TULSA METROPOLITAN AREA PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting No.2771 June 6,2018,1:30 PM 175 East 2Nd Street, 2Nd Level, One Technology Genter Tulsa Gity Council Chamber

TULSA METROPOLITAN AREA PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting No.2771 June 6,2018,1:30 PM 175 East 2nd Street, 2nd Level, One Technology Genter Tulsa Gity Council Chamber

CONSIDER, DISCUSS AND/OR TAKE ACTION ON: Call to Order:

REPORTS

Chairman's Report: Work session Report Director's Report: Review TMAPC Receipts for the month of April 2018

1. Minutes of May 16,2018, Meeting No.277O 2. Amend Minutes of April 18,2018, Meeting No.2768

CONSENT AGENDA: All matters under "Consent" are considered by the Planning Commission to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. Any Planning Gommission member ffiây, however, remove an item by request.

3. LC-1025 (Lot-Combination) (CD 4) - Location: West of the northwest corner of South Xanthus Place and East 15th Street South

4 LC-1026 (Lot-Combination) (CD 1) - Location Southeast corner of North Rockford Avenue and East 48th Street North

5. Z-5444-SP-ld J stin Schroeder (CD 7) Location: West of the southwest corner of East 41st Street South and South Garnett Road requesting a GO Minor Amendment to increase the allowable floor area by 15 percent.

6. Z-7345-a Greqorv Helms (CD 9) Location: East of the Southeast corner of South Peoria Avenue and East 35th Street South requesting a Minor Amendment to optional development plan to reduce the setback from 50 feet to 35 feet. 7. PUD-712-5 Scott Eudev (CD 6) Location: North of the northwest corner of East 51st Street South and South 193'd East Avenue requesting a PUD Minor Amendment to permit an additional ground sign.

CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA:

PUBLIC HEARINGS 8. The Estates t the River lll (CD 8) Preliminary Plat, Location: South of the southwest corner of East 121't Street South and South Hudson Avenue

I Enclave ll at on Creek (CD 8) Preliminary Plat, Location: West of South Sheridan Road at East 123'd Street South

10.PUD-737 Plat Waiver (CD 6) Location: South of the southeast corner of East 11th Street South and South 161st East Avenue

11.2-7444 Deborah Richards (CD 4) Location: East of the southeast corner of South Peoria Avenue and East 1Oth Street South requesting rezoning from RM-2 to PK (Withdrawn by applicant)

12.2-7440 Kvle Sewell (CD 2) Location: East of the southeast corner of West 71st Street South and South Elwood Avenue requesting rezoning from AG to CG with optional development plan (Continued from May 2,2018)

1 3. LS-21134 (Lot-Split) (CD 8) - Location: North and east of the northeast corner of East 98th Street South and South Sandusky Avenue (Related to LC-1023)

14.LC-1023 (Lot-Combination) (CD 8) - Location: South and west of the southwest corner of East 97th Place South and South Urbana Avenue (Related to LS- 21134)

15.2-7445 Gurtis Branch (CD 2) Location: East of the southeast corner of South 26th West Avenue and West 71st Street South requesting rezoning from RS- 3/PUD-159 to AG (related to PUD-159-B)

16.PUD-159-B Curtis Branch (CD 2) Location: East of the southeast corner of South 26th West Avenue and West 71st Street South requesting PUD Major Amendment to abandon the PUD and rezone to AG (related to 2-7445)

17.ZCA-10. TMAPC, Amendment of the City of Tulsa Zoning Code to Section 55.090-F3 (Maximum Width of Residential Driveways in RE and RS Districts) to revise the maximum driveway width regulations established by that section. (Continued from May 2,2018) OTHER BUSINESS

I 8. Gommissioners' Gomments

ADJOURN

CD = Council District NOTE: lf you require special accommodation pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, please notify INCOG (918) 584-7526. Exhibits, Petitions, Pictures, etc., presented to the Planning Commission may be received and deposited in case files to be maintained at Land Development Services, INCOG. Ringing/sound on all cell phones and EæIg must be turned off during the Planning Gommission.

Visit our website at www.tmapc.orq email address: [email protected]

TMAPC Mission Statement: The Mission of the Tulsa Metropolitan Area Planning Commission (TMAPC) is to provide unbiased advice to the City Council and the County Commissioners on development and zoning matters, to provide a public forum that fosters public participation and transparency in land development and planning, to adopt and maintain a comprehensive plan for the metropolitan area, and to provide other planning, zoning and land division services that promote the harmonious development of the Tulsa Metropolitan Area and enhance and preserve the quality of life for the region's current and future residents.

TMAPC RECEIPTS Month of April 2018

------Curent Period ----.--- Year To Date

TOTAI, TOTAL ITEM CITY COUNTY RECEIVED ITEM CITY COUNTY RECEIVED ZONING

Zoning Letters 5 $ I 87.50 $ I 87.50 $375.00 9l 4,825.00 4,82s 00 $9,650.00 Zomrg 2 1,000.00 l,000.00 2,000.00 53 20,425.00 20,42s 00 40,8s0 00

Plan Reviews 22 2.575.00 2,575.00 5, I 50.00 213 27,915.00 27,915.00 ss,830.00 Refunds 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NSF 0.00 0.00 0.00 000 000 0.00

$3.762.50 53.762.50 $7.525.00 $53.165.00 $53.16s 00 $106.330.00

LAND DIVISION

Minor Subdivision 0 $0.00 s0.00 $0.00 I $435.00 $43s 00 870.00

Prelirninary Plats 4 2.185.95 2,t9s.9s 4,3't t.90 2l $ 10,408.30 $ 10,408.30 20,8 1 6 60

Final Plats 2 I,0 I 7.50 1,0 I 7.50 2,035.00 26 $10"6s2 78 $ 10,652.78 2l,lOs.ss

Plat Waviers I I 25.00 I 25.00 250.00 28 $3,4s0.00 $3,4s0 00 6,900.00 Lot Splús 6 375.00 375.00 750.00 103 $s,77s.00 $5,775.00 I 1,550.00 Lot Cornl¡inations il 550.00 550.00 l, I 00.00 96 $4,82s 00 $4,825.00 9,650.00 Other 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 l0 $850.00 $8s0.00 1,700.00 NSF 0.00 0.00 0.00 $0 00 $0.00 0.00

Refunds ( r00.00) ( r 00.00) (200.00) ($ I s0.00) ($ r s0.00) (300 00)

$4.153.45 $4.153.45 $8.306.90 $36.246.08 $36.246.08 $72-492 rs

TMAPC COMP

Cornp PIan Adrnendrnent 0 s0.00 $0.00 s0.00 4 $ 1,000.00 $0 00 $ r,000.00 Reñurd L0_00 $oo0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $ f "000 00 $0 00 $l.000.00

BOARDS OF ADJUSTMENT

Fees l5 $4,400.00 $500.00 $4,900.00 199 $60,0s0 00 $ 1 7,1 s0.00 $77,200.00 Refunds 0.00 0.00 $0.00 ($2,8oo.oo) $0.00 (2,800 00) NSF Check 0.00 0.00 s0.00 ($s00 00) $0.00 (s00.00)

$4.400.00 s500.00 $4.900.00 $s6.750 00 $17-1s0 00 $73.900.00

TOTAL st2,315.95 $8,4t5.95 $20,731.90 s147,161.08 $106,s61.08 s253,722.t5

LESS WAIVED FEES * ($8,1 3 LOs) ($8, r31 .0s) (s14,646.7t) ($14,646.71)

GRAND TOTALS $4,184.90 $8,415.95 $12,600.85 $ 132,5 t 4.37 S t 06,56 t.08 $239,075.44

* Advertising, Signs & Postage Expenses for City of Tulsa Applications with Fee Waivers. April 2018 receipt comparison

April2018 March 2018 April2017 Zoning Letters 5 10 6

Zoning 2 7 8

Plan Reviews 22 26 L8

Minor Subdivisions 0 0 0

Preliminary Plats 4 3 3

Final Plats 2 4 1

Plat Waivers L 2 4

Lots Splits 6 7 23

Lot Combinations LI 18 L6

Other 0 t 0

Comp Plan Amendments 0 0 t

5t23t2018 Case Number: Z-5444-SP-1ú Minor Amendment

TMffiE Hearinq Date: June 6, 2018 ['lt-lrr nirt tt C un in ris:i..: r r

Case Report Prepared bv: Owner and Applicant lnformation: Jay Hoyt Applicant: Justin Schroeder - Ross Group

Property Owner: Wyndham Tulsa

Location Map: Applicant Proposal: (shown with City Council Districts) Concept summary: Corridor Minor amendment to increase the allowable floor area by 15o/o.

Gross Land Area'. 7.11acres

6 Location: West of the SWc E 41st St S and S Garnett Rd

I 7 'I I -t 10918 E 41st St S ..1 I I Lot 1, Block 1 Atria

Zoninq: Staff Recommendation: Existing Zoning: CO Staff recommends approval Proposed Zoning: No Change

Comprehensive Plan: Land Use Map: Town Center Growth and Stability Map: Growth

Staff Data: Gitv Gouncil District: 7 TRS: 9430 Councilor Name: Anna America czt{i. 49 Atlas: 752 Countv Gommission District: 1 Commissioner Name. John Smaligo

5.1 June 6,2018 SEGTION l: Z-5444-SP-1d MinorAmendment

STAFF RECOMMENDATION

Amendment Request; Modify the Corridor Plan to increase the allowable floor area 15%.

Currently, the allowable floor area permitted by the development plan is 221,000 sf. The applicant is proposing to increase the allowable floor area by 15%o, or 33,150 sf, for a total of 254,150 sf allowable.

The requested increase is due to an addition of a 3,000 sf gym facility to the existing hotel, which would have exceeded the total allowable area for the hotel. The requested 15% increase would allow this expansion and provide for some additional room for expans-ion in the future, if so desired. Even with the requested 15% added, the proposedþ(totalfloor area of 254,150 sf would be significantly less that the 387,372 sf ofäõõÈarea max that would be allowed in a CO district, based on a FloorArea Ratio of 1.25 allowed.

Staff Comment: This request can be considered a Minor Amendment as outlined by Section 25.040D.3.b(5) of the Corridor District Provisions of the City of Tulsa Zoning Code.

"Minor amendments to an approved corridor development plan may be authorized by the Planning Commission, which may direct the processing of an amended development plan and subdivision plat, incorporating such changes, so long as substantial compliance is maintained with the approved development plan. "

Staff has reviewed the request and determined

1) The requested amendment does not represent a significant departure from the approved development standards in the Corridor Development Plan.

2) All remaining development standards defined in Z-5444-SP-1 and subsequent minor amendments shall remain in effect.

Exhibits included with staff recommendation: INCOG zoning case map INCOG aerial photo INCOG aerial photo (enlarged) Applicant Exhibits: Site Plan Enlarged Site Plan Aerial

With considerations listed above, staff recommends approval of the minor amendment request to increase the allowable floor area by 15%.

5.?- E38 Pt S AG

PUD-I37A RM.I

E Prs

SUBJECT TRACT

GO GS GS

s ltJ ot GO o 843 Ø RM.2 AG s7s s

trJ ñt

¿*"", $ 1r, GO z E cs

z-7101-S z-71CI1-S RS-3 z-5636-SP-3

Feet z-5444-SP-1d 0 200 400 5.3 19-14 30 fl o ,/.,' . tlr f/ H tueruqa! :aleo opttd ßuav 0e þL-61 ffi #nrrt 'punotß lcul 00t 002 0 aqt uo silryea| ¡ec|sÃt1d r1¡yn u6¡¡e p lcetqns úaslcatd pu Ãeu sÃ,eperro c¡qdetg :e1o¡¡ L-ds'?rrg-z ìoêj ì ! I ,,i... t- t

=t sJswEJ 1Þ ,, t i* ¿, @ -it :ir i S sr :lt- 'l I ø ã

.,!

:'f '? ,7v *r'1 .- -'t \" ç fr, a tL-.ç¡: ,'! .. -i EJSæg ''' 6t " J¡o ,{ ii -l r1e v.f ,! ¡ v þ .,i a1 .li ¡, 3å)/ :l*.^ ,'1¡ :l *ç¡,,rvi;i ! tr+r I

l:. i ,. .! ì,, ¡ l,i I ,.:l i{ r -n rrt' i &r-" f.,_ -'"t' !å1h_ .tq T;u::-i' , -f ,it 'i t': I !h.rä'fi i. I a ' fl: .'" i ltmæ ,k!r þyt*\t'i'

": .- ': SJ'sÐSDüÐ" ;. .t

t: ôiì' l ú d 'i* tl ¡ i.i."r il ¡". I l *t! Ë-. I '.' loñ.: ; , E . i l- & , :... t ,' u-_ ' + '.. ; t_ it .:!t' a il l

1 I [--ri J at ;Lþ 'ï-.',Þ.*ñ'r I ...--,L4 _., ür ,

I I I ! i '1 I : * t i -'*'l il i ,* l, :..( '¡ .ri-*-, .,1 .'! l; I ,rrt¡È,

'I '"- *- ":, - .- - I, I i ., L, L" ,* .t- - lL, \,,' L"

I 'tl t,1 "f 4x t:' ; -.r il È;rY {$ .Ì.. tt{ 'l * lrJ ; .5t { * { q E4{SffiS .a .dft i,, l, J 1 frt & t"fr .t*. ltr J,'r ',Çl ;r0 t ;¿,i a åË

{ .Ë ':,¡ 4.*i - " ,ffi;' +ì -a'"tn.B i ! ! 3' :¡tf-!rñ ;'dfr *rT ffi ry {f

*ri ti .i! ï'r Y3 t*!

.5 ,l\t--:. S,','i "j. ' ::i. , 't l:" l' ..¡rl:, tl i

'',1 t ,il], :t' t r ' l ',; llr'll ,',: :', ,, '.', :ii

r41 iu I t: ltt ,:rn -l ?jr rt {e I | 'l'l rq tt Yt ¡b '!i 4 .t Irlr+ th â I * ti ¡ a ,-: -8 4 ø a a Êl r].ã 4 '! -iqr¡ J F {t I 1 s 5?¡l .Í á,' I 4 ü ii.'Þ { -t.1l

N Feet Subject - - 100 Z- 5 4 4 4 S P 7 d !;;: -",{;ixî"i:"î'i:::,iy,i",Li';:::"::!, 0 50 Tract Photo Date: February 2016 +t- 19-14 30 Aer¡al _ 5,9 Ø"orro.ou,

OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION LIFE SÆETY I.EGEND

NPA 101: B$INESS ._ EXTACCE$RELPAü guslñÉss tBc ]HIMWL DFIANCE CrcOMMON PAff OF RVl IFPA 101: ÆSEMBLY IBC A$EWLY ß¿) fi, o***rr*rrr* El arruemceurcrcum Q qmrrcrrwruuuwm ¡Bc' tr- t@uÞamsuslNciltr tiÐ.- *o"*o"* @

d.ã. tuñ9-l*rkqÈ531.hàdl4dvlhêldá¡d!êsd ffi d ã bdHing 4l@ thóughdùù d ffirÈ Sd&r #6âÉdqturoe!1llM.

üISNG ACG$IBLE

/l\upe sapery \-/iF=i{-'--

ADDMON RÉÀ1OOSæPUN

q á 9ãsE E BH p

F 961re ACCESSTBLE o

PUN NORTH 8'40'8'16X SHEET æ IDEMIFICATION O SCALE lN FEET- 1/S= 1þ" G-003

,ç EXISTING ACCESSIBLE PARKING

AREA OF NEW ADDITION RE: A-100 SITE PLAN

EXISTING ACCESSIBLE PARKING

Case Number: Z-7345-a TM Minor Amendment Êq.-: Hearinq Date: June 6, 2018 t{Jti

Gase Report Prepared bv: Owner and Applicant lnformation Jay Hoyt Applicant: Gregory Helms

P Owner: Hen Aberson

Location Map: Aoolicant Pronosal: (shown with City Council Districts) Concept summary: Modify the Optional Development Plan standards to reduce the setback for kitchen exhaust equipment from an R district from 50 feet to 35 feet. J

4 6 5 Gross Land Area: 1 .18 Acres I Location: East of the SE/c of S Peoria Ave 7 and E 35th St S

8 1326 E 35th St S

Lot 6, Block 3 Olivers Addition

Zoninq: Staff Recommendation: Existing Zoning: CH with optional development Staff recommends approval plan Proposed Zoning: No Change

Comprehensive Plan: Land Use Map: Main Street Growth and Stability Map: Growth

Staff Data: Citv Gouncil District: 9 TRS: 9319 Councilor Name'. Ben Kimbro CZlvl: 47 Atlas: 189 Countv Commission District: 2 Commissioner Name; Karen Keith

6.1 June 6,2018 SEGTION l: Z-7345-a Minor Amendment

STAFF RECOMMENDATION

Amendment Request: Modify the Optional Development Plan standards to reduce the setback for kitchen exhaust equipment from an R district from 50 feet to 35 feet.

The applicant is proposing to revise the setback standard for the kitchen exhaust equipment due to the nature of the existing buitding. The furthest wall from the adjacent R building is 40 feet distant. This would mean that the existing building could not comply with the 50 ft restriction. The reduction to 35 ft would allow an exhaust hood to be installed on the existing building.

The applicant states that the exhaust hood will be on the opposite side of the building's ridge line from the adjacent R district and will be shielded by that ridgeline, or otherwise screened from the R district if the ridge line is not sufficient. Based on the ínformation provided by the applicant, the reduction in setback would not adversely affect the adjacent R district properties.

Staff Comment: This request can be considered a Minor Amendment as outlined by Section 70.0401.1.a of the City of Tulsa Zoning Code.

"The planning commission is authorized to approve amendments to approved development plans as minor amendments if the planning commission determines that substantial compliance is maintained with the approved development plan. "

Staff has reviewed the request and determined

1) The requested amendment does not represent a significant departure from the approved development standards in the Optional Development Plan.

2) All remaining development standards defined in Z-7345 shall remain in effect.

b.7- Exhibits included with staff recommendation

INCOG zoning case map INCOG aerial photo INCOG aerial photo (enlarged) Applicant Exhibits: Summary of Modífication Request Exhibits B-E - Equipment lnformation Exhibit F - Exterior Elevations With considerations listed above, staff recommends approval of the minor amendment request to reduce the setback for kitchen exhaust equipment from an R district.

b.3 Þ a qE o= În a E u, 832 SrS

PU J o

I hlY

z-7

P ñ hJY SUBJECT TRACT

-349

I P1(

lc PK / i-73

N Feet 0 200 400 Z-7345-a 19-13 19 6..{ + Feet Note: Graphic overlays may not precÍsely Subject Z-7345-a al¡gn with phys¡cal îegtures on the ground. 0 200 400 Tract Aeñal Photo Date: February 20rt 19-13 19 (?.5 t, t' $ 1 !iÎìl ri 4 I ,r_x

'? I { t; Í .'i

1 l- .1 - '¡, l¡ : J., "óL.. * ---*- r||

I 5 -I

il j

iro * ,'} aa ;.ç lr¡ ,t'1, I

Feet Note: Gnphic overlays may not Necisely Subject Z-7345-a align with physical features on the ground. 0 50 100 Tract Aerial Photo Date: February 2016 -# 19-13 19 b,v HELMS + ASSOCIÅTES April 25,2018

Request for Modification to Approved Zoning Case Z-7345

1326 East 35th Street South Tulsa, OK 74105

SUMMARY OF MODIFICATION REQUEST previous re-zoning approval was based upon an Optional Development Plan (refer to Section ll: Z-7345, Exhibit A).

lJse Limitation I in the Optional Development Plan requires that kitchen exhaust equipment be located not less than SCi feet from R Districts and directed toward the west or south' Air handling units may be placed anywhere on the site except for a buitding greater than 5,000 square ieet when the above mentioned spacing standard applies.

