approved site plan to permit a 24 x 60 temporary
classroom, and a permanent classroom addition, located 13413 E. 106th
St. N.
Presentation:
Mr.
Beach announced that the area where the temporary classroom was to be located
was not included in the notice.
Therefore, the notice is not valid and the case could not be heard until
a future meeting.
Interested
Parties:
One
interested party was present and stated he would come back when the case comes
before the Board again.
Board
Action:
On
MOTION
of Walker,
the Board voted 4-0-0 (Alberty, Walker, Dillard, Hutson "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Tyndall "absent") to CONTINUE
Case No. 1984 to a future meeting, for correct advertising of this
case.
A tract of land that is part of the SE/4 SW/4 of Section 9, T-21-N,
R-14-E, of the IBM, starting at the SW/c of the SE/4 SW/4 of said Section 9;
thence N 88°4440 E along the Sly line of said Section 9
for 390.00; thence N 01°1358 W and parallel with the Wly line of
the SE/4 SW/4 for 71.42 to the POB of said tract of land; thence continuing N
01°1358 W and parallel with the Wly line of
said SE/4 SW/4 for 1002.52; thence N 88°4437 E for 593.73; thence S 11°1259 W, parallel with and 100.00 Wly of as
measured perpendicular to the Wly right-of-way line of US-169 for 372.31 to the
NE/c of Lot 1, Block 1, Owasso Freewill Baptist Church, thence S 88°4437 W along the Nly line of said Lot 1 for
453.47 to the NW/c of Lot 1; thence S 01°13 58 E along the Wly line of Lot 1 for
633.00 to the SW/c of Lot 1; thence S 83°0202 W along the Nly right-of-way line of
US-169 W exit ramp for 60.30 to the POB of said tract of land; AND a tract of
land beg. at the SW/c of the SE/4 SW/4 of said Section; thence N 88°4440 E and along the S line of said SE/4
SW/4 a distance of 175.93; thence N 1°1520 W a distance of 50.00; thence N
83°0152 E a distance of 215.16; thence N
1°1358 W a distance of 1002.52; thence S
88°4437 W a distance of 390.02 to the W line
of the SE/4 SW/4; thence S 1°1358 E a distance of 1073.93 to the POB;
AND a tract of land beg. at a point 1073.93 N of the SW/c of the SE/4 SW/4 and
on the W line of said SE/4 SW/4 thence N 88°4437 E a distance of 983.75 to a point
100.00 W of and at a right angle to the W line of US-169; thence N
11°1716 E a distance of 74.14; thence N
3°1537 E a distance of 605.72; thence N
1°1803 W a distance of 249.65; thence S
88°4437 W a distance of 1046.98 to a point on
the W line of said E/2 SW/4; thence S 1°1358 E a distance of 929.36 to the POB,
Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*
UNFINISHED
BUSINESS
Action
Requested:
Variance of the required 30 frontage on a public street to 0 for lot
split. SECTION 207. STREET FRONTAGE REQUIRED Use Unit 6,
located SE/c of W. 43rd St. & S. 61st W. Ave.
Mr.
Beach reminded the Board this case was on the last agenda and the Board
continued the case for the completion of a subdivision plat.
Presentation:
Stuart Arnold, 4403 S.
61st W. Ave., stated that Bryce and Associates were doing the
preliminary plat. They informed him
they needed a sketch plat first, so the subdivision plat is not completed. He informed the Board that he wants to
build a house on Lot 1 and the plat really does not have any bearing on this
application. He has obtained a lot
split and the re-zoning has already been approved. A site plan was provided (Exhibit
A-1).
Comments and
Questions:
Mr.
Alberty asked if he had a document for filing the easement. Mr. Arnold stated he had one for a 30
easement, not filed yet. Mr. Walker
pointed out the need for the road to be brought up to specifications of the
county before the county would maintain it. Mr. Alberty informed the applicant that
he would have to maintain it if the county does not.
Interested
Parties:
There
were no interested parties who wished to speak.
Board
Action:
On
MOTION
of Hutson,
the Board voted 4-0-0 (Alberty, Walker, Dillard, Hutson "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Tyndall "absent") to APPROVE
a Variance of the
required 30 frontage on a public street to 0 for lot split, with condition for
a 30 mutual access easement filed of record, finding there is not a way to
dedicate the street except through filing of a mutual access easement, on the
following described property:
Access Easement: The E 30 of the following tract of land: E/2 SE/4 SW/4
NW/4, Section 29, T-19-N, R-12-E, Tulsa County, State of OK; and the W 30 of
the following tract of land: Tract A1: The N 200.00 of the S 526.00 W 450.00
SE/4 NW/4 of Section 29, T-19-N, R-12-E of the IBM, less and except the N 6.00
of the E 14.22 thereof; AND Tract B: the N 200.00 of the S 266.00 W 450.00
of the SE/4 NW/4 of Section 29, T-19-N, R-12-E, of the IBM; AND Tract C: 3
Tracts of land in the SE/4 NW/4 of Section 29, T-19-N, R-12-E of the IBM, being
more particularly described as follow, to-wit: Beg. at a point 66.00 N of the
SE/c of SE/4 NW/4; thence N a distance of 454.00 to a point; thence due W a
distance of 884.00; thence due N a distance of 300.00; thence due W a distance
of 435.78 to a point on the W line of said SE/4 NW/4; thence due S along the W
line of said SE/4 NW/4 a distance of 754.00 to a point 66.00 N of the SW/c of
said SE/4 NW/4; thence E and parallel to the S line of said SE/4 NW/4 to a point
and POB; AND Beg. at a point 800.00 S of the NE/c and on the E line of said
SE/4 NW/4; thence Wly parallel to the N line of said SE/4 NW/4 a distance of
884.00 to a point; thence Nly parallel to the E line of said SE/4 NW/4 a
distance of 100.00 to a point; thence Ely parallel to the N line of said SE/4
NW/4 a distance of 884.00 to a point; thence Sly along the E line of said SE/4
NW/4 a distance of 100.00 to the POB; AND commencing at the NE/c of said SE/4
NW/4; thence S along the E line a distance of 500.00 to a point; thence W on a
line parallel to the N line of said SE/4 NW/4 a distance of 884.00 to the POB;
thence continuing along said line a distance of 437.61; thence N on a line
parallel to the E line of said SE/4 NW/4 a distance of 100.00; thence E and
parallel to the N line of said SE/4 NW/4 a distance of 437.61; thence S a
distance of 100.00 to the POB, less and except the E 1291.61 of the N 100.00
of the S 615.00 of the N 1015.00 thereof, less and except: The N 200.00 of
the S 526.00 of the W 450.00 of the SE/4 NW/4 and less and except the N
200.00 of the S 266.00 of the W 450.00 of the SE/4 NW/4 of Section 29,
T-19-N, R-12-E, of the IBM, Tulsa County, State of OK.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance of average lot width in the AG district from 150 to 144.64 and
150 to 111.84. SECTION 330. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE
AGRICULTURE DISTRICTS Use Unit 6; a Variance of required side yard in the AG
district from 15 to 11. SECTION
330. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN
THE AGRICULTURE DISTRICTS; a Variance of land area per dwelling unit from 2.1
acres to 1.93 acres. SECTION
330. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN
THE AGRICULTURE DISTRICTS; and a Variance of lot area from 2 acres to 1.83
acres. SECTION 330. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE
AGRICULTURE DISTRICTS, located 10316 E. 126th St. N.
Presentation:
Richard True, 10316 E. 126th St. N., stated the owners
propose to place a doublewide mobile home on the property. The existing home needs a variance on
the west side yard.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr.
Alberty stated that the lot width is what the Board is concerned about. Mr. Alberty asked about the site for the
new home. Mr. True replied it would
be on the backside of the property where the handle stops.
Interested
Parties:
Steve
Schuller,
500 OneOak Plaza, stated he represented John and Judy Dicks, the owners of the
property to the south. They are
opposed to the application. It is
an AG zoned area, though in character is rural residential. Mr. Schuller indicated there was no
hardship peculiar to this property.
He stated this would increase the density of this
area.
Applicants
Rebuttal:
Mr.
True stated the neighbor to the east has two mobile homes and two septic systems
on the same amount of property.
The
Board went into review session.
Mr.
True asked to speak again. Mr.
Hutson recognized him. Mr. True
stated that the width of the property did not meet the requirement when he
purchased the lot. He added that it
is a very narrow lot. He added that
if he split off the property in the back it would be landlocked.
Mr.
Schuller responded that the aerial and site plan show that it is not a narrow
lot. It is 175 wide and that is
wider than Mr. Schullers city lot, which is a very big lot. Mr. Schuller noted that the zoning code
was just changed to allow a lot of 150 from the previous 200.