This request would reduce the required separation distance from 50 feet to 35 feet for kitchen exhaust equipment. The west wall of the existing building is located 40 feet south of the nearest R District, iherefore a separation distance greater than 35 feet would be difficult to achieve. The information below illustrates that reducing the separation distance will not adversely affect the outdoor or indoor enjoyment of the adjacent R District properties.

1. Currently, the restaurant HVAC equipment is located between the restaurant building and the R District property directly east. According to Lennox lndustries (Exhibit B), typical outside noise leveË of air conditioning units is between a garbage disposal (80 cíó) anO a dishwasher (75 db). A typical kitchen exhaust fan has an outside noise level ol 25 sones (85 db). According to Seng Piel Audio's online sound level calculator (Exhibit B) thè kitchen exhaust lan noise level would be 54.12 db at the R District property line if located 35 feet away. This noise level is similar to Quiet Urban Daytime hoise levels as well as a Dishwasher in the next room (Exhibit D). The sound level would be reduced even more inside the residence by the exterior walls. The standard STC rating for a wood stud wall is 38. This would drop the interior noise level from the kitchen exhaust fan to 16.12 db (Broadcast / Recording Studio level)'

2. Since the kitchen exhaust fan is proposed on the west side of the building, the equipment should be shielded from view from the R District by the roof ridge. lt is präp'oseO that if the equipment does extend higher than the ridge line, it would be screened from view from the east (Exhibit E).

Modification to no other Use Limitations is requested'

please let me know if you have any questions about this request or need any additional information.

Sincerely, *liÀ,

Helms GSHELMS & Associates, LLC 424 ÊaslMain Street Jenks, OK 74037 918.298.7257 www.gshelms.com Ç1 Is Tltere Eeaþ ThatMuch Differencein EXHIBIT B Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Sound Lerels?

l/vE'RE GtAD YOU ASKED!

Bæause the answer is most definitely YES! Until ræentl¡¡ noisy air conditloners and heat pumps uøre aæeptd as the norm. High DAVE LENNOX opower" noise levels were even associatú with the of heating and mtirg s¡rsfems. But today's tæhnology lets you dtææ an air ænditioner or heat pump that is not only hlghly effÍcient, but also exæptionally quiet.

HOtv IS SOUND MEASURED? difference in the sound levels of products on the Sound is measured in decibels (db). A decibel market today. Be sure to compare sound ratings describes the relaüve loudness of a sound. when you shop for a new air conditioner or heat pump...your good night's sleep depends on it. l,t'HY IS A SOUND RAT¡NG IMPTO¡ITANT? Although no financial savings are tied to it, LENNOX..DESIGNED TO BE QUIET the sound rating of a cooling system can directly Lennox designs each ai¡ conditioner and heat affect your comfort. Your ears tell you what is too pump to be as quiet as possible. Thtough extensive noisy, and what seems quiet. The chart below testing, lænnox has come up with many features shows sound ratings for some common sounds that, either alone or in combination, make oul air conditioners and heat pump,s some of the quietest available. COHH(DN NOISE DECIBEL LEVEL Blender 88 Insulated comprcssor compartments, discharge Garùage Disposal 80 mufflers and unique fan designs work to soften Dishwasher 75 the sound of a hard-working, high-efïìciency Voice (normal level) 70 compressor. Tbp-panel orilìces, compressor wrappers and indoor blowers are all designed to Obviously, the sound an air conditioner or further enhance smooth, quiet airflow. heat pump makes depends on a variety of factors, not the least of which are the age of the unit and Rrchasing an air conditioner or heat pump whether or not the compressor is insulated. On system with a low sound rating will make you average, the noise level of air conditioners and more comfortable...because even on the hottest heat pumps rate somewhere between a dishwasher surnmer days or coldest winter nights, you'll feel and a garbage dispos"l. your air conditioner or heat pump working, not hear it. AR.E ALL AI¡T CONDITIONERS AND HEAT PUilPS QUIET? Call your independent Lennox dealer to find Most heating and cooling systems out about a new Lennox heating and cooling manufachred today are quieter than those system that offers maximum comfort with produced in past years. But there is still a great minimum noise. LEill(06 ONE LESS THING TO WORRY ABOUT.Ttr g

on rccyded pape¡ WGYASL 7Æ8 (81H?2) @ l¿nnox Indusües Inc., 1998 o] hlnted Vlsit us at http://www.Davel¿nnorcom ¿t Irtho u.s.A. EXHIBIT C

Enter the three gråy hsxes and gtt the answtr in the ïThite hox. Sound is here the sound level rn decibels, no matter if it is the sound pressure ]evel or the sound intensrty level - but not the stund power levêl

Calculation of the sound level L2, ttuhich is found at the distance 12

Reference distaficÊ 11 $ound level I'1 frorn sound source at reference distaflcê 11 Searcñ tor L2 þ morft dBSPL Another distance r3 $ound level 12 Sound level difÞrcnce frorn sound source at another distance r2 ú L= f,r -Ãr rnorfi 54.1 2 dBSPL 3ü.88 dB þg I

Exhaust fan noise level 1 foot away from fan is 85 db.

Exhaust fan noise level 35 feet away from fan is 54.12 db.

(r.g EXHIBIT D

LouDNEss coMPARtsoN cHART (uen)

Common Outdoor Noise Level Common lndoor Activities (dBA) Activities

Jel Flv-over ¿l 1tOO ß Band

1 Gas L¿wn Mower ¿t 3 fi

Food Blender at 3 ft

Diesel Truck at 5O fl al 5ü rnph Garbage Disposal at 3 fl Noisy Urb,an Areå, Daylime Vacuurn Cleaner at 10 fl Gas Lawn Mower al 1O0 ñ NorrnalSpeech ft CommercialArea ¿l 3 Heavy Traffic ¿l 300 fl Large Buslness Offìce Culql Urba¡, Daytime Dishwasher Nexl Room

Aulet Urban, Nlglrllime Thealer, Quiet Suburban, Nigtlllime Large Conference Room (Background) Library Quiei Rurå|, Nlghtlirne Bedroom al Nighl, Concerl Hall (Baekground) BroadcastlRecordin g Studin

Lowesl Threshold of Human l-'learing Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing

An increase of 3 dBA is barely perceptible to the human ear.

INFORMATION TAKEN FROM REDDING, CA NOISE STUDY b.l0 EXHIBIT E

Sou nd Tra nsmission Coeffi cient

The STC is a single nun:å:er ratinç scale that meäsurÈ5 ¡ r"¡all. c*ilinp or fl*on assemblyt abilityta l¡l*ck s*und scrrÌþte. Å st¡ndard studded r,'¡all nrith dqn'.all has an ðverage Sound Transnrission {oefficient rating cf 38.

ade r'rill baast STC values af rnCIre ålun 55- 6ü. 5T( values for ner,"., build or the Academy" arud applied in detail in our l{¡alls, {eilings ¿nd Flsor secticns sf aur Applicatians Guide. Tl¡ese soundprocfing treatnrcnts target the isolatian of a sound r",¡åve äs depicted h*re:

Using tlie 5T{ rode ís sirnple m.ütf!. lf one rçorn is producãng leud stereo music rvith ler,'els exceeding r St decibels. and the dividing surface assembly t* tlie adjaininE room hetd an STC rating *f 55" sne æuld reasonrbly €frpÉct the dB ler¡el fronr that nnusic in the adjoinlng r+orn ta carry a reading af 45. ln a lahoratory setting, this result c¿n be ¡çeeçured in ¡ r¡acuunr. ln a ñeld test. this result tuill decay due to leakaEe, vibrations" a¡'¡d other sound sources tl'r¿t will combine tc altelthe results,

Regardless of the field resillts, renrember tl'l¿t tlre lowering of the deciirel iE on an algaritlrmic scale. For every 3 dB your treatment rvill drn¡e another 5ûc'* of the remaining sound [e',rei exposure wilt å:e elinlin¿ted. Using this nraËh. a simple 1û-'ì? dB drup triEg*r,ed hy a producÊ with an STf, ratinE sf 27 can still delir¡er more th¿n a 9t4'å drop in perceived nsise. This ST( scale is brsadc¡st f*r your reference in cur Sound Charnber,

The Uniforn'¡ Berilding Code assigns a required STE v¡lue for multi-dr',¡elling units that inclucle a stand¿rd rating for tcr¡,,n lrsmes, condoniiniurns" hotels and nratels. The walls r,vill t¡rpically require ¿n 5TË r,rting of 5t+ r,r¡l'¡en field tested, l-uxury units r,r¡ill bqast STC values cver 55, ln ronrparison, the standard lvall configuratiar¡ in a residential home ilh¡strated her* ivill Ëãrry ãn ãr/erãge 5Tf rating of 3Ë:

INFORMATION TAKEN FROM NETWELL NOISE CONTROL (coNTROLNOTSE.COM)

G. ll J (¡) o N) PROPOSED KITCHEN EXHAUST FAN rn o) o X 5D 40'-0" (, t+= I (Jl o 35'-0" min w J -¡ @ -{- r+ J T] -¡ oÐ 'ï o 1l o nm -l ztr c m 6 P ox EXISTING south exterior elevation RESTAURANT BUILDING PROPOSED KITCHEN EXHAUST FAN

GUARDRAIL

(0= ¡ @ c I È.- + (o )(o t" q_ 3 ø 9o 0¡ a) oa, o a. 5 0¡ ñ o f¡ I west exterior elevation @ o Gase Number: PUD-712-5 TM Minor Amendment "r- : i ü f¡1¡ 1' 1:f-":,i;", ".jt Hearinq Date: June 6, 2018 Plur ¡nitrrl Cur r lr¡ l::ir:rt

Gase Report Prepared bv: Owner and Applicant lnformation: Jay Hoyt Applicant: Scott R. Eudey, Ross & Eudey, PLLP

Property Owner: National Self Storage, LLC

Location Map: Applicant Proposal: (shown with City Council Districts) Concept summary: PUD minor amendment to amend the sign standards to permit an additional ground sign. J (

¡ I Gross Land Area: 0.59 acres I -'a

6 I I Location: North of the NWc of E 51st St S {' andS193'dEAve 7 Lot 3 Block 1, Stone Creek Commercial I Center

Development Area A

Zoninq: Staff Reco mendation: Existing Zoning: OLIPUD-7 12 Staff recommends approval Proposed Zoning: No Change

Comprehensive Plan: Land Use Map: Neighborhood Center Growth and Stability Map: Growth

Staff Data: Gitv Council District: 6 TRS: 9425 Councilor Name: Connie Dodson CZM: 50 Atlas. N/A Gountv Commission District: 1 Commissioner Name; John Smaligo

1, t June 6, 2018 SEGTION l: Z-5444-SP-1d Minor Amendment

STAFF RECOMMENDATION

Amendment Request: Modify the Corridor Plan to increase the allowable floor area 15o/o.

Currently, the allowable floor area permitted by the development plan is 221,000 sf. The applicant is proposing to increase the allowable floor area by 15o/o, ot 33,150 sf, for a total of 254,150 sf allowable.

The requested increase is due to an addition of a 3,000 sf gym facility to the existing hotel, which would have exceeded the total allowable area for the hotel. The requested 15% increase would allow this expansion and provide for some additional room for expansion in the future, if so desired. Even with the requested 15% added, the proposed total floor area of 254,150 sf would be significantly less that the 387,372 sf of floor area maximum that would be allowed in a CO district, based on an allowed 1.25 Floor Area Ratio.

Staff Comment: This request can be considered a Minor Amendment as outlined by Section 25.040D.3.b(5) of the Corridor District Provisions of the City of Tulsa Zoning Code.

Staff has reviewed the request and determined:

1) The requested amendment does not represent a significant departure from the approved development standards in the Corridor Development Plan.

2) All remaining development standards defined in Z-5444-SP-1 and subsequent minor amendments shall remain in effect.

Exhibits included with staff recommendation INCOG zoning case map INCOG aerial photo INCOG aerial photo (enlarged) Applicant Exhibits: Site Plan Enlarged Site Plan Aerial

With considerations listed above, staff recommends approval of the minor amendment request to increase the allowable floor area by 15o/o.

1,L PUD.83O

SUBJECT TRACT

9 'l l¡¡ F-r--rIrI I I I t t AG I 712 GS

I E oro_ GN

I RM 52ND ST A-l

PUD.11O FD A-{ gc ! LEGEND o(t Broken Arrow Corporate Limits A.CH Tulsa Corporate Limits IH

Feet 0 200 400 PUD-712-5 19-14 25 1.3 Note: Gnphlc overlays may not preclsely Feet Subject al¡gn wlth physical îeatures on the ground. 0 200 400 PUD-712-5 Tract Aertal Photo Date: February 20tt1.al 19-14 25 I

I I

Nole: G¿Ë,ph¡c oveilays may not precísely Feet Subject attgn w¡th physical lealures on the ground. 0 50 100 PUD-712-b Tract Aerlal Photo Date: Februa¡y 2018 E# 19-14 25 Narrative:

Stone Creek Commercial Center (previously Stone Creek Center) Comprises a total of 13.26 acres (gross) located at the Northwest corner of East 51't Street South and South 193'd E. Ave. The specific property in question (Lot 3, Block l) is zoned Office Light and is planned for retail commercial facilities pursuant to Planned Unit Development No. 712 as amended by minor amendment No. 712-1.

The application for minor amendment proposes an amendment of permitted signs to include an additional sign on Lot 3, Block 1 to identify the business occupying a retail shopping center. Drawings of the center and the proposed location of the sign are attached hereto as well as a depiction of the sign to be installed.

No change in the permitted uses is proposed and no change of underlying zoning is proposed.

Modifications of permitted signs are proposed as follows:

Permitted signs as approved for puD No. 712-1 are as follows:

Signs: (Development Area A)

'¡'&{<{<{<:1. "Signs shall be limited to:

(a) wall or canopy signs not exceeding 1.5 feet of display surface area per lineal foot of the main building wall to which affixed, provided however, the aggregate length of wall signs shall not exceed 75% of the wall or canopy to which affixed and no wall signs shall be affrxed to the west and south building walls or canopies.

(b) one ground sign at the intersection of 193'd and 5l'r identifying the center andlor tenants therein, not exceeding25 feet in height and200 square feet ofdisplay surface area,and

(c) one ground sign along 193'd identifying the ministorage use not exceeding 20 feet in height andr20 square feet ofdisplay surface area,

(d) one ground sign within the east ll2 of Lot l, Block l, identifying the tenants therein, not exceeding20 feet in height and 160 square feet of display surface aÍea."

1 '7.la Proposed permitted signs are as follows

Signs: (Development Area A)

ooSigns 'l'¡l'**{<'l' shall be limited to:

(a) wall or canopy signs not exceeding 1.5 feet of display surface area per lineal foot of the main building wall to which affixed, provided however, the aggregate length of wall signs shall not exceed 75% of the wall or canopy to which affixed and no wall signs shall be affixed to the west and south building walls or canopies, and

(b) one ground sign at the intersection of 193'd and 5l't identifying the center and/or tenants therein, not excçeding 25 feet in height and 200 square feet ofdisplay surface area, and

(c) one ground sign along 193'd identifying the ministorage use not exceeding 20 feet in height and I20 square feet ofdisplay surface area, and

(d) one ground sign within the east rl2 of Lot l, Block l, identifying the tenants therein, not exceeding2} feet in height and 160 square feet of display surface area, and

td (e) one qround sisn within Lot 3. Block I alons I East Avenue not square feet of display surface area."

[The underlined area depicts changes or additions]

1 a 1 t¡ ,- ',.9-- ¡',í -.ll ê' ¡l I I Jr:' at r f i I s' , ¡- í'!;^ ,-l I rí1 LOT 1 .i x i si:ai: ¡-:d -=1.- sr3NE Cfìftri cû$$tRcrAt cEr.l'tÊrì I ---t- ñ¡:!!a=- õi :t !.ã ,r-, ilô tù) "1 f:ffi f'-d Ii i;l .,.1 :TO¡II i.PE{:F &;' Y: :l g :ìi . - -.':,lL !!'-! a1-!l -¿!!'! - *--.. - -. - -- ^ci PWOSÊo gutltr€ .ri :

PÊæ6:O gUtrONG

= rt ù! o z. UÉ. c: t- J z- rr ;,'i u> 1l1r I U¿ 5 JQ ür I cÊ ñ<) LIF É. - t--- z. e5 Lrl YA coilsrRUcììcN trl9ÀÀ!E HÚ CUNê Tôble ô_ d< L (-)Ø 5ttu tl¡ ! 9.:ir¡¡ ti i .1v€,u_ J Jo U- I LTJ --l*.:+-'ili.r. =-(J g LU ØøF-< cl .J d:) Soult¡ t 9.Jro [os! Avenue rsY sËÞÂüft fl3nuÉr c5 ?.ts l@ :z LU :¿ þ- rll (Ju 5.æ É. OO IJ *>-*F ul rúrs ærcaæ€ssiâr *PÆ diü ec'¡¡}!,e?.J Pô*vIl!çéNp z þ HORIZONTAL CONTROL o STAAUZEO CO¡SIRUCTON EilTRAf CE NOæS: ?,6t t- J PLAN tt1 GRADING PLAN a1 1t GiAOING, PA\4NG, HoRrZ CÖNTRO| & APPROVÊO CONTRTT EFOSþN CONÏÊOLNO¡ÊS: FON IDP PER&illONLY

ROC( UG 3€O¡NENT BAffiIÊR ilOES: rlN;rrt BËNCHfrd,/tRK

1€' ÊÊ&R{UMTNU$ Cæ Sñ ft À coÉcaEl¿ pot9añ@_À6 û t0 flOñhASl OF ^ÊPÂOXrM,1EL!û€ftreRSÉClrOñ OË C@ñ Uñ ñoÁo (1olÊo€ ÁvE.)so a€r 5r5f IREEI rrNréñÀ1þ @ú!r4sñerf{ ÈLEV -615.r!trgvo 1929' ffi' PVOl J it , i- le'"vt9-"lr'*$ t-' t --'¡'i + rr r.ri t rt1 \'d Sr:Åz à'' ;1" tX Ji\(>J ! r:: ta r:'lec* Lr-.-K¿"¿å r\' ln m --18 in 72 in

6in

_T 7 itt 321 ln

5in

Tenant 1 12 in

Tenant 2 12 in

Tenant 3 I ll2 in 105 in Tenant 4

Tenant 5

Tenant 6

Tenant 7

12 in

48 in

l1l -'- ?gr¡gl..C: lighted monument. Tenant panels Side View are wh¡te acryl¡c b¡rck lit. Top letterinçj metal punch thru. Brushed alLm acceñt.

t¡ 180220O1 C()NTAC'l' f,lAMF.i:- I rReu:vul'rrttty axtlrurx FILE N^MEr STONE. CREEK RETATL CENTER.CDL L l /\PI,l(iJFlu Atc'\!t)uK D^i[E: 2202018 IìEV #: MÅN,{GÉfì: MICIìELLE I}\GË:1

X artnc¡¡eD AS Is SIGJ\n"I'IJIìE: [l appRovnn wITH c:I{ANGES: DATE:- 1.?