Board
Action:
On
MOTION
of Hutson,
the Board voted 3-1-0 (Walker, Dillard, Hutson "aye"; Alberty "nay"; no
"abstentions"; Tyndall "absent") to APPROVE
a
Variance of required side yard in the AG district from 15 to 11;
and to DENY a
Variance of average lot width in the AG district from 150
to 144.64 and 150 to 111.84; a Variance of land area per
dwelling unit from 2.1 acres to 1.93 acres; and a Variance of lot
area from 2 acres to 1.83 acres, finding there is an existing dwelling and the
zoning code has been changed to require a greater
setback, on the following described property:
A tract of land being a part of Government Lot 3, lying in the NE/4 NW/4
of Section 6, T-21-N, R-14-E of the IBM, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma, being
more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the NE/c NW/4 NE/4 of
Section 6; thence N 89°2738 W a distance of 1463.56 to the POB;
thence N 89°2738 W a distance of 174.64 to a point;
thence S 00°0332 W a distance of 1322.38 to a point;
thence S 89°3442 E a distance of 174.57 to a point;
thence N 00°0342.51 E a distance of 1322.02 to the
POB.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Use
Variance to permit auto repair in an AG district. SECTION 310. PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED IN
THE AGRICULTURE DISTRICTS Use Unit 17, located 6123 E. 181st St.
S.
Presentation:
Todd Reynolds, 6123 E. 181st St. S., stated he wanted
to get in compliance with the zoning code.
He has a hobby of restoring cars, one at a time and he proposes to build
a business out of it.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr.
Alberty asked how many vehicles he would work on at any one time. Mr. Reynolds replied there would
probably be at the most, six vehicles other than his own on the property at one
time. They are inside where
they cant be seen and they are his vehicles.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr.
Alberty informed the applicant that to have this operation as a business it
requires a general commercial zoning.
He asked Mr. Reynolds if he was asking the Board to consider this as a
small-scale operation. Mr. Reynolds
responded that he didnt want any more cars than he has now. He submitted photographs to the Board
(Exhibit B-1). Mr. Alberty asked
him if he has an advertising sign, to which he replied in the affirmative. Mr. Reynolds stated he has been
doing restoration of vehicles for seven to eight years and the sign has been up
about three to four years. Mr.
Alberty determined that a complaint had been made to the County Inspections
office. He questioned Mr. Reynolds
about a hardship for the variance.
Interested
Parties:
Connie Woodson, 5707
E. 181st St. S., stated she is preparing to build a home adjoining to
Mr. Reynolds property.
She submitted a packet of information and
photographs (Exhibit B-2). She
pointed out that he has a quonset hut where most of the vehicles are kept. Ms. Woodson informed the Board that her
family has owned their property since 1955. The land has been used for conservation
purposes and farming. She and her
husband are restocking the pond and replanting a lot of Oklahoma
vegetation. They were concerned
that the project might become a salvage, which they would see from two sides of
their house. They did not want a
problem with more snakes or rodents.
She stated that it appears it wont be a salvage yard.
Board
Action:
On
MOTION
of Hutson,
the Board voted 4-0-0 (Alberty, Walker, Dillard, Hutson "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Tyndall "absent") to DENY
a Use Variance to permit
auto repair in an AG district, finding it would cause substantial detriment to
the public good or impair the purposes, spirit, and intent of the Code, or
Comprehensive Plan, on the following described property:
SE SE less E/2, Section 34, T-17-N, R-13-E, Tulsa County, State of
Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Special Exception to allow a carport in the front yard. SECTION 240.2.H. YARDS, Permitted Yard
Obstructions Use Unit 6; and a Variance from the required 55 setback from the
centerline of the street to 31 for a carport and to 50 for a cover on an
existing sidewalk in a RS district.
SECTION 430.1. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, Bulk
and Area Requirements in the RE, RS, RD, and RM Districts, located 408 N. Loop
Dr.
Presentation:
Donald Mashburn, 408 Loop Dr., Sand Springs, Oklahoma, stated the
house is 53 from the centerline.
He proposes to build a carport to cover vehicles to protect from tree sap
and cover the sidewalk. He stated
some garages and a few carports have been built in the neighborhood. Some of the carports are closer to the
street than his would be. It would
be open-sided and less intrusive than the existing structures on the backside of
the same street.
Interested
Parties:
There
were no interested parties who wished to speak.
Board
Action:
On
MOTION
of Walker,
the Board voted 4-0-0 (Alberty, Walker, Dillard, Hutson "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Tyndall "absent") to APPROVE
a Special Exception to allow a
carport in the front yard; and a Variance from the required 55
setback from the centerline of the street to 31 for a carport and to 50 for a
cover on an existing sidewalk in a RS district, finding there are existing
structures that approximate the same request of the applicant, and that the
carport would be open on all sides, and not a permanent type structure, on the
following described property:
Lot 9, Block 4, Valley View Estates, Tulsa County, State of
Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance to permit a detached accessory building in the side yard. SECTION 420.2. ACCESSORY USES IN
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, Accessory Use Conditions Use Unit 6, located 12711 E.
134th St. S.
Presentation:
Steven Gray, 4530 S. Sheridan, Ste 205, stated he is the attorney
for Mr. and Mrs. Fred Fegaly. He
submitted a packet of exhibits (Exhibit C-1). He pointed out a petition with twelve
signatures of neighbors in support of the application. They replaced an old accessory building
that had been at the side of their house for over 20 years. The new one is only a little bit larger
and about one foot higher. They
contacted the City of Broken Arrow and were informed it was not in their
jurisdiction. They did not
realize they needed a building permit.
A complaint was made to the County Inspector and Mr. West informed them
of the error and what to do. They
have a pool that takes up a substantial portion of the back yard. They are on a septic system. There are other such accessory buildings
in the neighborhood. There is also
a ten-foot easement at the back of the yard that limits where they could place
the building. There really is
no other place to put the building with the existing placement of the sewer
lines. They are prepared to put in
landscaping as screening for the building.
No industrial activity is involved, just personal storage.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr.
Walker asked if the house has any additions. The drawing on the sketch layout
indicates there are fifteen feet out to the first lateral line and the applicant
has managed to fit in a pool, a small covered area and a deck.
Fred Fegaly, 12711 E 134th St. S., stated it is rather
tight. He explained when they put
in the pool they moved all the lateral lines back to the east. There are huge elm trees that screen
very well. Mr. Walker
responded that the lateral lines could always be rerouted.
Mr.
Walker questioned Mr. West about his findings. Mr. West stated the job was already done
before he received a complaint and inspected the property.
Interested
Parties:
There
were no interested parties who wished to speak.
Board
Action:
On
MOTION
of Dillard,
the Board voted 4-0-0 (Alberty, Walker, Dillard, Hutson "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Tyndall "absent") to APPROVE
a Variance to permit a
detached accessory building in the side yard, finding this is a replacement
structure that was legal when it was originally built, on the following
described property:
Lot 12, Block 2, Casa Real Estates, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance of the required 30 frontage on a public street to 0. SECTION 207. STREET FRONTAGE REQUIRED Use Unit 6,
located 4413 S. 61st W. Ave.
Presentation:
Jeff Dykes, 4748 S. 31st W. Ave., proposes to build a
home on the property. The
road dedication ends on 61st W. Ave. about two hundred feet from the
subject property.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr.
Alberty stated the zoning code requires access to a dedicated street to protect
property owners, or at least a mutual access easement. Mr. Dykes stated he had a right-of-way
easement that was filed at the courthouse. Mr. Alberty asked Mr. Dykes if he
was confident he had satisfied the requirement with a valid instrument filed of
record in the county courthouse.
Mr. Dykes replied in the affirmative.
Interested
Parties:
Windell Drake,
4401 S. 61st W. Ave., stated the existing road is his private drive
and there is too much traffic on it.
There is a drainage problem because the previous owner of the subject
property dug culverts that do not allow water to flow through so the road washes
out and flows into his front yard.
The septic system overflows and has drained into his pond. Mr. Drake did not believe the easement
is legally filed of record.
Board
Action:
On
MOTION
of Walker,
the Board voted 4-0-0 (Alberty, Walker, Dillard, Hutson "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Tyndall "absent") to CONTINUE
Case No. 1976 to the meeting on September 17, 2002, to allow him to meet with the neighbors regarding an
easement that would benefit all of them, on the following described
property:
Beg 600 S NE/c SE NW, thence W 884 N 165 W 407.61 N 35 E 1291.61 S
200 POB, Section 29, T-19-N, R-12-E, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Special Exception to allow a dog grooming business as a home occupation
in an RS district. SECTION
420.1. ACCESSORY USES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, Accessory Uses Permitted Use
Unit 13, located 12743 S. 124th E. Ave.
Presentation:
Kathleen Delisle, 12743 S.
124th E. Ave., proposes to have a dog grooming home occupation in her
garage. There was a complaint when
she put up a sign, which she took down.
Mr. West directed her to apply to the Board of Adjustment. She stated she did not board dogs. She limits herself to four dogs per day
maximum. She cleans and disinfects
thoroughly to prevent spreading diseases between animals. She went to the City of Broken Arrow and
they recommended approval of this application (Exhibit D-1).
Comments and
Questions:
Mr.
Alberty asked if she was familiar with the code regarding a home occupation and
she replied in the affirmative.
Mr. West stated that he had inspected the operation and found it would be
in compliance.
Interested
Parties:
There
were no interested parties who wished to speak.