TMre Case : The Estates at the River lll Hearinq Date: June 6,2018 Tulss Metropoliton Areo Plonning Commission

Gase Report Prepared bv: Owner and Applicant lnformation

Nathan Foster Applicant: Tanner Consulting, LLC

Owner.121tt Street Property, LLC

Location Map: Applicant Proposal: (Shown with City Council districts) Preliminary Plat . '.)

| -i 60 lots, 5 blocks, 17.86 + acres

Location'. South of the southwest corner of East 121't Street South and South Hudson Avenue

Zonins: RS-3 / PUD-803 Staff Recommendation:

Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat

Gity Council Districü 8 Councilor Name: Phil Lakin Gountv Commission District: 3 Commissioner Name: Ron Peters EXHIBITS: Site Map, Aerial, Land Use, Growth & Stability, Preliminary Plat Submittal, Conceptual lmprovements

Í.1 PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT

The Estates at the River lll - (CD 8) South of the southwest corner of East 121st Street South and South Hudson Avenue

This plat consists of 60 lots, 5 blocks, 17.861acres.

The TechnicalAdvisory Committee (TAC) met on May 17,2018 and provided the following conditions:

1. Zoning: Proposed lot conforms to the requirements RS-3 zoning. PUD-803 permits a gated subdivision. 2. Addressing: Address will be assigned to final plat. Provide lot address graphically on the face of the final plat. 3. Transportation & Traffic: Reserve C should be excluded from the plat or language should be added to permit use of the area for future extension of South Hudson Avenue and a connection to proposed subdivisions to the east.

4 Sewer: Proposed fence easement along 125th Place has a sanitary sewer located under it. Agreements will be required prior to construction in any easement.

5. Water: IDP submittal must be approved prior to approval of the final plat. 6. Engineering Graphics: Submit a subdivision data control sheet with final plat submittal. Graphically show all pins found or set associated with this plat. Add legend entries for found/set property pins. Platted subdivisions at the time of final plat approval must be shown in the location map. All other property should be labeled unplatted. Label plat location as "Site" or "Project Location". 7. Fire: No comments. 8. Stormwater, Drainage, & Floodplain: lllustrate existing FEMA floodplain boundary on the face of the plat. 9. Utilities: Telephone, Electric, Gas, Cable, Pipeline, Others: All utilities indicated to serve the site must provide a release prior to final plat approval. Provide a Certificate of Records Search from the Oklahoma Corporation Commission to verify no oil & gas activity on the site. Staff recommends APPROVAL of the preliminary subdivision plat subject to the conditions provided by TAC and the requirements of the Subdivisions Regulations.

ç 3'- I puo-áf8-\j Piu.D-67_7iA lrrrrr¡irlrrra \/ \ ,/l AG P.uD-]6í.7c \ I ËËüB='-r.tH F a.ì, ¡¡lDvcr-7rl -L ê- o

SUBJECT TRACT

RS-3 PUD.8O3

RS-3

(ô

Feet THE ESTATES 0 250 500 AT THE RIVER III 17-1 3 03 9.3 Note: GtË,phic overlays may not precisely Feet Subject THE ESTATES al¡gn with physlcal îeatures on the ground. 0 250 500 Tract Lr# AT THE RIVER III Aeñal Photo Dale: February 2018 I 17-13 03 trl êT ê

SUBJECT TRACT LAND USE PLAN NEW NEIGHBORHOOD

Land Use Plan Categories I Downtown ! NeignOorhood Center I Downtown Neighborhood I empnyment I Main Street New Neighborhood Mixed-Use Conidor Existing Neighborhood I Reg¡onalCenter ! earfand Open Space I Town Center f Rrt

Feet THE ESTATES 0+--250 500 AT THE RIVER III 5 17-13 03 8, SUBJECT TRACT

Growth and Stability

I Area of Growth Area of Stability

N Feet THE ESTATES 0 250 500 L# AT THE RIVER III 17-13 03 E.k+ R 13 E Preliminary Plat PUD.803.4

T l7 TT{E Esr¡rgs AT TT{E RrImnm â r{olltl PARI OF rHESOltfAS AIAR'ER ñORtHW6t QUARÌEÊ {SÊ/4 NW/41 OF SECr ON ÌHREE (3) IMÀ¡C¡NCOG N IOWNSHIP SEVENIEEN iI /J NORTH, RANGETHIRIEEN I]3) EÆT OF THE ]NOIAN ÆRIOLAN WITH¡N TULSA, trll A S!8DVS ON THE CIY OF IUßA COUNIY, STAIE OF OKhHOM ll ¡l ,"'f:"IJ;;,i;. @rdó.qdtuliobtu OWNER: SURVEYOR/ENGINEER: :**".- â l2lst Sùeet Properly. [.1.C. Icnner Consulllng, [.!.C. oK a No. 26r, ErPrR6S 6ÊolþD EMAtr: EGREEÑ347@M$.@M EMAI MNOINNERBAISHOP.æM 17211 5outh4170 Road 5323 South Lewß Avenue claremore, Okl¿homè 7æ17 Tulsa, Oklahoma74105 Phone: (918) 342-0m wfHrHEEß)46¡rÉffis Phone: {918} 745-9929 -----=.ñi

-----¡ññffi ffi ftTpdd*h¡fr*4æ wturù&dctAd¡ñ@lIic nHì¡htudtubñfr*&Eftr Nole¡:

10 snÉEt 9 g

q!a$Èß lNv4) or tuÊ Nomrw& a!4frÊß 1Nw4) d srroñ 3; g ô I nl t 3

l 12 6 El

I (PRIVAE) EASI SIREET s0uH I Curuê Tdblê ai 10 ã

2 1 -l i, E (D .b æ -' 3q I ! C) 6 1J q 3 15 r¡ l I l .U 10 o. E C :l I t6 t-

¡6 ¡

-- r31E.9d -----

@@,øM) ia E v^caEa) unpla ited

?s ùrE oF PREÞaRATTON: M.y3, þú Erlol6 ot the livê¡ lll -l PREI.Ifl^INARY I.AT

PUD.m3.4

Deed ol Dedlcqllon TT{E ESr¡rPS,{T THE RTVTNM

PARI OF IHESOIINilST OUARTER NORIIWÑ OUARIER {SE/4 NW4] OF SECI ON IHREF 13) IOWNSH]P SEVENTEEN (I 7) NORIH, RANGEIHIRIEEN II3I ÊASI OFTHE NOIAN ÆR]DIAN A S!8OIVS ON W IH N fHE CIY OF IIISA, IULSA COlNfr,sTATE OF OKLAHOM

6V4 NW4) oÉ scnôñ 1HAft (3), fowñsHP s.@ñr*N þ7) NoRrs, MNGI rHßftEÑ ûl

@6Êl¡ NV4t Àr rH. eur

IHE RE@ROEO Pøf THI*ÓF (Þúi ÛEN€ þUil d'!T E$ ANO A@IG $D EÆr r Nr oF ero *^ Nw4 .oR ^O.J;a $3s f€e ro Á PoLNr ÓN lHE w6r lNE or fH€ */4 Nw4j rHrNcE noRÈ de536" wsraoÀloNG rHE w€e !NÉ oF ilE q4 NW4, þR a

oFa,a57É6roû¿ryqryj wNÉR o¡ ¡s¡o¿ñt ÀÞ/oÀ MÉMEE¡ 4

oÉMANa, o s61€ú, NoñH æfl€ (3soÐ, NoRrB M€r@N ÞÀruM r$3 {úÚL rÞ B4rr6s Ài! 0 cdMt !Âa!rE,

8w€!t cÔtuÊa oF rtÊ NoRnær aladÊÂ {Nv4l r ÀRa owN€R oi RElo€Nr ^NÔ/ÓÂ o¡ rN¡ NoRrHw6Ì qudiÉR (Nq4) oF sdÞr 3r RBST @RNÉR O' IHE NORBT T dA[R (NIN mD¡ú ño/Ôa MÉMotR or û€ 6*rÁÌon oR ar Gu¿si Meroß, oi n! ÍtE rHrREoÊ

!! wams[ÆYs4MrqM*wa*rvÉÊ SEdION II. PÑNCO UNIT DEVELOfu€ilT RC$RIqþilS 0H6'66arod) LN &BED BY fHÉ c'r O¡ ruq orúø MAIN' wÀl¿Ê MALÑS, 9Nl'Añ fw[R ÉviloPMÊNf (os6NArÉc (WHEREWRTBE WORÞ s PUÒ No.3d) Æ PrcvÞÊo wfrr

rd^ÌÉs dH¿Rwß€) now, MilÉdnóÊÎÙqo(úrcM^,rH¿

SEd¡ON I. SIRESSND TLIN S'MCilE

€ ðf rrE crt oF rÙq

DEGNAEÔ N "UÆ' LNG, R¡PA RNA, REú N6, dO/O8 3

¡i3, GÆ ÙN6 wÁrrR rNg año ù wRÉr øÔurÉ APs, valws, MÍÊg

rygs]¡Ô@ ÊuRN&rNG warrR ñtÔÀ se!Â s

tBE cm of ruq ÓruHoMA, aÑo BY IsEE@PÀNING Ph'

I OßIV6 PARßÑ6 ARE€

É Áq É¡aPr 6 Æc65', 0,N¡,1 oN fH! À@MÞñY

ðRMrÉ Æ eÙicÉt oÊ

MnMùMrrcþl¡ilc@sDoÉÈ$ÀÉ

or€ 0l a@Nc rHE l¡sr rcñrÆÈ eD fte¿ þ) ûorÁr PÙo) eNG rN

À sx (6) !@ fa[ MeNÂr wr! w r 3É coñfRudtD lwrH a MdTMUM .oÙMÑ HåGHÌ oF r) N oÊ Þè Ètu RÉo l5rÊ[€Ê warER, sNfaiY 'ñMnuruRr ÌNE tNrrR€ uq *{erc ÑG sr (51 fÉf rN HÉ 6Hr {wrHAMdLMuMcoùMN HaftrÔÊ3). d gQ, PRETIMINARY PTAT

?uD-803-4 TÏ{E Esr¡rES.{T THE Rwrnm

PARI OFIHESOUIHEASI AIARTER NORINWE$ AUARÍÉR fS€/1 NW/4) ÔF SECIiON IHRÊÉ {3) TOWMIIP SEVENIEEN II 7) NORIN, RÀNGETH RIEEN Iì3J FN OFIHE INOIAN MERIÞAN A SUSDVIS]ON WÍHIÑ IAE C]IY OF IUßA IU6A COUNW, SIAIE OFOKIAFOM

DEED of DEDtcanox (controâd)

cl ÁwoMoBrús. øircRß aÊ PR4

WfNOWCOMMEßCAISICNAGE(M4MUM3ATO{.

wNrE asdÀnÔNoHE 'Ás@ÁfroN1. ùr As@AlroN sH

susac€ oF €rerÞR wals (æuorñ6 wNæÆ aNo @6)

sr þt rcHs ñ ¡rcM f8r w 4 fr. cuas ÀN0 5f {6) Æ!1 FúM rH

3 MAr@x s{LercÁfl -No (44 rß

azoGMG¿@e'Ml

ÉÉú a rHAl Êtu rME ro r ME, Æ

rcE dÞ UTd WRÛ€N RÊ4U61 dP *ttoil vt. ÉNFo¡cilffi, oumlo[ MfloMEM oR TEWTNATToN¡ ND srya@¡ltTY ChIION MAY NAVç I8E *RcNr F@ of r¡€ a*a.ovEßÊD d

*6toil v. PRlvalÊ GTolloils

ssoß ND s 6Nt ño HT CÌYô¡ ru&ÀY OMIRÓFÂ!

1a6u& ¡!rcÈ, wd, PAMNG, sq

0N.ruDùG a€i@ ra¡Nrnc) oN frY rol ÀNo flo tæwa( s¡aú 3É @ elY ÞM6€ft ^eÞr€o

ûo6uorN6 ÞúNtsoÉwu 6ùr

RrN ÂE@rÂ€owlHLNlwÊNr e0) ùt cov¡¡arrs 40/or ro ßE@€R DÚ

aú Erlro r¡ (6) ÈEr LN ilÉÊ E3rÂñ6Ntror8E ÊF¿Nr *

@MÞfrÌñc Þu1 6 fÊNcÊ ÉÆM¡ilf oÁ T/e.

aRa oNE do oNÈNAu þ¡È) oÂ ilo Þ) sroßY DwEúNGs ve 3Âv€ À M os þ n 13 E Conceptual Utility Plan PU0.803.¡l

T â 't7 TÏ{E ESr¡rUS ATTFIE Rvgnm NORlH TMAryNCOG PARI OF IHESOUINASI QUARIER NORIHWÊS OUARIIR {SÊ/4 NW4) OF SECI]ON IHRÊÊ {3) N ÍOWNSH P SÊVÊNTEEN {1 7) NORIH, RÀNGEIHIRIEEN I]3) EÆI OF THE ]NDIAN MERIDAN A SUBDIVS ON W]IH]N THE CIY OF TULSA, IUßA COUNIY, STAIE OF OKúHOM ¡tÊl ffi øuddù@dI&oblìm OWNER: SURVEYOR/ENGINEER: bMrh: l2'l sl Properly, l.LC. Ionner L.L.C. tocotion l{op I Sfteel Consulllng, oKdNo. 56! ExPrs6Êo/2ors EMA L ACR€Ê[email protected] ÊMAI ON@IANNERBA I*OP.COM 17211 South4170 Road 5323 Souih LewisAve¡ue claremore, oklahoma 74017 lulså, Oklåhoñ¡ 74105 ffi Phone: (918) 342-oeo Phone: (918) 745-9929 ffi

a. ¡prMl d ffi tliJ M dll 4E .æ FtÞnú.dddcry@dlsdru a e^,sYfwRMùd! &chùtuds.dtoiltrût ¡ fo.MfwRLNúr Notês: r, i :1":L't if -i 'i i"j'

cooRDN¡¡ rrÉM, úFB zoNE l3sÐ, ñoRri ¡M€i,cN oÀruM ú33 iil!

o.ÀmrR.\./¿)or Fr No{-rh-o-amkl\ú/¿)or fc,o\ 3. I I I æ954" E an¡q!ilw^ro, !o oil3. I t: 1 31 8.57' I

I t. ' à s E ftoporêd SbmSewêr ! ì .o.. 1¡' ;l ?ræd$ÑYWd ctr . lBq I ì à 0ai:i a: 15 E l' f^51 (Ll :OU Cì Ir) .)

PrcFsd Wodnè 16 ! I õ ,,_.1 I l¡ ö l 1 i tÌopd þdqkd s ¡ ..'-*-\ i-J)ìpl-.lt ./"-* rt(l .-__-- --,--.

|ri , i irrl i:rll,rl.'i 1!l"l:j OAÍEOf PRÊPAMTON: M¿Y'20ß Eslot$ otthe River lll ?a -e TMre Case : Enclave ll at Addison Greek Hearinq Date: June 6, 2018 Tulso Metropoliton Areo Plonning Commission

Gase Report Prepared by: Owner and Applicant lnformation

Nathan Foster Applicant: Tanner Consulting, LLC

Owner. Stone Horse Development, LLC

Location Map: Applicant Proposal: (Shown with City Gouncil districts) Preliminary Plat

'106 lots, 9 blocks, 27.8 + acres

Location'. West of South Sheridan Road at East 123'd Street South

Zoninq: RS-3 / PUD-828 Staff Recommendation:

Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat

Gitv Gouncil District: 8 Councilor Name: Phil Lakin Countv Commission District: 3 Commissioner Name; Ron Peters EXHIBITS: Site Map, Aerial, Land Use, Growth & Stability, Preliminary Plat Submittal,

Conceptual I mprovements g.l PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT

Enclave ll at Addison Creek - (CD 8) at East' 123'd Street South

This plat consists of 106 lots, 9 blocks, 27.8 + acres.

The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) met on May 17,2018 and provided the following conditions:

1 Zoning: Proposed lot conforms to the requirements RS-3 zoning. Boundary for PUD-828 should be delineated on the face of the plat to indicate which lots are included and subject to the development standards.

2. Addressing: Address will be assigned to final plat. Provide lot address graphically on the face of the final plat.

3. Transportation & Traffic: No comment.

4. Sewer: Easements in which sanitary sewer is located must be a minimum of 15' wide. Revise easements or obtain release from City of Tulsa for reduced easement widths. 5. Water: IDP submittal must be approved prior to approval of the final plat. 6. Engineering Graphics: Submit a subdivision data control sheet with final plaf submittá|. Graphically show all pins found or set associated with this plat. Add legend entries for found/set property pins. Platted subdivisions at the time of final plat approval must be shown in the location map. All other property should be labeled unplatted. Label plat location as "Site" or "Project Location". 7. Fire: No comments. 8. Stormwater, Drainage, & Floodplain: lllustrate existing FEMA floodplain boundary on the face of the plat. 9. Utilities: Telephone, Electric, Gas, Cable, Pipeline, Others: All utilities indicated to serve the site must provide a release prior to final plat approval. Provide a Certificate of Records Search from the Oklahoma Corporation Commission to verify no oil & gas activity on the site. Staff recommends APPROVAL of the preliminary subdivision plat subject to the conditions provided by TAC and the requirements of the Subdivisions Regulations.

9.L -EIq.Tn

qs ? o Ø Ia \ (t, AG

SUBJECT TRACT

I 'ìrF I t I I t I ¡ I I t o(Y) I æ I I z I la o I I f I I PU D-828 o À I I T ì I I tJt , ì I ^¡- I I t. l' rlìr

RS-3 ìl \ \\ LEGEND ------rrr

Bixby Corporate Limits PUD.8I2 Tulsa Corporate Limits

N Feet ENCLAVE II AT 0 200 400 ADDISON CREEK 17-1 3 03 9.3+ Feet II Note: Graph¡c overlays may not prec¡sely Subject ENCLAVE AT align w¡th physical features on the ground. 0 200 400 Tract ADDISON CREEK Aer¡al Photo Date: February 17-13 03 s o= v, aI I U,

SUBJECT TRACT LAND USE PLAN NEW NEIGHBORHOOD

] I I I t I I I -t z I o I T ì I t e I I a , ì t ì I I I , ì,

E126S

Land Use Plan Gategories f Downtown I Neighborhood Center I oowntown Neighborhood I Employment f uain street New Neighborhood Mixed-Use Corridor Existing Neighborhood f Regionalcenter I Park and Open Space I Town Center I Arkansas River Corridor

N Feet ENCLAVE II AT 0 200 400 ADDISON CREEK 17-1 3 03 ?,5+ -=ÊJ-tí-cLS:

SUBJECT TRACT

8126

Growth and Stabiliity

I Area of Growth Area of Stability

N Feet ENCLAVE II AT 0 200 400 ADDISON CREEK 17-13 03 9.þ + t't3€ Preliminary Plat m[øctrcur PUD-828 I ENcLAVE II AT 17 â NORTH N ADDISCN CREEK FIFII PARI OFIHE NORIHEASI QUARÍÉR INE/4J OÉSECI]ON TIREE I3J IOWNSFIPSEVENIEEN {ì 7) NORTI, RANGE TH]iIEEN (ì3J EAS OFTNE INOAN MERIDAN A SUSD]VsION WIHIN IHE CÍY OF IUßA. IUTSA COU Nil SIATE OF OKúHOM â #*H!"-- Unplatted

oNÊ HUñoRËoÁNo !f rôE tre) t .BI 5, t9

il 45{$' É 659.07 OWNER: 1æ .. ì2¡RD sr. s slone Horse Deyelopmenl, [.L.c. 79.02' 12 i EMAI: NHERHOMÉSOR@GMAILCOM Notes: 11029 South Mêmoriðl Dr¡ve lukâ, Oklâhomâ 74133 Phone: (918) 81+0881 o 12 R'- to -Ë h8 u SURVEYOR/ENGINEER: sMlÈE- .OORDINAÏ NfÊM, ÑOFi þNE €$!, NOßI¡ AMÊRICAÑ ùÎUM 1* I Tonner Consulllng, [.LC. ðz o^ þ) þuNoEßcf e¿MAÎÎHf N0 f, o( a No. ?661, *r R6 6/30/Ð19 ÉMAI!: OAÑ@TANNEfi ETSHOP,COM 5323 South bwisAvenue {b) ¡ouNo fi" ñN PrN Âr rHÉ eu <3 ffi adrÀ (Nv4) or senoil 3r Tule, Oklahoma 74105 6 -e !, rú Phone: {918} 74s-9929 q) ---iúrc¡N¿õsMrh_ a il c

_-tM I curê tqble ------=¡Ñ:ñ@ ffi tu¡pDMldftFrdhsn4Ê.8 @tuûhlqeuñclSd[ú Nhùtudtu(@M&hl -Addlson creeK 5 Blocl(s 1-Ð (Proposêd)

ùlù ;i; t! 'l' EASI 125fr SmEÍ S@ft

L _ ]1j!ß )ÙlL tuE M s/. Ù1 -{ MRMÙ1q4 t-- *q sì F' t_ s I ENUVE ü ADDISON CITEEK ^T =o\.l PRELMNARY PLAT PUD-828 ENcLAVE II AT ADDISON CREEK

PARI OTIHÊ NORüAST OIARIER iNE/4J OFSECTION IHREE {3) I] 7) NÔRTH, RANGE INLRIEEN {I3J ASI OF THE ¡ÑDAN MERIDLAN 'OWNSNIPSEVENTÊÊNA SUSD VIS¡ON WÍHIN IHÉ CIil OFIULSA, TU6À COUNIY, STÀI OFÔftAHÔM

Dèed ol Dedlcollon Frc(r¡ES AUSÉo 0R r€CÊ$farÉ É ÀcæMPñyrñc PLAi NO BU(Oß OWNIR5AGENIS OR CONf Rrc1ORS. ÆovE oÊ 8€!ow GiouND osrR! PIrcEO, ER€CI6O, INSIIUD, ôR MANIANÊo, PROVIDEO 4. fHE CrY 4 rurq O(hHOMÀ ôR rß SUCCES$R5, SrAtr Âr Â 1. Atr@SßAND EXPEN56Â5$CIAIEOWIH Atr RESRVÉAR[6 INCUDLNG MAilIENÂNCE SHII 3' DÊÉMED PARENC ÆE€ CURÊNG, accÊs ro Àtr !ru¡n æÊMÊNr c Prar, on olBÉRwjs sroNE NoRsE oÊvnotuÊNf, [c, trNCÉS WHrG m NOr CoNSUrufE aN ?ROUOED TOÊ IN IH]S DÊEO OF DE ÍEUN6, MAINIALNING, IHg PROPÉRIYOWiERS'ÆSCIAIO IO O¡ UNDÉRGROUÑOWAITR, sA truarEorN lNEc[Yor rusA ruscouNû srarroroKrsoMA:

HE NoRTHEÆIO!ÀRÌER sEcroN ÌHRIE (3), {NV4)o¡ 5. rHE tORECOrrG CoWNefg S E ENfORCEABÉ BV û€ HE R¿sERVE ARÉA fiO rowNssrP sEvENrÉrN NoRrH, RsG€ rNrRfÊEN F7) 03) €Æf of rH ANO æMMINIqÍON uccËsss, aNo rH6 owN€i oÉ rac SUSÉO!ÉNIIY FATS rc PAY ftE C r!r$couNlY, srarE or ofLAHoMÀ,9roftrcr sÊrNG MoiE PÀiicu SfAÍEMEIIOF COSI'¡ROM IHE ON OFruIh OKhHOMÀ Y EÆ6MÊNI5 OI 1NÉ SUSDIVLS¡OI IHE C]IY MAYfIIÊ OÉ RECOßDACOP SIANDMOS sHAtr 3€ SÉRVÊO TY UNOERGRdID CABLE ÂNO, SHII æ A U€N ßANgI &G O MMÉDAf€IY,PRECEDING 5ETIEICE Nq EÉPN$E, CAg[ .SECLSEDBYIHgCIIYOÉTlTqOKSNOMÀ. TEúVISIOÑ ANO 6N UNgSAtr ¡E IOGIED UNÐÊRGROINO IN æ EAü LOI EO RESRVÉ ARú R€CÚVÊ ANO OßAN, LN åN UNOSIRICTED MNNÉ& IHÊ GÉNERÁ! UItrIY SERVICÉ Æ OTPIC . SERVICÉ ÊE$9[S ANÞ SIONM dD SURFACE WAIEN 'HA[FRO 3 ÊÆN IÓI NÐ ÉSERV€ Æ€A OWN€R OR R6I*NI ÂND/tr MÉM TRS5FORMER' A9 SUrc$ OF SUPPIY A1 SCONùRY V4Tre'' MAY [þ æ TæAI¿D N owNERSNITCONSÍR!ÍORPERMßtO 3E @NSnuCrsÐ owNaß ÆsrÂfroN ÆRE¿s fo H rNEREor lPlar No. J, rBÉ RANÆá OÊ SIORM SO MAÑ6, LSUI g' OR TBÊ OWNÊRS !O1 OR RÊSTNÊ AR€A IHg @VÉNÀI6 gI MMÆÊS Ærsrr6 coRNaRof sao tñcrav€ araoDsNcñ*K"Àr0rNÉ!!!f gsrcrNN Naj ruAMO IN IAÊ N€S E SUæIVSON MÀY S EXENOÊO ¡ROM HÉ ÔWN€R gNAtr^ESFiVE 3E !ÆG IO IH 0 cdsrRucroN oF a owN6R OR ñÊSroÉrf ño/oR M¡Ms6ROr rn€ PROPÊRTYOWNER9 AS srRUcruRE lPoN f8a !o1 PRdroão rNAl uPoN LNsfÀtraÏoN fotrowNc ÉrcHr i3t co!ÉÉs: s of a NY ùM6! 10 ÞERþN OR PROÞB ftENCq þufi *54 54 w€sr toR À orsrÁc€ oF 79.0¿ ÉEf; rrÉNcE s OM SON tr NEGUCFNCÊ OT ANY lOIOR RÊSâñV€ ÆAOWN€R OR ÂBIÐÊNI ÀNO/tr MEM*R *€MÉO TO HAW A DEf NIIVE, P€RMSINl EtrlCIIVg, AND NON.É ANÌNG PßI gH[T 3E ÊA*M6NI ON fHÊ LOI COVERNG Â RESPONS&€ ÉOR INE RÊPAIR O' DAMreE rc úNSCA !'eæ wESr toR À DrslaNcÊ or 2ô2.r FÊÉrr ÌMÊNCE surN s6 ENANCÊ OF UNOERGÊO!ID WÀI¿& sANIISI S€W€R, sIORM *WER, NAIURAI GÉ COMM!^ICAIION, M ÊÉCÌRrc FrcÛÌ€5 WÌH N lHE w6rÉRNM6f þurHw6rcô €ÉK',rrHENC€ NOArr frus, oKraHoMAoR s'00fi wÊsr rcR a o5rÀN4 Ô o!?z wÊsr foR a F IHE UIUfl SERVICÊ$Atr !S€ REÆONA8IT CAR€ Ñ I!€ oRrN 0.9339 wÉSr ÉOñ a orsraN F accEs fo dr !tufY Ê800f oÊoLanoN FoR EEri rB€Nc! NoRrN s'5454 ÊÆr ¡0ñ a D3rÀNc€ OF IANINC. REMOVING. OR REPßC]ÑC ANY ÐRILd OT 1H' NÊ, æMMUN1CAION, OÊ GA NSIÀtr€O 3Y IH€ 7r!3eÉÊf To rH¡ryq!!Nl C æ15âIO APPÊdED SY THÉ COIN 'Æ[IÉS SIDEWALß SHAI M CONSIRUCI6O EÔ MANÍANED {OÑC SIREEfS O ACCOROANCÊ WTH INÊ SUBDVgOÑ ñ€CIIAIION5 OF frÃ CIIY Of IU ÉsERvÊÀR€asN[r À6 RESmN!8S iORrHÊ PnoÉcroN o¡ CONTORMANCÉWlAÍHÊCIYOF fUlsAEilC NÊÊRLNG OÉ9GI SIANOMø fHÊ g€ARING5$NI HÊÊ€ON ARÉ BN€O UPON IH€ OEAHOMASfÂfT PLANE @GÐIilAIE f Â INWÀTK WfBLÑ THÉ SIRE€T R SN€RIOAN RN AÑÔWfHIN THF Sf STSTEM, NORIH ÐNE {350Ð, NORIN MERICAN DAruM T$3 {NÂM) rNr€Rf¡iå wrN rHE EfclRrc, lflEPHONÈ, COMMIN|CAÍOñ, Oñ 6Æ fÆtrrÉ5 EAO SupprÉR DÊPfrEDONTHEAIIKHÊOPßÌ.E ,gRIORIOINE SUNCE crroFruq,orú8oMAAñD OÍ fH€* SERVIC6 SHAU 3E RE5P E MEU iG WIHIN A LOI, IHE OWIÊR Of ÈÉ PÑIICIIAÊ NLMæOÊÈOUIR€IBÊ tooro 3ÊÆscPsfEM arrHE NoRrHasr@Ril€aoF*EroRrf €Nralmf€R (Ns/4) þ) 5ÁB!5HMENT OF @[NÅTs OF R É il THECIft OFIU& R€S¡RVE AruAOR5AO OWN€R 5 &ÊIIIOR Cilf RACIOß (b) ¡olNo s/3 rRoN P¡N ÀrrHÉs srauÀRrER (Nv4t 5. INÊCOV€NANISS€ITORIN II8LSSU3*OONASHAúBÉENFORC O''ÆAÉIRIC,IEtrP3ONã,COMM EREBY ÉSIABÙSH ANO GñANl IO IIÊ OWNERS OT IH6 ñ65'RV€AREAÆREE5ÍO3EæIND S AND ÊENEÊI, T€ùC€ D UPOil IHÉ MAS OESIGNAÎED AS 54' ND SHOWN ON IHE A@MPÀNYIilG PTÀI, AINIANING PÊRIMÊT€Â OECORAIIV€ I¿NCts AID €INY Éss[rÀratrfrM€s ro FÉilcEs, warq SPRLNÍ$R ssrÊMt ÀNo ÉNATEROÊfrNEO,çN[I MvE rHÊ RCNr Ot aCCE$ 10 er Uilrn ÊÆEMÉNfS S8owil ON rHE hNBEPINq ÀÑD FOR INE PURPO DEVEÉPMÉNI PÂdISIONS OT 1H6 PROVæD FoR rN r3r9 0EÊ0 0r DaDTAiON ÊOR ftE runpo* OÊ r $ ANO ALON6 SUC8 N'MÊNß ANO dER, ÆrcS ÂND HÉ CNOT fU!*, TU6A 111H 20É, OR MAY ÊÉ AMEÑDEO sUS€OUENTIO THÂT R€PÀIR¡NG, OR RÊPßCJNG ANYPOR OlANDÍÆEÀR64 6 cou¡rY, ôflsoMA, iwtsaRâvÉñ rHE wo& rusDrvrsril aPPas H IHE PROPÊRÍ OWNÉRS ÑOCIÀIIO AND €NIRY ÉEAIUi!'ANDAtr ßI 6SEâVE Añú SII 3€ R€SPON5IBTÉ N€REIN EgIA8!sHED AND CMNI€O OATED]N IHÉIR IOIOR R€SRVEAREANOSE!PRÙ€NÎ rÊsOTNERWSEI. ÑOW, IBERÉTORÉ, INÉOWNER, ¡OR IHE fN€ AIIÊRAION OT GRAW tr ÂNY H CH rcU6 IÑIERFIR¡ ãvrsroN, ÀNô roi rHÊ P!ÂPOSE OF ¡NS!R]iG ÆEAIA1E RÉSM6LONS FOR IB€ M!ruAT 6ÊN Æilr¡6 Blr rHÉ owNÊR or rHÊ succEssR' GRANEÊ9Àilo ÀNrsSû 6rCN Fqf! 4!W, cEsgrarEo âY Ær5 0F ÄNO @ENÀNI' WBCH S3A[ B€ ONSIRICNON OF TIE RÉOUREO INFreIRICIURÊ ISiRÊ€I' warE& s&rraRY sÉwER, aNo sro ß rHAr rHÊ owN€i rs ¡. 13€ covaNÀrsS osucarÊo rô côNÍRlq 'OREGOTc IANTNG NÊ rcÂEGOINC, IHE CIIY MÂY EÍNORL¿Ê INE $!8C€ OF A TSPORMY CERrf rC G lHÊ rcREGolNc, lNÊ

ÆcEÞrÀNcÊ # lfÊ IÊÊ P!3!C TH€ U1 UlY FÑâMENß jTORM ilE P!E]CWAIÊR MAINS, $NIIARY s€W€R MAN' ANO SÉWER rclrm PNASE. tu[OrNG CoNsrRU oE9GNAÌÉO p!ÂpOS6 S "!/fl fOñ rNE SVIRN 0F N¡RÆIRUCIURE S8Atr 3ÉATfA€ Â M1N6, RÊPARNG, RÊÞ!trING, NO/Oñ Ê€MOVING ANYANO rol NoilrrHsrÀNoNG rr€ rssue s.wER' sñlraRY G ÞIA1 IHE {ÌERAION COMM!ÑICAIIOil !NE' EtrCTR]C POWER !ÑESAffO I$ÑSORMEÉ 6Æ !NE' WATER !N6 OT CRÆE IROM IBE CONTOURg *ISIING !¡ON INE COMPtrNOI OF T EINERWi'NNIMN6' CONDUÉ PLES, VATVES, METER' MANNOGS ¡NO ÉOULPMENI FOR EACA OF SUCN fÀ'!116 WHICi,]ÑTHÊIUÑMÉIIôÉfNÊC MArN5 OR SÌôRM pft4itrÊo, PROV|WD TOWEWR, rc PrcHBI OÂ]VE' PARKINC ÂRÉÆ, CIRgINC, lCI MAINTAN, OPERAIE, hÍ ND R€PAIR OR NÊNrc€ EÉN|N6 FENCÁSlNAr æ rôl Cdsr WÀTSRINÉ' g{]IâRY SEER MAIN IBER WIts ftÊ NI6HI OT

M6NfS ÞEPf€D ON THÊ r^-,'Ji,ü!r3iri!',à",,*îËf#ï"11*iü^iffi^r,iìüü,r;i!i"¿så,;[tr¡,,:¡¡¡ ÀRÊA SAtr PAY FOR OMA i!#f¡åüffis:F,',9,*¡iîi{:#Ä¡åjåå-{i!itiü$}:1^sj¡äi!#i$ DÊOICÀIÉO S !fI!N EÆSMÉIIS SE MÀINIANEO 3Y 1NÉ PiopÊRilom€R9 ssooÂÍoN,

ENúVE [ ADDISON CREEK -o ^T tsa PEELIMNARY PLAT PUD-828 ENCLAVE II AT ADDISON CREEK

PARI OFBE NOiINEÑ QUAÊTÊR IN€/4J OFSÊCTION IIREE 13) IOWNSHIPSEVENIEEN (ì Z) NORTh, RANGÊ IN]RIEÊN I] 3I EAST OIIHE INDAN MÊRIDAN A SIBD]VEION WLftIN IHE CIT OFÌU6A, IITSA CO!Nry, $ATE OFOKúHOM

DeÊd ot Dedlcdlon (Cordinued) owNER Or ar És EVERY PEßON OR ENNTYWNO ISARICOROOWNEROT IHE TEE ¡NIÊIE acnowrEocEosYrHÊowNsßo ÌH€5ISOrV¡SjON. NrHÉ MEM4N OF ilÉ ff$OAIION. MÉMBEÉHIP SAtr BÉ APPURE¡ANf ryÉNTOTANY@N'UCI8€IW€EN AN MENDMEilIORIÊRMINAI ON PROÞEßIYAECUTEOSYIH€ SEIÀNAED TROM fHE OWNERSI I OT A !OI. OWNER {DUR]NG Iß OMEßHIP O' ÀI fÆI 1 TO¡ ÂNO NY AMENDMÊNIOR Î€RMINÂIION PutfrEo uNtr oryELoPÆM tEilrqþf,s(coNTttuED) PROPERIY EXECIIEO 3Y fH€ OWNÊre O'AI úÆI 60%OF IHE 6I' IHE I srcrþ¡ ù BY II3 OWNER SHAU

IERMI ÑATINC COVÊÑElS AN D REsÌRI ÍIONS SHII SE E tr FñOM EACH ror OWNÉR 5HÀ( É SsrECr 'CIIVE FOR TAE P!MO$ OF IMPRTEMTNI ANO MALNIEN¡NCÊ Of RÉÊRV€ AÊEÆ ND ÂNY OIN¿R fH€'PUD LOÉ'WIIHII IHE SU8DIV¡SOil, DEFNÉD Æ ATL LOIS WfßLI &æXS 1 AND ¿ LOIS T PROP€8IYåNDFÆtrItrSIHAI, TROM IMÉ IOIIM', AR! ¡ORIH€ æMM ôr srocK s, lors 1 rHñolcH 9 tNcrusvÉ, o¡ Broc(6, N0 6 $MÊ MÀY S ÆREEO TO 3Y fHE MEMBERS OI fNÊ IOT 4, BLE( 7 (HERNNAñERRÊFSRRÊD fO BE SUSfCI NIHÉ tOIy) $Atr Iô INf ÉOtrOWÑG NVIIOAIJON OF EY RÊSN]OþN SgI fORÛ NEREIN, OR ANY ¡AiI T r!6M€NlOñ D€CREEOf NY @!Rt OROTHERWSisN[rNOriNVÀ IHÊ OBÉR RBIRICIIONSOR ANY PARI THEREd Æ SÍ rcRru 3€ÂflI, W