Board
Action:
On
MOTION
of Hutson,
the Board voted 4-0-0 (Alberty, Walker, Dillard, Hutson "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Tyndall "absent") to APPROVE
a Special Exception to allow a
dog grooming business as a home occupation in an RS district, with a limit of
four dogs per day, finding 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 8, Block 9, Willow Springs Estates Addition, Tulsa County, State of
Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Special Exception to permit baseball and football playing fields in an AG
district. SECTION 310. PRINCIPAL
USES PERMITTED IN THE AGRICULTURE DISTRICT Use Unit 20; and a Variance to
allow a non-all-weather surface for parking. SECTION 1340.D. DESIGN STANDARDS FOR OFF-STREET PARKING
AREAS, located 13702 S. Garnett.
Presentation:
Byrne Webb, proposes to lease out the subject property for
baseball and football practice fields.
There are a limited number of practice fields in the Union School
District and Bixby School District.
The access for the site is on Garnett. The house that was on the property has
been removed. There is a cell tower
on the property. Most of the
activity would be Monday through Friday from 5:30 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., spring
through fall, no winter work.
There would be lights on the fields.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr.
Alberty determined from questioning Mr. Webb that this is a commercial venture
that would generate revenue.
He asked Mr. Webb for more information regarding the request for a
variance of parking surface. Mr.
Webb was concerned that an all-weather-surface could cause changes to the
hydrology. He stated if it rains
they would not be using the property.
Mr. Webb added that the football fields might double for soccer fields
also. Mr. Hutson asked about
proximity to residences. Mr. Webb
replied the closest residences are on 141st and there might be a
mobile on the north of Haikey Creek.
He described the work they have done to raise the elevation by two feet,
created a compensatory storage pond to the north and provided swells for a
better flow into Haikey Creek. They
checked with the Corp of Engineers and found that this use would be approved for
the floodway. There will not be any
development. Mr. Dillard asked if
there were plans for a snack shop or restroom facilities. Mr. Webb replied there would not be any
facilities in the floodway, maybe a portable restroom
unit.
Interested
Parties:
Paul Fehrenbacher, 8324 E. 117th St., Bixby, Oklahoma,
stated he is the President of Union Youth Football Association. The numbers of ball players
continue to grow, while the number of practice fields is decreasing. He stated they have not entered any
negotiations with Mr. Webb regarding money. Several groups of soccer, lacrosse, and
other ball teams have contacted them.
Lori Cole, 13220 S. Garnett, Broken Arrow, Oklahoma, stated she is
on the small parcel of land across from the housing addition. She informed the Board that from 7:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m. daily they are inundated with about ten dump trucks per hour
from the sand company and Haikey Creek Sewage. The access to the housing addition is
across the street from her home and her home is twenty-five feet from the
street. She was concerned the
visibility for traffic would be obstructed. She also expressed concern that the gas
meter and gas line near the road.
Kim Worthington, 13504 S. Garnett Road, stated she is on the
property north of the subject property on the other side of Haikey Creek. She had the same concerns as listed
above and the water runoff in the flood plain. At least three times in the last year
cars have lost control and ended up in their yard because of the condition of
the road. They have asked the
County to fix the road but they refuse to fix it as long as the trucks continue
running.
Brett Worthington, 13400 S. Garnett, stated that yards of property
are washed off into the creek. He
was very concerned about the flooding problems.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr.
Alberty asked Mr. Worthington how playing fields without pavement or structures
would increase the water flow. Mr.
Worthington replied that he saw this same type of problem happen off of
131st.
Monte
Carnes,
139 AG Hall, Stillwater, Oklahoma, stated he is the Division Engineer Facilities
Coordinator for the Division of Agricultural Sciences and Natural
Resources. He stated they have the
property immediately to the west of the subject property, which is the
experiment station. He informed the
Board that the east end of their property is used for soybean research, the
primary site in Oklahoma. He
explained that soybeans are very sensitive to light. He submitted photographs (Exhibit
E-1). The light makes a big
difference in when the soybeans come to maturity. Additional light would interfere with
the research, and there is no other place to relocate on this station. They have no objection to the use but to
any additional lighting.
Joe
McCormick,
601 Park Tower, 5314 S. Yale, stated he represented Carol Boles and Bert and
Cheryl Boles. The Boles farm their
land. He submitted photographs and
a map (Exhibits E-2 and E-3). He
noted the subject property is in a fragile area. He was concerned there has been a lot of
digging and moving soil already. He
pointed out that the applicant has laid soil on top of vegetation to build up
the fields. He stated when you do
this in a floodway it is just like pouring it on cardboard. When it rains the flooding will wash all
of the soil onto his clients property.