Nft @NoLloñs^No 16Êr rN Rç3, UONrñG DgrRrcr rN I RESIßKNONS CONIAN€O Ifl IH]S OEEO OF NOIAÍON 1O IHE SM€ CôDÉ, Æ IIE SME A6ED ]UNE €ÀruN6 AND SÊCUREÐ BENÊfIOM€SftÊR€ÔI, rcTUDNG¿rcH lOTOWNEÀ INE C fYNOIHÊSUPPUÊROFSY !IUil NOM OtoÊ!@MÊrl (C, Àr O& ENTRANCES ANO R€CñÊAIIOII ¡À CE$RY 10 P€RMIII€D OR OIHER 5ERVCE WIHIN THE 5UBDVI5IOfl, AND SNAtr HAVE IHE RICHI IO ÉNfOâCE IIESÉ @MPNYHÆÉICUTEO*ISINSIßUM€ÑION THI5- DAYOT srmÊHds D&EroPM€ñt trc N O(UflOMA!MIIED!ÂSUIYCOM¡ANY Sgro¡u cxtoicEM&a DUMIoI il4oMffi oiTaNtMf¡d,8D -20ß. MIN¡MUM!VÆIUÛ$rcERÉqUNED(PÊRtOI)": 4,@SF IH Æ' Cd€NÁNIS IO RUN WTH IHE LANO AND 5B[I SÉ BINOING UPON INE OWNÊR, IßSUCCFSÔßÂÑÔNGNS,WfHIN frE P 8ÉTORÉ ME, INÉ INDEßIGN€D, A ÑOTMY PU8UC il ANO ¡d SAID C ENIRL6NI5XRIAffislrD, ?0r3 PERso\a--YAPPEAqEo.@ ro v' r!or\ sr0É YñoaÊ!Í rG açrR6Ër¡.¡ o r., wHÍaEñ ôÂ Nor gÉcçrca 10 SE rH6 rÐÊNÌc[ reeN Wrc SÉ DùEIOPM€N I trC fO RÊAR'ARO RÉfr YÁRDÂBUf NNG OÑCLUOÊS 0 sHA( 36 SNTORCÊÆtr SY r8E O ñrER¡À! s1¡És R -v.ÑÑTÂùæffi cHr.FwaYl. IHE COVENANIS CONIAINED IN S€qLON II. PISN€D UNII OEVETæ T\TC-¡ÉD 'FL SV! N F TCLÉ ÑfuJ-AqY ÆI ND D!!D 4D IhI q¡!^TD A IREÈ'd- ESTABUSFED PLÊAAN. I O I tsT LM Ì.mMtrffi i_IM VOLUÑTAñYACIAND æ€OFgUCg' CÊSIBERÉIN SÉI cooE rñ ÉxrslåNcÊ ßoFJuils ü,2015 aNDsNAtr |NURE ro rHÉ uN€¡fotûÊ cûot t!rs,^c 'ORIH OKNNOMA SY ANO INE PRæ87 UNDE6I6NÊDOWNÉ(OR TSSUCESþßOÊN'6Ñ5SNAtrVIOßIE rlr roR rHE c[Y 0f r!6a, aNYow PTPERÌY OWNÊRS Æ$CrÂiON rO N €OUrÌ ÆÀLr5l rrE M/ñrMUMrwo {21Êrclo$oOÉ.SÌRE€IPARíN6 9ÆE5PER MÉtrLNC lNLf PFR$N OR PEMNSVIOIAIING OR ÀTÉMPIINC IO VLOú'E ÀNY SUCN ffiÊffi sUCN ÞÊSOI OR PÉEONS TROM 9 æ]NG OR IO æMPÊL @MPTANCÊ Troñ rv. ¡ÊoPERû ôwN(ñs soc oNÊo)aloNcEtrf P$!crErfRilrÆE,NorroExcEEo32souaRÊtrEr€ÆHrNszE, rrE arÀÉr r o! ñY ow\Ec or À ror a!ffiffiffi ESOñS Oñ &rGNg SHAú vrùarÊ WIHIN 9ÊION V., ITSIAUBE ÁW Æ$CIAIOÑ rc MANIAN AIY ACION A1 úWOR N ÊAUITYÆANSI IHE PÉRSN OR ÞÉÉONS vro4lrNc oÊ ÂñEMPTNC fO VTOTATE AñY SUC| COVENANi rO PRÉVÉNI $C! PERSON OR tMwouaL '.úd Lat wLL MÊet tÆ P€R9N3 ÍROM 5O MLilC OR TO æMÉI COMPL NCE WLIH IN€ COVE ÆION srcUGHTTO ENFORCE INE COVEÑANIS ESIABUSN'O WIiIN I t0 fr. ts MNIaNED stweeN awEL ILNG IHÊ €OU I€[ PrcC€€OIilG H AI hW IS IERE8Y WAVED, IN ANY]IOICIA AC1ION BROUGHI 3Y SY O ANI UIILI|Y MEM LETû WÍHN IÆ Iø ALilC A fiE LAI UNE H CH ÆlôN SaÉKt rO 6MOrc€ rHE IÑ SCIONg I. OR V. NDþR TÔ ffCOVEñDMÆ85 FORIHE 8REACHIH€REOF, TAÊ ¡REVAUNG PARIY SNAtr 3E ÉNfftrD æCÉIW REÆilAE! AÍORNEY FEES A 'O t úE@ A MMUM AF FUE (5) FEt ASAVE tÆ

186É RESN]OION'IOfrE EXÍENI U BÉPERPETU{ SUI IN Kto¡ ru PþtEmow¡Eß r NOI ISS INAN INLRÛ {30) YÉffi ^ssnno¡ N6 0F rHrS 0Â€0 0¡ o¡DrcaloN E6ND€DÆ HERE Nf IER PROVDEO.

ilE OMER NN FONMS! OA fO BE TORMED ¡N ACCOROANC' WTH B¿ ot ÛÊ Sfal¿ ot o(aroMÀ aN'HÂ(CAUSE ÆæranoN oF a( owfltRg 0r Lors w 'IAI!I5 {IHÊ ASCAIION"L A NOT4OR.PROF¡I CORPORAIE EII¡'Y ESIÀBIsHEO ND ¡ORMÉO FOR INÉ ßscovÉNsrscorraNso wrarN st60r r. sfñ€€ßsD ur uÌ æ G R€S¿RVE $ES, FSNCFANO ûNDIAPE EN'MTNß, AÑO ßE5ERVE A MAY AE M¡NDEO Oñ IERMNffiN INSIRUM€NI ) 9üAIM! IOR ÈÊCOMMôN U5ÉM ÆINESE MAYÊEÆ3É€DIO BY ÍÉRM NAION 5 IO W APPT ú3É ANO Ð?ñOV6D ÊY IIE fUS MEIRO ) coMMsroN, m fs s!æ696 aNo rrÉ cft oF rur$, o(ßHoMA. rNÉ covÉrefs CONIANÉO WTHIil SCIO I I, RICIIONS MÂY ÈE ÀMÊil*! *¡ORE M6 IHE UNDERSGNEq A Ñ NTY ÀNÐ STAII, ON IN€ OR ÌECVÑAÍtD AÌ NV IIVI BVffi 2OA PEMAtrY ÆPEAREOIO M'ùN ¿.IEN€Â N NOOTALOWN€RSW¡ru¡Ñ IH€ S OWNESOFIHÉ ßÑOIOWN]CH I N WHO SUMRI8ÉD HS NAME Æ TrcÊNS€D PÊO'€$IONÀI OLIN ARú PNNING COMMI5S OF PROVIÐING OROERIY OEVAOPM NOIW1I3INOING fAÉ TORECOING N SEILS N]. SHAtr æ IÍOI IMPRôVEM€NÉ IHERÊIT. SAID PRIVÂIE R6TRICIION' tr€M€O aMÊñDED Nrrlolr NECE$ñ Or EfC!ÍON Of Ar Ð€No|NC oCUMÊri UrcN BE ¡úD OF RÊCORO I ro P!D.3:3 ÊY 1HÉ rut$ MÉnæ FSIBD VIsION,ANDSAtrBEæVFNNfSñINNING WTH TlE coMMrsror, oRrfs$acsoÉ NoÊEcsorñG 0r aeRrf Éoco*oFrNE M|NUTESor rN6 LAND ANO &NOING UæN fHE OWNÊ& IIS $CCEs$RS NO SGNS. SD sHÂtr g IU6A MEIROrcUIAN ÀREA ?IANNING @MMLsgOI OR EN IORCÊ€IE 6 STÂTEÐ N *ID FIÉO MCUMSNI COUNÌY CtrRT. ruÊ COVEOANE C 'URIHER ANO ÆXNWIÉæEO 3Y NI OWNER DURINC SUCH PEROO THAT THE OWIÉR ß TÆ i€CORD M@ffi

ùrE of PREPÂRAÍON: M.y 0r, 20rS ENüW [ ADDISON CREEK ^T =0-o R 13 E Conceptual Utility Plan

PUD-828

T ENCLAVE II AT 17 NORTH IMÀrc/NCæ N ADDISCN CREEK ll ll ffi PARr OFrNE NORTHEAST QUARTER INE/4) OFSECT ON rfREe 13) bud.t üe q dru a Ob@ IOWNSA]P SÉVÊNIEÊN (I Z) NORTH, RÀNGÊIH RI€€N I]3) ÊASI OÊ INÉ ]NDLAN MERID AN A SUSOIVS ON W!ÌN]N THE C TY OF IULSA, IULSA COUNTY, STAIE OF OKúHOM .::::'-**^ tocgtþi,wtsp. ô ffipC ll lllr¡lli:it.l È@dsrykwg 721.89'

ONIHUNOR¿DÁNO!XO6) LOIS 'iÈ ËË N ssas' a Propd S.flrySewq 659.07

, 79.02' Notes: a ñopøôd woldlna - l' .-- I Ë ' è o) ;ì1 o) ' ' L) NORIH ÄMIRICAN MIUM Ú3] ì 9!, h8 :ì [.iü i' 9 à o ':i .a ouÁr€ñ rNl4J of s¿cr oN 3; =

i! I !!

rLl

,'ì!l{ll:i! I \-i li lr,l\i :.) SURVEYOR/ENGINEER: Iqnner Consulling, L.[.C.

oKcaNo 2661, ExP REs6/r0201e

Tußå, Oklåhonå 74105 Phoñe: (918) 745-9929

OWNER: Slone Horse Developmenl, L.L.C.

11029 South Memori¿l Drive Tußa, Oklahoma 74133 Phone: (918) 814-0881 ftisai)q 12" Su.¡tor/ ScÙet l- .:ì ..-. ;1 l, ÊNUVE u ADDISON CREEK I ^T ¡ ù TMre Gase : PUD-737 Plat Waiver Hearinq Date: June 6,2018 Tulso Metropoliton Areo Plonning Commission

Case Report Prepared bv: Owner and Applicant lnformation:

Nathan Foster Applicant: Ruben Najera

Owner. Ruben Najera

Location Map: Applicant Proposal: (Shown with City Gouncil districts) Plat Waiver

Location: South of the southeast corner of East 11th Street South and South 161't East Avenue

Zoninq: RS-3 I PUD-737 Staff Recommendation:

Staff recommends approval of the plat waiver

Citv Gouncil District: 6 Councilor Name: Connie Dodson Countv Gommission District: I Commissioner Name: Mike Craddock EXHIBITS: Site Map, Aerial, Land Use, Growth & Stability, Síte Plan

lo,l PLAT WAIVER

PUp-737 - (CD 6) South and east of the southeast corner of East 11th Street South and South 161't East Avenue

The platting requirement for this property ís being triggered by the approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD-737) in 2007 that was never developed . ln 2010, the landowner divided the property into several large tracts and sold tracts to individual owners without addressing the need or requirement to plat the property. The current proposal is to permit the construction of one single-family home on the subject property

The Technical Advisory Committee met on May 17,2018 and the following items were determined:

1. Single-family residential uses aÍe a permitted use on the site. 2. No additional easements are required at this time. 3. A right-of-way dedication is required for S 161st East Ave to comply with the Major Street and Highway Plan 4. Water service is available on the site through service connections. 5. The property meets and exceeds the minimum requirements of the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality to permit on-site sewage disposal.

Staff recommends approval of the plat waiver with the following conditions:

1. The required righlof-way dedicatíon for S 161't East Ave must be made. 2. An ALTA survey is required to be filed of record with Tulsa County due to the property being unplatted.

lÒ.L AG GS ol RS-3 AG

I l"T

I t I

SUBJECT TRACT

PUD.737 RS-3

RD AG AG

N Feet 0 200 400 PUD.737 PLAT WAIVER ÊJ 19-14 11 to.s+ Feet PUD-737 PLAT WAIVER 0 200 400 Subject Note: Graphic overlays /-9;"I, al¡gn with phys¡cal features on the ground. Tract 19-14 11 Aerial Photo Date: February 2018 @M wddù .- ilvrd*rt ,--..-\ld8'*tu \- **.*-MhdtuM .+' Tú*ffim7at$

g-î.Ë#.la tsd O6cruon:

^ÉdEwhñMd*f,14*Èr*dùú@u@,bdh@bb tuú6.tu&nld,h'a@

@rñtu{Úd*lr,!Fl ll¡E6@&br¡hcbMd& tudlæbÞù'&dw; 1læffi.&EdMs tuffi.tud1@* rhært¡&dr.g* tuffi.dhcæS* ]hæ¡&Ðdff!* ]L!ffi¡ffidÉg* lr¡!¡ffi.tuú.ls* 1ba&ttw¡tudeúd¡hrhdh tu¡ffi&hdhcrMds11.¡ dæd&dhþùtuCW, BÉd&&Eryhû.@ñ h¡@úthúËiú6.d *c@d{b*hdbMdsli dgffiæ&ùdhdbMc@1trn4 Fr*dùúffirû@.bcry @bb@ßMtud. æ9,767 sS¡âro l€€t or 6.6541 acr€s 4@¡t.ttu

Nù: Mdøó@wb¡ry,þ-l_l-út ry.tuqbffidtuùl¡w&ÐË ¡l@d5ñøtd&dþúbdb o|fu,fu@hqdùJlilld're0@&€l s*'whbf(@,-tu.F¡&Fjm 4IøF*Ôffi, -Ê

FÉlÐqdqúø&. bqÞø¡tdbú t¡cúùb lÙrydffimtübÉ*ú LI ^6dÈù@*Q4¡rcU**hi-@@*døÙÈdú JI @bb rfGo.G, Dtb¡ d¡5 ffi !ffi Û4*Ðd ÊdbFd?!¡.8. %w6d¡r.rËù L¡netvpe: f-.l r¡ffiülùñúdd{¡&dÛ@¡&d I 24 tuædûqdù.ryÈqFtùå*¡6 dlÚdhæ,ùbr@ddgdhryÉb Effi¿E¡û¡ùÞ3; ffiñdùdry'@, @oüffibHq&¡æeú&w ffiucÞæ51*êúhdã,b& ùAtuffi tr.maüË3e8hþ4ÐaFÞt + bdüÊÉ La€rd: s&Í.fngtrÈ14

Panof th€ tlw4 olSoclim 11, T-19N, B-1¡l-E isdlbdhCbFd6É4t¡. & O¡mrddE Þ-Agú B¡d lôudAulirffi Boudaw Suruw r¡È êoulh. lêlil E ô! Àvrrc

i i- !

0 0t , bt : o, ol ¡ ú, l- :' ol iÞ rO i I o oio' z f, EI ,8 i8.

i : lo i: rO

I Int

? I

4tÞ,oo'N oo.oo'oo" Ê

I l

I ,:8 ol d; /q br ¡6 s_J rd zl r¡' /s ttd

êl '&,,,È t$/q t ,{r¡f' ,1,

q r"Ñ ô t,to*r*àw7- t- -á'fisf66{&@'

CdSTRUCIId HANA6ER: PRAECT FOR: The Najera-Landeros Residence Sawyer, Kim Z-7'/q/

From: Miller, Susan Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2018 10:32 AM To: Sawyer, Kim Cc: Wilkerson, Dwayne Subiect: Withdrawal of Z-7444 gL r [ ü{¡sj Y

From: De bora h Richa rds [ma ilto :de bo ra h @ i nter-projects.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 20L8 12:1"5 PM To: Foster, Nathan Cc: Miller, Susan ; Kolibas, Robert ; Austin Mitchell ; Jones, Robi Subject: Re: 1007 S Peoria Ave, Meeting Followup

Hi Nathan,

I have confirmation from the client that we should pull the rezoning permit and we will use our existing parking lot (with re-striping and regrading)as outlined in the first email. Please let me know if you see any issues with this or if I need to apply for any other variances/special exceptions.

Thank you, Deborah

Deborah Rir.hards, RA

I nter-Projects Architecture, PI LC jl_rlCt!"lg-iC q tS, c.ô rr' work:23,2-335"0849 cell:9'/3-441 0898

Please be adr¡iseri tlris messaçe. togeiher ivith any att¿ìchrrtents, is intendeei only for the use of the individual or entity 1o whcm ii is acidressed and nray contain inforrnation that is priviiegecr anel oonfiderilial. lf you are irot the intended recipient, piease do not read, copy or re-transmit this communicatton lf you have received this comnrunication in error, please delete this n'¡essag¡e and any attacl'rtnents.

On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 8:59 AM, Foster, Nathan wrote:

Deborah,

That is fine. I will pull it off the agenda. lf something else is decided later just let me know and I can distribute it

Thanksl

I f .l Nolhon Fosler I Lond Developmenl Plonner zjve$2nd Slreel Suite 800 | Tulso, Oklohomo 74103 ph: 918.579.9481 | fox: 918.579.9581 web: www.incog.org I emoil: [email protected]

lgnd Þç*eloÞnrent @coc 5ørYrc,er

From : Debora h Richa rds fma i lto : debora h @ i nter-proiects.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2018 B:51 AM To: Miller, Susan Cc: Kolibas, Robert; Austin Mitchell; Jones, Robi; Foster, Nathan Subject: Re: 1007 S PeorÍa Ave, Meeting Followup

Hi Susan,

Thank you for following up with me. I have a meeting with my client at Ll-am this morning to discuss this. I believe that we will pull the application. ls it OK for you to assume that we will pull it unless you hear otherwise from me between t2 and Lpm? Or do you need something definitive now?

Thank you

Deborah Richards, RA

I nter-Projects Architecture, PLLC

inter-proiects.com

work: 21,2-335-0849

cell: 973-44L-0898

Please be advised this message, together with any attachments, is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. lf you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy or re-transmit this communication. lf you have received this communication in error, please delete this message and any attachments. ' ll'L Case Number: 2-7440 with optional development TMre plan Hearinq Date: June 6,2018 Tulso Metropoliton Areo Applicant requested continuance from 5.2.2018 for Plonning Commission preparation of an optional development plan

Gase Report Prepared bv: Owner and Applicant lnformation

Dwayne Wilkerson Applicant: Kyle Sewell

Property Owner. BEALL, JAMES E AND LILYAN MAXEEN

Location Map: Appiicant Proposal: (shown with Gity Gouncil Districts) Present Use: Vacant

Proposed Use: Canruash on east portion, unknown 3 on west portion.

o Concept summary. Rezoning request to support potential car wash use.