Mr. Walker
left at 3:35 p.m., not to return to this meeting.
He
indicated that they were operating without a permit, and even after they
received notice they continued to operate.
He predicted that the pit and ditches they built would become part of the
creek, causing the water to flow backwards and erode the land. Mr. McCormick indicated the applicant
had not stated a hardship, and there was no hardship.
Applicants
Rebuttal:
Mr.
Webb responded there is a significant tree line that would block the
lights. They plan to use anti-spill
shields on the lights and they point north and south not east and west. There is a full forty acres between the
field with lights and the soybean field. He informed the Board that a
hydrology report was done on the property, and they are working with Ray Jordan
and Terry West to plan everything in compliance. The dirt was moved with a development
permit.
Board
discussion ensued.
Board
Action:
On
MOTION
of Hutson,
the Board voted 3-0-0 (Alberty, Dillard, Hutson "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Walker, Tyndall "absent") to APPROVE
a Special Exception to permit
baseball and football playing fields in an AG district, with conditions to limit
lighting to the east 650 only, for two football fields on plan submitted; and
the lights hooded to light the playing fields only, finding 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 a
Variance to allow a non-all-weather surface for parking, finding
it will not cause substantial detriment to the public good or impair the
purposes, spirit, and intent of the Code, or Comprehensive Plan, on the
following described property:
The E 55 acres of the N/2 SE/4 of
Section 7, T-17-N, R-14-E of the IBM, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Chairman Alberty called
a recess at 4:05 p.m.
Chairman Alberty called
the meeting to order at 4:13 p.m.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*
Action
Requested:
Use
Variance to permit the keeping and raising of exotic animals in an RS
district. SECTION 410. PRINCIPAL
USES PERMITTED IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. Use Unit 3, located 309 S.
71st W. Ave.
Presentation:
Bill Allison, 309 S. 71st W. Ave., for the applicant,
asked for a continuance because the Board was down to three members at this
point.
Board
Action:
On
MOTION
of
Hutson,
the Board voted 3-0-0 (Alberty, Dillard, Hutson "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Walker, Tyndall "absent") to CONTINUE
Case No. 1980 to the meeting on August 20, 2002.
S/2 Lot 13, less S 12 to Highway, Block 4, Twin Cities, Tulsa County,
State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance of the required setback for a barn from 15 required side
setback to 10 and from required 40 on rear to 10. SECTION 330. BULK AND AREA REQUIREMENTS IN THE
AGRICULTURE DISTRICTS Use Unit 6, located 4704 E. 181st St. S.
Presentation:
Otto Dorris, 4704 E. 181st S., Bixby, Oklahoma, stated
that last year he obtained a building permit for a barn. He found that the pond would be in the
way of the site he had chosen and so he needed the variance of the
setbacks. He added that the only
other possible location was in the front yard and he did not want a barn in the
front yard.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr.
Alberty asked if the neighbors were in support of the plan, to which Mr. Dorris
replied in the affirmative. Mr.
Dillard asked if they were going to have animals. Mr. Dorris said they were not going to
have animals in the barn. Mr.
Dillard asked if it would be a pole barn.
Mr. Dorris described the proposed structure to have a concrete floor and
a stick-built construction.
Interested
Parties:
There
were no interested parties who wished to speak.
Board
Action:
On
MOTION
of Hutson,
the Board voted 3-0-0 (Alberty, Dillard, Hutson "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Walker, Tyndall "absent") to APPROVE
a Variance
of required setback for a barn from 40 on rear to 10, finding the pond to be a
physical factor and a precedent was set on neighboring property; and to
DENY
a Variance
of the required setback for a barn from 15 required side setback to 10,
finding it would cause substantial detriment to the public good or impair the
purposes, spirit, and intent of the Code, or Comprehensive Plan, on the
following described property:
Part Government Lot 1, Beg. 353.46 W NE/c thence S 308.72 W 306.72 N
308.8 E 306.54 to POB less N 50 and E 35.04 thereof, Tulsa County, State of
Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Special Exception to allow the keeping and raising of exotic animals
(camel, kangaroos) in an AG zoned district. SECTION 340.E. REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES
IN THE AGRICULTURE DISTRICTS Use Unit 3, located 17242 S. Memorial.
Presentation:
Leslie Ellis Kissinger, 419 W. Patti Page, Claremore, Oklahoma,
submitted two letters and photographs (Exhibit F-1, F-2, and F-3). She stated that Ms. Williams owns the
subject property. Ms. Williams has
a camel and six adult kangaroos.
The kangaroos need quiet, tranquil surroundings, which is one reason she
moved to this place. The
kangaroos are not a danger to the public.
She has been inspected and is finishing the process for USDA
licensing. Ms. Williams received
notice of violation of the zoning code and applied to the Board of Adjustment
for a Special Exception.
Kaye Williams, 17242 S. Memorial, stated she has applied to the
USDA to sell joeys. She informed
the Board that each kangaroo has one joey per year and rarely they may have
twins.
Interested
Parties:
There
were no interested parties who wished to speak.
Board
Action:
On
MOTION
of Dillard,
the Board voted 3-0-0 (Alberty, Dillard, Hutson "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Walker, Tyndall "absent") to APPROVE
a Special Exception to allow
the keeping and raising of exotic animals (camel, kangaroos) in an AG zoned
district, with conditions to limit camels to one camel, and limit kangaroos to
six adults and their offspring, finding 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:
Part NE NE Beg 495 N Section NE NE thence W 835 N 160.92 E 835 S
161.91 POB Section 35, T-17-N, R-13-E, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Special Exception to permit fireworks sales for the year beginning 2003,
and to conduct year around sales of fruits and vegetables, pumpkins, Christmas
trees and other seasonal merchandise.
SECTION 1202. USE UNIT 2. AREA-WIDE SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES Use Unit 2;
and a Variance of all-weather surface. SECTION 1340.D. DESIGN STANDARDS FOR
OFF-STREET PARKING AREAS, located 15764 W. Highway 51.
Presentation:
Charlie Choate, 1800 S. 165th W. Ave., Sand Springs,
Oklahoma, proposes to use a portable building on wheels for open air sales of
fruits and vegetables, Christmas trees and other seasonal merchandise. He said it would be easily moved at a
moments notice in case of flooding.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr.
West commented that there could be no permanent structure in the floodway.
Interested
Parties:
Tony
Woodlee, 1535
W. 21st St., stated he lives west of the subject property. He mentioned that eight to ten homes
have been elevated in the last few years because of flooding. He commented there is no through
access and the road is very narrow.
Rick
Silvey,
2023 S. 159th W. Ave., Sand Springs, Oklahoma, stated when it floods
in the area the water moves in swift currents. It has washed out his fence numerous
times.
Janice
Silvey,
2023 S. 159th W. Ave., stated she does not want to see commercial
operations in the area. She
is opposed to more traffic and public customers driving
through.
Deann
Taylor,
2007 S. 161st W. Ave., expressed concern regarding flooding in this
area. She stated that the
road could not handle much more traffic.
Applicants
Rebuttal:
Mr.
Choate stated this property has been in the family for sixty years and he knows
about the flooding. He added that
he came up with this plan with the flooding problem in mind, to keep from
causing any problems. He reminded
the Board it is a small portable building, which will not be close to any of the
neighbors. The land has been
commercially zoned for fifteen to twenty years. Mr. Hutson asked if he planned to
have year round sales. Mr. Choate
replied it would be seasonal sales.
Board
discussion ensued.
Board
Action:
A
MOTION
made by Hutson
to APPROVE
a Special Exception to permit
fireworks sales for the year beginning 2003, and to conduct year around sales of
fruits and vegetables, pumpkins, Christmas trees and other seasonal merchandise;
and a Variance of all-weather surface, finding the hardship to be the flood
plain. The Motion
DIED for lack of a second.
On
MOTION of Dillard, the Board voted 3-0-0 (Alberty, Dillard, Hutson
"aye"; no "nays"; no "abstentions"; Walker, Tyndall "absent") to
CONTINUE Case No. 1982 to the meeting on August 20, 2002, to allow
time for the applicant to meet with the neighbors regarding the application, on
the following described property:
A tract of land in the SW/4 SW/4 of Section 8, T-19-N, R-11-E, of the
IBM, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma, more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the SE/c of SW/4 SW/4, thence N 1°1248 W along the E line of said SW/4 SW/4 a
distance of 24.75 to the POB; thence N 1°1248 W a distance of 281.22 to the S
right-of-way of SH-51; thence N 71°1107 W along said right-of-way a distance
of 5.70; thence N 73°4447 W along said right-of-way a distance
of 599.55; thence S 1°5934 W a distance of 268.48; thence S
89°5620 E a distance of 208.72; thence S
3°2118 E a distance of 183.97; thence N
89°4714 E parallel to and 24.75 distance from
the S line of said SW/4 SW/4 a distance of 376.79 to the POB.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Action
Requested:
Variance of the required average lot width from 150 to 137.89 and 84
for lot split #19404. SECTION
207. STREET FRONTAGE REQUIRED and
SECTION 330. BULK AND AREA
REQUIREMENTS IN THE AGRICULTURE DISTRICTS Use Unit 6, located 18002 N.