Tract Size: 2.61 + acres

Location: East of the southeast corner of West 71't Street South at South Elwood. Zoninq: Staff Recommendation: Existing Zoning: AG Staff recommends approval but only with the Proposed Zoning: CG with optional provisions of the optional development plan as development plan outlined in Section ll.

Comprehensive Plan:

Land Use Map: Employment

Stability and Growth Map: Area of Growth

Staff Data: Citv Council District: 2 Councilor Name: Jeannie Cue TRS: 8212 CZM: 51 Atlas: 1141 Gountv Commission District: 2 Commissioner Name; Karen Keith lzl ^,u,.uou,.o,,o,u SECTION l: Z-7M0

DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT:

The anticipated immediate use for a portion of this site is an automobile car wash. The applicant has provided design standards which help integrate this site into the expected development along west 71st Street South near the Turkey Mountain Wilderness area.

The applicant has stated that the allowed uses are consistent with the Employment Land Use designation of the comprehensive plan.

EXHIBITS: INCOG Case maP INCOG Aerial (small scale) INCOG Aerial (large scale) Tulsa Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Tulsa comprehensive Plan Areas of stability and Growth Map Applicant Exhibits: Support letter from abutting property owner

SECTION ll: OPTIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN STANDARDS

The following Use Categories, Subcategories and Specific Uses shall be allowed in conjunction with all suppler"-ntal regulatìons and all other zoning regulations as defined in the Tulsa Zoning Code except as further limited below:

PERMITTED USE CATEGORI ES: l Jommercial Use Category: Limited to the following Subcategories a. Public, Civic and lnstitutional i. College or UniversitY ii. Day Care iii. Hospital iv. Library or Cultural Exhibit v. Religious AssemblY vi. Safety Service vii. School viii. Utilities and Public Service Facility (Minor) b. Commercial i. Animal Service and all specific uses ii. Assembly and Entertainment (Small) iii. Broadcast or Recording Studio iv. Commercial Service and all specific uses v. Financial Services and all specific uses vi. Funeral or Mortuary Service vii. Lodging(Hotel/motel) viii. Office and all sPecific uses ix. Restaurants and Bars and all specific uses x. Retail Sales with all specific uses xi. Studio, Artist or lnstructional Service xii. Trade School xiii. Vehicle Sales and Services

/z,LREVTSED 5/30/201 I 1. Personal Vehicle repair & maintenance within this specific use only automatic car washes with accessory vacuum bays are permitted.

c. Other i. Drive-in or Drive-through Facility (as a component of an allowed principal use) BUILDING SETBACKS: The minimum Building Setback from the 71st Street right of way line shall not be less than 25 feet.

BUILDING STANDARDS: The first anticipated use for the property is an automatic car wash facility. That use will not exceed a maximum building foot print greater than 5000 square feet. All future uses shall conform to the lot and building regulations of a CS district.

The car wash and all future buildings shall meet the following building design standards. 1) The front of the building cladding will be a minimum 75% masonry (CMU, brick and mortar, or decorative concrete panel) excluding window or door openings. 2) All sides of the building will have a minimum 50% hard surface (CMU, brick and mortar, or decorative concrete panel). Trash enclosures shall be masonry constructíon with metal gates 3) No outdoor storage will be permitted. 4) Mechanical equipment such as condensing units, car wash vacuums, etc. shall be a minimum of 25'from any lot line

LANDSCAPE STANDARDS: All lots within the boundary of the optional development plan shall provide the following landscape and screening standards except where penetrated by vehicular and pedestrian circulation systems. 1) Deciduous and evergreen trees shall be placed on the lot within 20 feet of the street right of way. 2) Deciduous and evergreen trees shall be placed within 20 feet of the east and west boundary of the development plan area. 3) The quantity of trees shall be identified on the landscape plan however those trees shall be placed so no tree is further than 25 feet from any other tree as measured in any horizontal dimension to the trunk of the tree. These required trees are additional to any other landscape requirements identified in the Zoning Code. 4) Landscaping shall be installed prior to release of an occupancy permit for any building.

PEDESTRIAN ACCESS AND CI RCULATION: 1) Provide sidewalks within the street right of way as required by the Tulsa Subdivision regulations and shall be constructed to meet or exceed the design standards for sidewalks along an arterial street right of way. SIGN STANDARDS: 1) All freestanding sighs shall be monument style with a maximum height not exceed 25 feet. 2) Signage shall conform to all City of Tulsa Sign standards for signs in a CS district as defined in the Tulsa Zoning Code. 3) Signage on any south facing wall may not be illuminated.

LIGHT STANDARDS: The maximum heíght of all wall or pole mounted lighting shall not exceed 16 feet within 50 feet of the street right of way. The maximum fixture height for the remainder of the site shall not exceed 25 feet. lz.3 REVTSED 5/30/2018 DETAILED STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Many uses allowed in a CG zoning district may be consistent with expected the employment land use designation recognized in the comprehensive plan however some uses offer very little employment opportunities and some uses allowed in a CG district are not compatible with the surrounding property. CG zoning allows some uses that are not consistent with the goals of the employment land use designation. Staff has reviewed the development plan and determined that the objectionable uses have not been included in the development plan and,

Z-7440 abuts property with design and use limitations and is directly south across W. 71st Street South from the Turkey Mountain Wilderness area. The small area plan recognizes that this area should be treated with a higher level of aesthetics and encourage development that is complimentary with the employment opportunities near the wilderness area. The optional development plan provides building material limitations and landscaping requirements that are consistent with the expected development across the street from Turkey Mountain wilderness area and,

CG zoning as requested by Z-7440 with the optional development plan prohibits some uses that are not compatible with the existing surrounding office properties east and west of the site therefore,

Staff recommends Denial of Z-7440 where the applicant has requested rezoning from AG to CG but only with the optional developmetn plan as identified in Section ll.

SECTION lll: Supporting Documentation

RELATIONS IP TO THE COMPREHENS IVF PLAN:

Staff Summary: This site abuts the east edge of the West Highlands Small Area PIan boundary. CG zoning with an optionaldevelopment plan rs consrsfentwith the recommendations of the small area plan.

Land Use Vision

Land Use PIan map designation'. Employment Employment areas contain office, warehousing, light manufacturing and high tech uses such as clean manufacturing or information technology. Sometimes big-box retail or warehouse retail clubs are found in these areas. These areas are distinguished from mixed-use centers in that they have few residences and typically have more extensive commercial activity.

Employment areas require access to major arterials or interstates. Those areas, with manufacturing and warehousing uses must be able to accommodate extensive truck traffic, and rail in some instances. Due to the special transportation requirements of these districts, attention to design, screening and open space buffering is necessary when employment districts are near other districts that include moderate residential use.

Areas of Stability and Growth designation: Area of Growth The purpose of Areas of Growth is to direct the allocation of resources and channel growth to where it will be beneficial and can best improve access to jobs, housing, and services with fewer and shorter auto trips. Areas of Growth are parts of the city where general agreement exists that development or redevelopment is beneficial. As steps are taken to plan for, and, in some cases, develop or redevelop these areas, ensuring that existing residents will not be displaced is a high priority. A major goal is to increase economic activity in the area to benefit existing residents and businesses, and where necessary, provide the stimulus to redevelop. 12.,1 REVISED 5/30/201 I Areas of Growth are found throughout Tulsa. These areas have many different characteristics but some of the more common traits are close proximity to or abutting an arterial street, major employment and industrial areas, or areas of the city with an abundance of vacant land. Also, several of the Areas of Growth are in or near downtown. Areas of Growth provide Tulsa with the opportunity to focus growth in a way that benefits the City as a whole. Development in these areas will provide housing choice and excellent access to efficient forms of transportation including walking, biking, transit, and the automobile."

Transportation Vision :

Major Sfreef and Highway Ptan: The Commuter Corridor consideration of West 71st Street South is a high capacity traffic corridor that is generally not pedestrian oriented.

Trail System Master PIan Considerations'. None, but it should be noted that this site is immediately south of the Turkey Mountain Wilderness Area. Existing sidewalks provide access to the trail system on the north of West 71st Street.

SmallArea Plan: West Highlands SmallArea Plan

Special Distríct Considerations: None

Historic Preservation Overlav: None

DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING CONDITIONS:

Staff Summarv: The site is vacant except the remnants of a síngle-family residence driveway and fencing.

Environmental Considerations: No known environmental concerns that affect site redevelopment.

Streets:

Exist. Access MSHP Desiqn MSHP R^¡t/ Exist. # Lanes West 71st Street Primary Arterial with 120 feet 4 Commuter Corridor

Utilities:

The subject tract has municipal water and sewer available

Surround inq Properties:

Location Existing Zoning Existing Land Use Area of Stability Existing Use Desiqnation or Growth North AG Park and Open Stability Turkey Mountain Space Wilderness Area East CS with Employment Growth Vacant immediately PUD 384-A east but Mini Storage within the PUD South AG with Emplovment Growth Vacant /å*,5,,,,, PUD 384-A West CS North/2 Employment Grovuth Veterinarian Clinic on AG South/2 north half and Vacant on AG propertv

SECTION lV: Relevant Zoning History

ZONING ORDINANCE: Ordinance number 11827 dated June 26,1970, established zoning for the subject property.

Subject Property: no relevant history

Surrounding Property:

Z-7432 Apnl2018: (pending) TMAPC concurred in approval of a request for rezoning a20+ acre tract of land from AG to RS-3, for residential use, on property located south of the southwest corner of East 71st Street and South Elwood Avenue. (Case is pending approval from City Council.)

2-7375 fwith optional deve ooment olanl March 2O17: All concurred in approval of a request for rezoning a 2+ acre tract of land from AG to CG on property located east of the southeast corner of West TlstStreet South and South Elwood Avenue.

2-7366 December 2016: All concurred in denial of a request for rezoning a 1.47+ acre tract of land from AG to CG on property located south of the southeast corner of South Elwood Avenue and West 71"t Street South.

Z-7052l PUD-738 Mav 2007: All concurred in approval of a request for rezoning a 39.19+ acre tract of land from AG to RS-3/RM-O/CS and a Planned Unit Development for a mixed use development on property located at the southwest corner of West 71st Street South and South Elwood Avenue.

PUD-660/ 2-6858 Julv 2002: All concurred in approval of a proposed Planned Unit Development on a 2.2+ acre tract of land and in approval of a request for rezoning from AG to CS/PUD for commercial uses, on property located east of the southeast corner of South Elwood Avenue and West 71st Street.

PUD-3844 April 1987: The applicant requested a major amendmenf to PUD-384 to abandon previous uses that had originally been allowed and requested approval for Use Units 11,14, 15, and 17. All concurred in approval of the request subject to conditions for the following uses, a mini-storage facility, a retail lawn and garden business with office and showroom. Use Unit 17 permitted the mini-storage facility only and all outdoor display for retail lawn and garden business would be only for seasonal merchandise, on property located east of the southeast corner of South Elwood Avenue and West 71st Street South.

2-6017/, PUD-384 Mav 1985: All concurred in approval of a request for rezoning a 10+ acre tract of land from AG to CS zoning on the north 550' and denial of the requested lL zoning and all concurred in approval of a proposed Planned Unit Development, on property located east of the southeast corner of South Elwood Avenue and West 71st Street South.

2-6006 October 1984: All concurred in approval of a request for rezoning a tract of land from AG to CS, for commercial use, on property located on the southeast corner of East 71st Street and South Elwood Avenue. 61612018 1:30 PM l2.b REVTSED 5/30/2018 wa

RS-3

SUBJECT TRACT

GS cs r--l ! C N cs cl ¡ I (¡t ot oot (,r PU I t PU I I I I I RM.O l_ I -- I

RS-3

Feet 200 400 z-7440

18-12 12 ,J. Feet Subject Nota: Graphlc overlays may not preclsely z-7440 align wlth phy€lcel feeErras on the grcund. 0 200 400 Tract !r--- Aú¡al Photo Datê: Februery 2016 18-12 12 t). tt ¡ !¡r. .rr., !' @ ,. .:| ¿' 4es #rt b k ro +-* JB; e% '|þrlS ÈÈø¡ b' € c?t > Ëg 5 Q.o N äü ljs ot è F it 4..1 l'¡r .L; 'br¿- a ,.-,\l-, Gø\o to ao & ;-Ð:, tL B "{ tË ItÈ ff* 65 o ¡Jt 3' ÈË a I t'i,it *,¡* ÊF >oo\ o l*' tJ! ì "rl o.g o ä* G a '*fii -- t$*t{ g¡ .cE o '.:"':,'. ì# it q. ;-Þ..¡ t ÈË. 'È ffi ..È qo þi':, I ' . \*-- \ ¿ÈËõ "4' ., i 't,. ' . ' i "."¿' i o c\ I î \F c\ I t\ a t t ñ

I a,' ()* oo e ,# q-S -::I JF U) il * #!Ë ',!, '/ , .'l -J. -'ì *'ãì--t, ;*:' :' ; J} I ç .i i. s' t r t \È.tù.+ --1 ,'[ ß ¡*.¡".-. ú.- i# -J SUBJECT TRACT LAND USE PLAN EMPLOYMENT

|_r-

o\, aA, ,e Q7 ê .u t¡J Land Use Plan Categories ì a , Downtown | rueignoorhood Center Downtown Neighborhood f Employment Main Street New Neighborhood Mixed-Use Conidor Existing Neighborhood Regional Center I ea*andOpenSpace Town Center f Arkansas RiverCorridor

Feet 0 200 400 z-7440

HrJ 18-12 12 l2.lÐ' SUBJECT TRACT

t Ð

Growth and Stabllify

Area of Grow.ttr

Area of Stabitity

Feet 0 200 400 z-7440 18-12 12 /å.ll Keith A. Bailey, DVM 316 W. 71't St., Ste. B Tulsa. OK 74132 SOUTHWEST VETERINARY HOSPITAL. INC.

05/03/18

To whom it may concern

My name is Dr. Keith A. Bailey, and I am the veterinarian at 71"t and Elwood. Our practice was established in Tulsa by my father in 1965 and we have been at this location for fourteen years. I have recently been made aware that there is a plan in the works for a major car wash on the property next door to us. I would encourage you to approve zoning so that this project can begin as soon as possible. I feel that quality businesses along this street, such as this, will help our community, as well as all of Tulsa, and I welcome it with open arms. lf I may be of help in any way just let me know. Thank you.

Sincerely,

/^/* ø/

Keith A. Bailey, DVM

12. l¿ Case Number: LS-21134 TM Lot-Split (Related to LC-1023) Tulso Metropoliton Areo Hearinq Date: June 6,2018 Plonning Commission

Gase Report Prepared bv: Owner and Applicant lnformation Applicant: Russell and Sylynda Thrash Austin Chapman Property Owners: William Morgan/Russell and Svlvnda Thrash Location Map: Applicant Proposal: (shown with City Council Districts) Proposal to split an RS-1 tract into two tracts and combine the back tract with a separate parcel.

The lot-spliUcombination requires a waiver of the Subdivision Regulations that no lot have more than three side lot lines.

Existing Use: Residential

Tract 1 Size: 0.397 + acres Tract 2 Size: 0.743 + acres Tract 3 Size: 0.784 + acres

Location: South and West of the SWc of East 97th Place South and South Urbana Avenue

Comprehensive Plan: Staff Recommendation: Land Use Map: Staff recommends approval of the lot- Existing Neighborhood spliVcombination and the waiver of the Subdivision Regulations that no lot have more Stability and Growth Map than three side lot lines. Area of Stability Citv Council District: I Councilor Name: Phil Lakin Zoninq: Existing Zoning: RS-1/PUD-216 Gountv Gommission District: 3 Commissioner Name: Ron Peters t3.l Lot-Split and Waiver of Subdivision Requlations

June 6, 2018

LS-21134 Russell and Sylynda Thrash, (14041(RS-f /PUD 2f 6) (C¡ty) Location: South and West of the SW/c of East 97th Place South and South Urbana Avenue

The Lot-SpliUCombination proposal is to split a portion of the property located at 9703 S. Sandusky and combine it with the property located at 9726 S. Urbana. Both tracts will meet the Lot and Area requirements of the City of Tulsa Zoning Code for an RS-1 zoning District and for PUD-216.

The Technical Advisory Committee met on May 17,2018 and had no comments

The proposed lot-spliUcombination would not have an adverse affect on the surrounding properties and staff recommends APPROVAL of the lot- spliUcombination and the waiver of the Subdivision Regulations that no lot have more than three side lot lines.

l3.L I P )0c P I I

t ll---- I ITJ -ê AG RNPI RE-EI(-T'I¡JRNPI RS-l

- I II -- I - I t I I I I E I I I I I ¡ I I I .I I I -I t I I I t (t, t 1 3 I PU

I SUBJECT TRACT I - -l A''lÉ' I I I I PU I I L I ! I I AG I I I PU ( rrl qE

D-5384 cs -I- cn - -- I la, j - fr) I ; I >4 o RM RM.2 I É, I It I t Feet LC-1023 0 200 400 {Þ 18-13 21 ,q.l Feet Note: GnphÍc overws may not precísely Subject allgn wlth physical features on the ground. 0 200 400 Tract LC-íA23 Aeriat Photo Date: February -tlrl --+J 18-13 21 L Feet Subject :;;i' 0 50 100 Tract LC- 1 023 "",{;ii';"i::'i::i,iy"i':^i';i::;:i. Aeñat Photo Date: Februa! H 18-13 21 4.3

Case Number: 2-7445 TMre Related to PUD 159-B (abandonment) Tulsq Metropoliton Areo Plonning Commission Hearinq Date: June 6, 2018

Gase Report Prepared bv: Owner and Applicant Information

Dwayne Wilkerson Applicant: Curtis Branch

Property Owner. BRANCH, CURTIS R & RACHAEL L

Location Map: Applicant Proposall (shown with City Gouncil Districts) Present Use: Vacant

Proposed Use: Uses as allowed by an AG district

Concept summary: Abandon PUD-159 and re-zone 6 property to AG. _.l

Tract Size: 5.81 + acres

Location: East of southeast corner of South 26th t'. West Avenue & West 71st Street South \ I Zoninq: Staff Recommendation:

Existing Zoning: RS-3 Staff recommends approval of rezoning only if that part ofthe PUD has been abandoned. Proposed Zoning: AG The configuration of PUD development area SF-3 Gomprehensive Plan: has created an area that is unlikely to see developed in a manner consistent with the West Land Use Map: Existing Neighborhood Highlands Small area plan.

Stability and Growth Map: Area of Stability

Gitv Council District: 2 Staff Data: Councilor Name: Jeannie Cue TRS: 8210 Countv Commission District: 2 CZIt/': 51 Atlas Commissioner Name: Karen Keith /5.1 REVTSED 5/30/2018 SECTION l: 2-7445

DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT: The applicant is requesting AG rezoning and abandonment of the PUD is requested to allow agricultural uses and building types on the property.