93rd E. Ave.
Presentation:
Barbara Wall, 18002 N. 93rd E. Ave., Collinsville,
Oklahoma, stated there is a mobile home on the front of the property for her
mother and she proposes to place a doublewide mobile home on Tract A.
Interested
Parties:
Melinda Gruner,
18010 N. 93rd E. Ave., expressed concern that the current home has
sewage problems. She added that the
odor of it sometimes overpowers the barnyard smells. She stated that if the second home had
sewage problems it might contaminate her pond. The pond is an auxiliary stock pond for
her sheep. She informed the Board
that the applicants family dogs killed one of her sheep. Ms. Gruner submitted
photographs (Exhibit G-1) to the Board.
She complained that she had to pick up a lot of trash from the neighbors
July 4th fireworks off of her property. She questioned how much more trash there
would be with a second family living there. She also mentioned that the creek holds
water and wondered how they would get across to their home.
Geri
Calhoun,
17920 N. 93rd E. Ave., stated she lives just south of the
property. She commented there
are only two privacy fences to block the subject property because of the trash
and other problems on that property.
She pointed out that the access road appears to run along her fence
line. She complained that vehicles
already speed down the dead end road, and she is concerned for her childrens
safety. She is opposed to
increasing the density of the area.
Applicants
Rebuttal:
Ms.
Wall has been cleaning up her parents property since they could no longer keep
up the property. She has made
arrangements for things to be hauled off the property. She stated she has talked with several
of the neighbors and they were in support of the application. Ms. Wall added that there are trees that
would screen her home, even though some will be cleared for the easement. The contractor already has the plans for
proper drainage and a road to cross the branch. She stated she has only been there one
month and is doing her best to take care of things on the property.
Comments and
Questions:
Mr.
Dillard pointed out that the zoning code was recently changed to reduce required
frontage and they are asking it to be reduced more. At some point they have to stop. Mr. Alberty noted there are no other lot
splits in the area and this would be inconsistent with the character of the
neighborhood.
Board
Action:
On
MOTION
of Hutson,
the Board voted 3-0-0 (Alberty, Dillard, Hutson "aye"; no "nays"; no
"abstentions"; Walker, Tyndall "absent") to DENY
a Variance of the
required average lot width from 150 to 137.89 and 84 for lot split, finding
it would cause substantial detriment to the public good or impair the purposes,
spirit, and intent of the Code, or Comprehensive Plan, on the following
described property:
Tract A: A tract of land situated in the N/2 SE/4 of Section 1, T-22-N, R-13-E, more particularly described to-wit: Beg. at a point S 00°0500 E a distance of 493.00 from the NW/c N/2 SE/4; thence E and parallel with the N line of said N/2 SE/4 a distance of 519.85 to a point; thence S 00°0500 E a distance of 137.89 to a point; thence E and parallel with the N line of said N/2 SE/4 a distance of 805.55 to a point; thence S 00°0500 E a distance of 30.00 to a point that is 660.89 N of the S line of said N/2 SE/4; thence W and parallel with the S line of said N/2 SE/4 a distance of 1325.40 to a point on the W line of said N/2 SE/4; thence N along said W line of N/2 SE/4 a distance of 167.89 to the POB; AND Tract B: A tract of land situated in the N/2 SE/4 of Section 1, T-22-N, R-13-E, more particularly described to-wit: Commencing at a point S 00°0500 E a distance of 493.00 from the NW/c N/2 SE/4; thence E and parallel with the N line of said N/2 SE/4 a distance of 519.85; to the POB; thence S 00°0500 E a distance of 137.89 to a point; thence E and parallel with the N line of said N/2 SE/4 a distance of 805.55 to a point; thence N 00°0500 W a distance of 137.89 to a point; thence W and parallel with the N line of said N/2 SE/4 a distance of 805.55 to the POB, all in Tulsa County, Oklahoma.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
OTHER
BUSINESS
Dick
Blakely,
came before the Board to discuss CBOA Case No. 1877. It was a Special Exception to
permit mining of sand and gravel and associated processing in an AG district,
approved by the Board June 19, 2001.
Some neighbors appealed the case to District Court under Case No.
CJ-01-4244. The judge found the
exception would operate to the detriment of the surrounding community and
property owners. He stayed the
issuance of the special exception.
It is not known for sure whether the Holiday Sand Company will appeal
this decision. There is no pressure
for time right now should the Board decide to appeal. No action was taken.
*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:35 p.m.
Date approved:
___________________________________
___________________________________
Chair