EXHIBITS: INCOG Case map INCOG Aerial (small scale) INCOG Aerial (large scale) Tulsa Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Tulsa Comprehensive Plan Areas of Stability and Growth Map Applicant Exhibits: None provided

DETAILED STAFF RECOMMENDATION :

Large lot development required in AG zoning is consistent with West Highlands Small area plan at this location and,

Uses as allowed in AG zoning are not considered injurious to the surrounding properties and,

Abandonment of a portion of PUD 159 does not adversely affect the remaining developable property in the PUD therefore,

Staff recommends Approval of 2-7445 to rezone property from RS-3/ to AG only if the accompanying PUD 159-B is also approved.

SECTION ll: Supporting Documentation

RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:

Staff Summary: AG zoning rs consrsfent with the Existing Neighborhood and Area of Stabilíty components of the Tulsa Comprehensive Plan and wíth the West Highlands Small Area Plan

Land Use Vision:

Land Use Plan map designation'. Existing Neighborhood The Existing Neighborhood category is intended to preserve and enhance Tulsa's existing single-family neighborhoods. Development activities in these areas should be limited to the rehabilitation, improvement or replacement of existing homes, and small-scale infill projects, as permitted through clear and objective setback, height, and other development standards of the zoning code. ln cooperatíon with the existing community, the city should make improvements to sidewalks, bicycle routes, and transit so residents can better access parks, schools; churches, and other civic amenities.

Areas of Stability and Growth designation: Area of Stability The Areas of Stability includes approximately 75% of the city's total parcels. Existing residential neighborhoods, where change is expected to be minimal, make up a large proportion of the Areas of Stability. The ideal for the Areas of Stabílity is to identify and maintain the valued character of an area while accommodating the rehabilitation, improvement or replacement of

l5'4.u,..o stsot2o,ta existing homes, and small scale infill projects. The concept of stability and growth is specifically designed to enhance the unique qualities of older neighborhoods that are looking for new ways to preserve their character and quality of life.

Transportation Vision :

Maior Sfreef and Highway Plan: Secondary arterial with a commuter street overlay

The most widespread commercial street type is the strip commercíal arterial, these arterials typically serve commercial areas that contain many small retail strip centers with buildings set back from front parking lots. Because of this, strip commercial arterials have many intersections and driveways that provide access to adjacent businesses. Historically, this type of street is highly auto-oriented and tends to discourage walking and bicycling. On-street parking is infrequent.

Commuter streets are designed with multiple lanes divided by a landscaped median or a continuous two way left turn lane in the center. Commuter streets are designed to balance traffic mobility with access to nearby businesses. However, because there are so many intersections and access points on commuter streets, they often become congested. lmprovements to these streets should come in the form of access management, traffic signal timing and creative intersection lane capacity improvements.

Trail System Master PIan Considerations: None

Small Area Plan: West H ighlands Small Area Plan

This portion of the small area plan is considered an area of stability and an existing neighborhood. One of the major threats to the agricultural character favored by the residents in this area is increased density that would be allowed if the RS-3 zoning remained on this site.

Special District Considerations: None

Historic Preservation Overlav: None

DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING CONDITIONS:

Staff Summary: The site is currently wooded and has a private poot and recreational area

Environmental Considerations: None that would affect the possible uses in an AG district.

Streets:

Exist. Access MSHP Desiqn MSHP RA¡r/ Exist. # Lanes W.71st Street South Secondary Arterial with 100 feet 2 Commuter Street Overlay

Utilitíes:

The subject tract does not abut municipal water service ,5.3 REVISEO 5t30t2019 Connections to municipal sanitary sewer will require an extension or an on site solution

Su rrou nd i nq Properties :

Location Existing Zoning Existing Land Use Area of Stability Existing Use Designation or Growth North RS-3 / PUD 159 Park and Open Stability Golf Course Space East RS-3 / PUD 159 Park and open Stability Golf Course space South RS-3 / PUD 159 Existing Stability Single Family Neiqhborhood Residential West AG Existing Stability Single Family Neiqhborhood Residential

PUD 159-B Summary

Abandonment of a portion of development area SF-3 south of 71st street will reduce that area to 13.2 acres. Detached single family residential uses are the only uses allowed in that development area. The uses along with the bulk and area requirements identified in the remainder of SF-3 will remain unchanged.

DEVELOPMENT AREA MAP FOR PUD 1 59 SOUTH OF W. 71ST STREET SOUTH:

r¡

þãndonment ãrea: .81 acres

' '''¡'rrV'l

"¿,|'s1i..i1 : ,..r., f ú,itt - - t!, . ; utiri ) tJ.' i W.73rd Street

Åi '! ¡l

a¡-rF ô l4r¿ Vn-øûür t{ontr{ *YarcUsßút, '..-',.'.^-

SEGTION lll: Relevant Zoning History

History: 2-7445 15.q

REVTSED s130t2018 ZONING ORDINANGE: Ordinance number 11827 dated June 26, 1970, established zoning for the subject property.

Subject Property:

PUD-159 April 1974: All concurred in approval of a proposed Planned Unit Development on a597+ acre tract of land to develop the entire residential zoned portion of Section 3 and an RS-3 zoned area near the SW corner of West 71st Street and South Union Avenue. Permitted were 954 houses, 876 apartments and a 36-hole golf course.

Surrounding Property:

PUD-606 March 1999: All concurred in approval of a proposed P/anned Unit Development on a 30.3+ acre tract of land for residential development, on property located south of the southwest corner of West 71st Street South and South Union Avenue.

BOA-18183 September 1998: The Board of Adjustment approved a variance to permit 0' frontage in an AG District, per plan submitted, on property located at7424 + S. Union

BOA-18163 September 1998: The Board of Adjustment approved a variance of the required 30' frontage on a public street to 25', per plan submitted, on property located west of the southwest corner of West 73rd Street South and South 26th West Avenue.

BOA-17869 November 1997: The Board of Adjustment approved a variance to allow two dwelling units on one lot of record (guesthouse), per plan submitted and subject to a covenant being filed or record stating that the second dwelling may not be used as rental property, on property located at 7354 South 26th West Avenue.

BOA-17098 Julv 1995: The Board of Adjustment approved a variance of the required rear yard from 40'to 15'to permit construction of a new residence and detached garage, per plan submitted, on property located at7171 South 26th West Avenue.

BOA-15898 December 1991: The Board of Adjustmentapproved a variance of the required 30'of frontage on a public street or dedicated ROW to 0' to permit access by mutual access easement, and dedicated of necessary easements to serve the lots, on property located at 7500 S. Union.

BOA-14188 September 1986: The Board of Adjustment denied a variance of lot width and area to permit lots with 165' and 168' widths and lot areas of approximately 1.2 acres each in an AG district to permit a lot-split located at Lot 4, Block 2, and Lots 2-4, Block 2, Rosewood Acres 2nd, on property located on the northeast corner of West 73'd Street South and South 26th West Avenue.

61612018 1:30 PM

15.5

REVTSED 5/30/2018 PUD-I59

UD.1 RM-I

I ,T , ,T I T cs SUBJECT TRACT T

I cs I

I I

I ¡ I ò AG I t I 59 I t I t I

-I

lur 77

N Feet z-7445/ 0 300 600 PUD-159-B 18-12 10 15.þ+ may not prec¡sely Feet Note: Graphic overlays Subject al¡gn w¡th physical features on the ground. 0 300 600 Tract z-7445 Aerial Photo Date: February 201 6 !#J 18-12 10 l5 a N Feet Note: Graphic overlays mdy not Necisely Subject align with physical features on the ground. 0 50 100 Tract z-7445 Aeriat Photo Date: February.rt 18-12 10 I 5, ro SUBJECT TRACT LAND USE PLAN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD

Land Use Plan Gategories

Downtown I N"ignoorhood Center DowntownNeighborhood f Employment Main Street New Neighborhood Mixed-Use Corridor Existing Neighborhood Regional Center I ea* and Open Space Town Center I R*ansas River Corridor

Feet 0 300 600 z-7445 L# 18-12 10 15.9 SUBJECT TRACT

Growth and Stability

Area of Growth

Area of Stability

N Feet 0 300 600 z-7445 E# 18-12 10 f5. l0+ Gase Number: PUD-159-B TMre Related to 2-7445 Tulso MetropolítonÃeo Hearinq Date: June 6,2018 PlonnÌng Commission

Case Report Prepared bv: Owner and Applicant lnformation.

Dwayne Wilkerson Applicant: Curtis Branch

Property Owner. BRANCH, CURTIS R & RACHAEL L

I it--. Â El¡aaaaal. .@.^^^+:^- W^nli^an* (shown with Gity Council Districts) Present Use: Vacant

Proposed Use: Uses as allowed by an AG district. ,

I I Concept summary: Abandon a 5.81 acre portion of 6 development area SF-3 in PUD-159 and re-zone property to AG.

a Tract SZe: 5.81 + acres

Location: East of southeast corner of South 26th West Avenue & West 71't Street South

Zoninq: Staff Recommendation

Existing Zoning: PUD-159 / RS-3 Staff recommends approval of the abandonment for a portion of PUD 159. Proposed Zoning: AG The configuration of PUD development area SF-3 Comprehensive Plan: has created property that is unlikely to see developed in a manner consistent with the West Land Use Map: Existing Neighborhood Highlands Small area plan. Also, a subdivision east of the site in Cluster 2 has blocked vehicular access Stability and Growth Map: Area of Stability to and from S. Union Ave.

Staff Data: Citv Gouncil District: 2 Councilor Name: Jeannie Cue TRS 8210 CZM 51 Atlas: 1144 Countv Commission District: 2 Commissioner Name; Karen Keith

lh,l REVTSED 5/30/2018 SECTION l: PUD-159-B

DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT: The applicant is requesting AG rezoning and abandonment of the PUD is requested to allow agricultural uses and building types on the property.

EXHIBITS: ¡NCOG Case map INCOG Aerial (small scale) INCOG Aerial (large scale) Tulsa Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Tulsa Comprehensive Plan Areas of Stability and Growth Map Applicant Exhibits: None provided

DETAILED STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Large lot development required in AG zoning is consistent with West Highlands Small area plan at this location and,

Uses as allowed in AG zoning are not considered injurious to the surrounding properties and,

Abandonment of a portion of PUD 159 does not adversely affect the remaining developable property in the PUD therefore,

Staff recommends Approval of PUD 159-B which will abandon a portion of PUD 159

SECTION ll: Supporting Documentation

RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:

Staff Summaru: AG zoning rs consrsfent with the Existing Neighborhood and Area of Stability components of the Tulsa Comprehensive Plan and with the West Highlands Small Area Plan

Land Use Vision:

Land Use Plan map designation'. Existing Neighborhood The Existing Neighborhood category is intended to preserve and enhance Tulsa's existing single-family neighborhoods. Development activities in these areas should be limited to the rehabilitation, improvement or replacement of existing homes, and small-scale infill projects, as permitted through clear and objective setback, height, and other development standards of the zoning code. ln cooperation with the existing community, the city should make improvements to sidewalks, bicycle routes, and transit so residents can better access parks, schools, churches, and other civic amenities.

Areas of Stability and Growth designation: Area of Stability The Areas of Stability includes approximately 75o/o of the city's total parcels. Existing residential neighborhoods, where change is expected to be minimal, make up a large proportion of the Areas of Stability. The ideal for the Areas of Stability is to identify and maintain the valued character of an area while accommodating the rehabilitation, improvement or replacement of existing homes, and small scale infill projects. The concept of stability and growth is specifically

I brZ- *ru,r.o stsot2ols designed to enhance the unique qualities of older neighborhoods that are looking for new ways to preserve their character and quality of life.

Transportation Vision :

Major Sfreef and Highway Plan: Secondary arterial with a commuter street overlay

The most widespread commercial street type is the strip commercial arterial, these arterials typically serve commercial areas that contain many small retaíl strip centers with buildings set back from front parking lots. Because of this, strip commercial arterials have many intersections and driveways that provide access to adjacent businesses. Historically, this type of street is highly auto-oriented and tends to discourage walking and bicycling. On-street parking is infrequent.

Trail System Master PIan Consíderations: None

Small Area Plan: West Highlands Small Area Plan

Special District Considerations: None

Historic Preservation Overlav: None

DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING CONDITIONS:

Sfaff S The site is currently wooded and has a private pool and recreational area

Environmental Considerations: None that would affect the possible uses in an AG district.

Streets:

Exist. Access MSHP Desiqn MSHP RA¡t/ Exist. # Lanes W.71st Street South Secondary Arterial with 100 feet 2 Commuter Street Overlay

Utilities:

The subject tract does not abut municipalwater service. Connectíons to municipal sanítary sewer will require an extension or an onsite solution lb.3

REVTSED 5/30/2018 Surroundinq Properties:

Location Existing Zoning Existing Land Use Area of Stability Existing Use Desiqnation or Growth North RS-3 / PUD 159 Park and Open Stability Golf Course Space East RS-3 / PUD 159 Park and open Stability Golf Course space South RS-3 / PUD 159 Existing Stability Single Family Neiqhborhood Residential West AG Existing Stability Single Family Neiqhborhood Residential

PUD 159-B Summary

Abandonment of a portion of development area SF-3 south of 71st street will reduce that area to 13.2 acres. Detached single family residential uses are the only uses allowed in that development area. TheTt__ uses-___ aiong_r_ with the buik anei area requirements identifieej in the remainder of SF-3 wiii remain unchanged.

PMENT AREA MAP FOR D1 TH F ST

q'.i.r"t PUD 159-B partial ç2f. donmenl area 1 acres

î ;2*.Å' \/ 4.1 ..1. '.r¡ , I qj.r i . É¡.ù! l.ú/t' :" ,t ,-',*,, t,*;.;' rii' I 73rd Street 'r.\,'. "ta,r, .+.ti '1./ ^ ' i,ll,u.ì"1.,".,-:;' .i,, .1;; : ')'.'|;,:',:1. -ri.':.,.1..'¡,rÍ\ ;i{,,t-,': .,,n'.. ; ..,, "., a' :..',::

rff ô l4rÅ Vn-fuür NOFTH OrYanøVrÑrrrt

SECTION lll: Relevant Zoning History

History: Z-7445

/ tn.tl REVISED 5/30/2018 ZONING ORDINANCE: Ordinance number 11827 dated June 26, 1970, established zoning for the subject property.

Subject Propefi:

PUD-159 April 1974: All concurred in approval of a proposed Planned UnitDevelopmenton a 597+ acre tract of land to develop the entire residential zoned portion of Section 3 and an RS-3 zoned area near the SW corner of West 71st Street and South Union Avenue. Permitted were 954 houses, 876 apartments and a 36-hole golf course.

Surrounding Property:

BOA-18183 September 1998: The Board of Adjustment approved a variance to permit 0' frontage in an AG District, per plan submitted, on property located at7424 + S. Union.

BOA-18163 September 1998: The Board of Adjustment approved a variance of the required 30' frontage on a public street to 25', per plan submitted, on property Iocated west of the southwest corner of West 73rd Street South and South 26th West Avenue.

BOA-14188 September 1986: The Board of Adjustment denied a variance of lot wídth and area to permit lots with 165' and 168' widths and lot areas of approximately 1.2 acres each in an AG district to permit a lot-split located at Lot 4, Block 2, and Lots 2-4, Block 2, Rosewood Acres 2nd, on property located on the northeast corner of West 73'd Street South and South 26th West Avenue.

616120181:30 PM

16,5

REVISÊO 5/30/2018 PUD.I59

UD.1 RM.I

I I IT , T a I GS SUBJECT TRACT

r---

GS I I I I I I I I I AG I I I I PU 59 t t I t ¡

I t

I tAt a2

È 't

N Feet 0 300 600 PUD.I 59-B HrJ 18-12 10 lb.v+ Note: Graph¡c overlays may not precisely Feet Subject z-7445/ align with physical features on the ground. 0 300 600 Tract PUD.I59-B Aeriar photo Date: February *t 18-12 10 I bJ Note: Graphic overlays may not precisely Feet Subject align with phys¡cal features on the ground. 0 50 100 Tract PUD-1 59-B Aerial Photo Date: February 2016 18-12 10 lb SUBJECT TRACT LAND USE PLAN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD

Land Use Plan Categories

! Downtown f NeignOorhood Center I Downtown Neighborhood f Employment I Uain Street New Neighborhood Mixed-Use Corridor Existing Neighborhood f negionalCenter I ea*andOpenSpace I TownCenter f RrtansasRiverCorridor

N Feet 0 300 600 PUD-| 59-B 18-12 10 tv.Î .Þ SUBJECT TRACT

Growth and Stability

I Area of Growth Area of Stability

N Feet 0 300 600 PUD.í59-B 18-12 10 lb, l()+ TMAPC Public Hearing Staff Report June 6,2018 ZCA-10, Residential DrivewayW¡dth I Zaning Code Amendments

Item: Zoning Code text amendments to modify standards for residential driveways Chapter 55 Parking: Sections 55,090-F

A. Background: The City was asked by the Home Builders Association of Greater Tulsa, to consider amendments to the residential driveway requirements to better facilitate market demands for wider driveways. Once a proposal was developed and vetted, the TMAPC, on April 4,2018, initiated text amendments to the Zoning Code. The May 2,20t8 TMAPC hearing for this item was continued in orderto conduct an additionalworksession which occurred on May 16, 2018. Additional adjustments to the proposal were made as a result of the discussion at the work session.

The Tulsa Zoning Code establishes a maximum width for residential driveways based on zoning district. This measurement sets the width of driveways both on private property and within the public right of way. Generally, the purpose for having a maximurn width is to support the residential character of neighborhoods and prevent lots from becorning fully paved parking areas in front of single family homes. Narrower driveways on srnaller lots are more consistent with existing development patterns in older parts of the community. As average home sizes have increased, market demands have resulted in properties having three garages, for vehicles, boats, storage, or any number of other uses.

Under previous versions of the City's zoning code developers used a PUD as a means of modifying open space requirements to allow additional paved (irnpervious) surface for wider driveways accessing three-car garages. The current code provides that a greater driveway width may be approved by special exception or by amendment of existing PUÐs.

Proposed amendments address lot dimensions instead of zoning district which allows the amount of lot frontage along the street to serve as context for the rnaximum width of a driveway within the public right of way. This proposal allows larger lots to install wider driveways, which seems consistent with the request under consideration.

Open space requirements are not proposed to change and willtake precedence if they are more stringent than the allowed maximum driveway width. A provision is included to ensure no more than 5O% of the lot frontage is occupied by a driveway. This proposal was adjusted after the May 16, 2018 work session to add; 1) a provision for very narrow lots (30' or less) to have maximum 12' wide driveways, and 2) a cap on the overall driveway area within the required street setback which is not to exceed 50o/o of the required street setback area. lT, l The following table compares methodologies for determining maxirnum driveway width:

Pre-2016 Zoning Code Current Code Proposed Based on zoning district Based on zoning district Based on lot frontage Maxirnum coverage Specific dimensions within Specific dimensions within calculation within street right-of-way & on the lot right-of-way; Maximum setback {17% - 360/ol {12',- 30',) coverage within street setback (50%); Maximum width of all driveways {50% of lot frontage) Livability space required Open space per unit Open space per unit required required Note: The definition of "Open Space per Unit" in the current code closely matches the definition (and prescribed dimensions) of "Livability Space" from the previous zoning code,

Engineering standards for residential driveways have been amended to allow widths ranging from 10'-30'. The previous standard limited residential driveways to a maximum width of 24' ,

Proposed amendments to the City of Tulsa Zoning Code, Title 42 Tulsa Revised Ordinances, are shown ¡n Mformat in Attachment l.

The new City of Tulsa Zoning Code became effective on January 1, 2016. Since that time, fourteen (14) applicat¡ons for special exceptions allowing wider residential driveways have been processed; all were approved. Attachment ll includes examples of special exception requests which have been granted by the Board of Adjustment. These approvals allow wider driveway widths based on individual review relative to the approval criteria for all special exceptions. While some of these applications would no longer be required under the proposed amendments, others would still have needed BOA approval to be permitted. Attachment lll shows the single PUD amendment that was approved to allow for wider driveways.

Attachment lV contains graphic examples of proposed maximum driveway widths for lots with various frontages/dimensions. These examples show the difference between earlier proposals and the current version which reflects changes made after the May l-6, 2018 TMAPC work session.

Attachment V is a document provided by the HBA of Greater Tulsa at the request of the TMAPC for discussion at the May 16, 2018 Work Session.

11.u And Attachment Vl is a code comparison showing driveway allowances for cities within the region as well as for comparable cities nationally. public comment received by the TMAPC staff prior to distribution for this public hearing is found in Attachment Vll.

B. Staff Recommends APPROVAT of proposed amendments to the City of Tulsa Zoning Code as shown in Attachment l.

11.3 Attachment I

Proposed Amendments:

55.090-F Surfacing 3. ln RE and RS zoning districts, driveways cer+¡ street risht-of-Wav may not exceed 50% of ihe lot frontaee -o"J the following maximum widths. whichever is less, unless a greater width is approved in accordance with the special exception procedures procedures of 5-ç.Cliqn_7.q,.-1-?.3- or, if in a PUD, in accordance with the amendment of

5eçU_o_-n_-3-Q.010-12. (Refer to Citv of Tulsa Standard Specifications and Details for Residential Drivewavs #701-7041.

RE RS;t rs¿ R54 RS.s

Within Right ef.Vlley {feet) 30 :€ tg lao ¿o & 30 3€ 3g 20

ineluding (1) varbtees ef maxirnum driveway eeverage rneasured by width¡ square feetage er

@ Maximum Drivewav Width Less than 30' lot Frontaqe us 60'-741 46'-59', 30'- 45' Drivewav Within 12',[21 R¡sht-of- 30' 2g' 24'. 20' Wav {feetl EI l1l firlavimu m widt h ¡nnlipc to thp r:o ite nf all drivpwavc if multi le curb rr rf < ¡re provided.

I2l For lot aees less than 30 feet, a maximum drivewav width of 12' is oermitted

ln RE and RS zoning districts, the total area of all drivewavs within the required street setback mav not exceed 50% of the area of the required street setback.

l-7.q Attachment ll

Examples of Approved Snecial Exceptions:

l?.5 g9¡l Ò'Ll t{, : o ttr¡.^r¡ - ': rl ,rl o o I iÞ I t, .to '""* I 4 (^ ? i 1 () 5 ¡9h vt¿Et Âvr siigft.wect¡ve ^ z J ¿ -c o l! Ê: r N..l.tstYrå! € : éi ì ìl É l I * I o ! 9) r¡ *._-:!-.i 6) l o N I t¡ I r'g 1 I Fr vt o o !l : åË 3 ì ¡ú : :.lqs 4 I s ! { d f üt --ät tú I Ø À t 1 ì',, ù 7 î, ;, t ûr 1i q ¿ã t I !i :1 5,Peqi¡ o"t) a S Ëlm St I rt I 1 ñ 1r t. o 1i 3 Avem tl r oII o) ah :¡ OO qt È. a5g l¡t g tà Ì ! úÉ o o l - S ll¡tldrd Avs I ah åo tn ! EY ri r¡, sñ l 6 x '1 I I t o .l Afs fn ff, o og m ll : I o It l I 1t É, i a I ø rT |o o 1 .i Ø t+ o Ut u, I o ,i f,n a I i I 6 U, il I J lr I I q .i ¡j a ì '-9 t¡lemori¡l Di- 's,¡i¡6¡='.--.:= Vt S ilemo¡i¡l tr t¡ fi ît r¡ ut -l tlinqô Rd r.!l Êa!lA,{è S. f 5 l¡lin¡o Rd ñ' o ;

I o ../, I + ê : S.f?olh € ¡¡ t2sth Éng o m I sl Ëðst Av 9' ,i : àüì Ê¡el Avô ñ .: - m :i rl q : I,l l:,i (] Ì*,Ì45rb Eåst¡ u, S'14Sù'E! ,ì4" * l.l.,jar.; m ¡ s I 4$tr j

: =. l frt r,n o t øS t6lti EåslAv 3 I À r¡ ¡ Ì t D, ìU! ø q,f llt q 4o i ! 3ô¡ (à .] : t- i' I û: 1 S l1?ü ÊiålAvr a o ro I ù'ã.t tg 1 ñ i : ii t I i S l93ld Ave Ë r! I tl I I l ! I I .¡ c! 0 I tr o I S-t09h Êt31'A'rÊ å I a o I ô il 3. tl úc ø

I Eo { oõ" i

r: -.o' li housê; dñewãy exp¡ñloû frñil1 es¡ t70 ?0120 ãrbtim aln21t8 Vdder m15 Ê,ilh FL S 6'9/20t6 22104 4 ^ml¡¡ exirlìôO hôú$: addêd ø to lhó garag€ wh¡dl Approvod D 20ß0 2t ßauired drìWY oxp¡ns¡on Hæper 2663 Ê 20ô Sf s RS-3 169 sz20la 22125 4 Nit

Cà5rlê¡ S¡ndÊn psr1 ol nêwly gbdlvb¡on ApÞþvtd c 167 20!20 14 buildi @tled Hmslm- r8521 É.. 4{lh sl. RS¡ e¡26/201 6 22tAA 6 1 ÙoE¡t6

ûeiEhborñood zot3Q lw boild: ìnfill ìn established åe¡roì¡d 5033 Ê, 118Ít St. S. Rs-1 tl82'(Combi¡ed lols) 22169 I 12t13r16 f,llc* Puma

r 65'.?f (14 l9rs in Vlt€st ârìd Saûlh of lhe Sl{/c psn øeôled subdiuslon AfFefd 3ubdiliEion) 2N2ø 30' ne bulld: of ñwly 0#10¿f7 J.D, Hâ.p ol S 193 E Àve s¡d E ,tl Sf S RS-,1 1 1/28n016 esslhg hðuæ: ådded on lo lhe 9669e wàkh 37' Rolqr 56' (tr lol) reqliæd driffiY expâmi6 ApÊrovoat B 10512 S URBANAAV E RS-2 ir03 20r30 {]n me2a1? 22224 I 01¡25r17 Phil Êoshon

48' rw build; inlìll ln elåblished leighboriood ÀpFFvrd 3220 E. 61st Sl. RS.1 !200' 20ß0 22241 2 ot23r'1? 4ffiie l-ler@

t1ï æw build: l¡lìll lo eÉt¿blish€d neighborh@d A¡9o¡d 1366 E 27 Pt S 1157' 20ß0 AÐÐíII 2221¿ 4 06/13i1? Gol&teh Appr@d 20t2a ¡?' æw bu¡Hi pañ ol ñev¿y deâled subdlvisiú A li 1û S. 1851h AY6 E. RS-{ t'lt ilwtt't 22250 6 06d3Í17 Corbìn Sû¡lh

elistlru hous; ûdded ø to thegåøg€ wh¡dl requi@d driwwây epans¡on AÞlmd OuakerAve RS,t È186'(@hbincd lols) 20r30 ÛE4ntt7 272ûa 4 Mn7t17 Ph¡ll¡p Doll6 2931 S rw bui¡d: infill ¡n €lablist€d æighborhood AFD0rd 301h Sl, S. ts-1 tl80'(@ñb¡¡rd lols) 20/30 7t6n017 22293 4 ô8/(ì8117 R¡ú$d Wnn 25?5 E. ?qúiæd dri€My erPansìon AD¡ËI,.d ¡521 Ê, 3,{rh st. s. ¡153' 20i30 21321 I æt12117 J¿d( Arnold u10n0t7 e¡istiûg hôÆ; ¡dded oñ lo tl€gânge wiich 34, (!n RO1',4t 4{ (or iol) reqli€d dÉ€my erPðnsloñ l¡¡@Ëd K€nf,êlh 1860 N. Hâidtrd Âve. F. 20t20 12t112017 0ro9.t1E Eadh 30' n@ bùild: oart of ne*'ly sealed subdivi$oñ A¡¡ütrC 18509 €.43rd st s 20n0 1t2312014 22396 6 o2t27t18 ,eemy Bal6 30' nw build; p6rt ofæNly qealed subd;øslon Àþtæwd 18ô08 E 43rd Sreet 20t20 2,23t2Ð14 22418 6 2nw018 ,.O. Harp

J Ja Driveway \tVidth Assessment I Special Exceptíon A City of Tulsa Planning Departmentl3A May 2018

Example IRS-4 Zoning Example I Approved Special Exception (compl Íant wîth propose d chan ge s)

t- I

residence residence

building setback buildinÇ setback F I driveway I driveway I I BOW ROW

sidewalk sidewalk

cul-de-saç cul-de-sac

-1. I î Driveway Width Assessment I Special Exception B City of Tulso Planning Departmentl jA May 2A1S

Approved Exception Example lßS-3 Zoning Example I Special ( com pli ant with pr opose d chan g es)

80'

driveway

driveway building setback residence r50' building setback residence ROW ROW

t------þ------I I e'Strêêt I È-*street I I T------*----'--- I

l-1.1 Driveway Width Assessment I Special Exception C City of Tulsa Planning Departmentl30 May 2018

Example Approved SpeciaÍ Exception Example lR5-2 Zoning I (NQT complia nt with proposed changes)

Composite of olldrivewoys is greaterthan noximum width allowed within the ß.0,W.

/ \- / -- residence residence driveway driveway

driveway driveway ROW ROW street street

IJ. ID Driveway Width Assessment I Special Exception D j0 I City of Tulsa Planning Departmentl May 2018

Approved Special Exception Example I RS-4 Zoning Example I (NOT compliant with proposed changes)

Driveway width within R.A.W. is greaterthonthe n aximum allowable width.

I I

I I I I I I

I I I I I I I residence I residence I I ¡ , ! I buìlding setback I building setback r-I I driveway driveway I I ROW I ROW ¡---1- I L---*------i----i t- I t_..-l- sidewalk sidewalk I

street +-5trê€t

ll.ll Attachment lll

PUD Amendment to dre.ss Drivewav Width:

IJ.]L ile Eott{EÈw30ú!slN A ¡l aârturßtut¡ ú*añtrôhhì 2ûtÐ XT 1n4ibl? tthtru I üatallT EÉl#Ituñ

J I a t^) Attachment lV

Examples of Proposed Residential Drivewav Regulations:

l'1 .lq 60

RESIDENCE RESIDENCE 120' 120' FOOTPRINT: FOOTPRINT: 2796 sq.fr 2796 sq.fl

_BUII.DING

SÊTSACK SETBACI(

_PROPERÍY r PROPERTY 20', LINE LINE

Rô.W RO.W

STREEl STREET

HAilIMERHEID tn¡tlal Proþosal After Work Sess,on Driveway width withín Ê.O.W. based Ðr¡veway width within R-O.W based DR¡VEWAY I RS-3 on lotfrontage. an lot fronta{e, includíng 5Q% rule "',..-g-,-i w¡th¡n street setþack

t-t-

Ja -(/1 75'

RESIDÉNCE RESIDENCE 125' FOOTPRINT: 125' FOOTPRINT: 3351.5 sq.fi. 3351.5 sq.fL

gutLDtNG BUILDING SETBACK - SETBACK

PROPERTY _ PROPÉRTY UNÊ tfi.lÊ

RO-W

STRÊ81 S'IREÉT

3.CAR lnltlal Proposal Áfter Work Sessíon Drîveway width within R.O.W. based Driveway width withín R.0.W based DRTVEWAY I RS-2 on lot frontage. on lot frontage, including! SOYo rule L--GJL-J within street setback

.- J a r- € 75'

RESIDENCE RESIDENCE 125' FOOTPRINT: 125' FOOTPRINT: 335f.5 sq.fi. 3351.5 sq.fi.

BUIIDING T - SETBACI( 30' _PROPERTY LINE 1

R.O.W RO.W

STREËI STREET

G¡RGLE Inítíal PropoæI Aftet Work S,ession Ðriveway width wíthin R.O.W. based Dríveway width within R.O.W þased DRTVEWAY I RS-2 on lot frontage- on lot frontage, includín$ 50% rule "F--l!--...f w,th¡n street setback. J r- -J Attachment V

HBA Prepared Response to TMAPC Questions:

Material presented and discussed at May t6,20Lg TMAPC Work Session

l1.t{ HBA Resoonse to Co missioner Ouestions

Why did the HBA (or those representing the HBA) agree to / not oppose the current zoning code pertâining to residential driveways during the CAT process and/orthe drafting / hearings of the current zoning code?

Paul Kane, past HBA Execulive Officer, was a member of the Zoning Code Update Citizen Advisory Team (CAT). He resigned to accept another position out-of-state before the TMAPC public hearings and City Council meeting adoption, He advises that a request was made for driveway widths to be limited ãt a maximum of 30', but that this issue was not fully vetted during the CAT's partícipation. Mr. Kane also advised that driveway width was not a negotiating tool to receive favorable consideration on other zoning code update issues. Like other zoning code issues with unintended consequences which have been subject to post-adoption amendment, dr¡veway widths became an íssue for builders during the transltion from the previous zoning code to the new.

Why exactly does the HBA wânt to amend the current roning code pertaining to resldential driveways? How precisely does it adverseþ affect the HBA or those it represents?

The HBA supports providing housing choices, a basic tenet of PLAN|TUtSA, wlth the announcement of the Gathering Place and continuing investment in downtown redevelopment there has been increased demand for single-family residential infill development. Whether new construction or renovation, these new home buyers are demanding larger homes - some with 3-car garages to accommodate off-street vehicle parking and/or storage. The current zoning code only allows for a 20'wide driveway in the right of way, which limits a resident's ability for direct access into a third garage or full driveway width for sports or exercise. The proposed changes to the zoning code not only increase the amount of paved area by 40 to 100 square feet within the right of way, but create more opportunity for families to enjoy complete use oftheir pr¡vate property. There is no proposal to changeto the 50% open space coverage on a lot, so the maximum amount of paved area will not be affected by this zoning code amendment. Any adverse effect is not on the HBA or its members, but to the CitV of Tulsa's ability to increase property and sales tax dollars within its city limits. ln2Oi-7 ,128 of the 156 homes in the Greater Tulsa parade of Homes were constructed with at least a 3-car garage. When access is limited by a bottleneck driveway, we are finding that home buyers seek out houses with direct access elsewhere' While comparing Tulsa to othÀr peer cities in the nation is recommended, the City cannot afford to cont¡nue to lose population and businesses to surrounding municipalities.

How do Tulsa's peer cities handle the issue of residential driveway widths? Not surrounding cities, but peer cities,

More detail and excerpts from zoning codes are included on a separate sheet. Research was done on 5 peer cìties, Portland, OR; Fort Worth, TX; Nashville, TN; Raleigh, NC; and Cleveland, OH. Two of our peer cit¡es noted thât 50% of the total lot must be open space which is less restrictive than Tulsa. We could not locate any open space requirement on the other three cities. Portland, OR specifically calls out for no more than 40% of paved area in the front yard and Fort Worth, TX specifically calls out for no more than 50% of paved area in the front yard. Cleveland, OH calls out for a rnaximum of 30' in width for driveways. The proposed amendment would fall in common ground with the average of these five peer cities.

ll.tq Does the HBA have any alternatives lo proposed revisions to the zon¡ng code regarding residential driveway widths? For example, a city wide overlay perta¡ning only to new construction ¡n platted subdivisions? other?

The HBA has worked with city staff for the past 15 months and this proposed zoning code amendment has staff approval. This amendment is minor in context to ex¡sting neighborhoods as it increases the driveway width in the right-of-way by 4'-10', but does not affect the overall amount of paved area on a lot. The zonîng code still requires open space in the range of 52Yo'57%of the lot. The HBA does not support a city-wide overlay pertaining only to new construction in platted subdivisions. ln our opinion, a zoning amendment best addresses this issue - not another overlay district which serves to undermine the purpose of the zoning code- There should be a place for everyone in the City of Tulsa.

l{ave vor I looked at anv nlannlng alternatives to fâe¡ng three garage doors and their required concrete to the street?

Have you looked at "stacklng" the third gara1e space out the back of a two car garage? The third space is many times used for a boat or a utility vehicle. The third space projecting out the back could also serve as a room off a rearcourtyard.

Have you tooked at installing the gârage in the rear detached? Utili¿ing a 12'-0" drive at the side of the home? Again, a detached Sarage can become a flex space as well for the back yard.

Have you looked at the use of alleys in a completely new developmentto access a detached garage and provide a "shared" easement for utilities on a full block?

The HBA and members of the residential development and construction industry evaluates all options that pique homebuyer interest. What's important to note is that the one thing that distinguishes Tulsa's housing stock is its diversity. Garages may be constructed in any orientation, size, or style from detached to front facing, side or rear entry, or perhaps just a porte cochere. Options are limited by lot size and street access. These opt¡ons are best left to the homebuyer in determining their preference for what is typ¡câlly the biggest ¡nvestment of their lifetime.

l-l.Lo Peer CiW Drivern{av Comparison

Portland. OR

3. Frontage limitation. a. The standard of this subparagraph applies outside the Central City plan dístrict in the R3, R2 and Rl zones. No more than 50 percent of the frontage on a street may be used for vehicle areas, On sites with more than one street frontage, thls standard applies to the street with the highest transit designation. lf two streets have the same highest transit classification, the applicant may choose on which street to meet the standard. Sites where there is less than 100 square feet of net building area are exempt from this standard.

3. Front yard restrictions. a. No more than 40 percent of the land area between the front lot line and the front building line may be paved or used for vehicle areas. ln addition, on corner lots, no more than 20 percent of the land area between the side street lot line and the side street build¡ng line may be paved or used for vehicle areas.

3. Standards. a. The length of the garage wall facing the street may be up to 50 percent of the length of the street-facing building façade

Fort Worth, TX

Driveway coverage, including ribbon drives, shall not exceed 50% of the front yard, and any additional parking on th€ property shall be provided on the driveway. Circular drives shall not exceed 65% maximum coverage. Parking pads are permitted if they are attached to the primary driveway and constructed of the same material, and shall be included in the calculation of driveway coverage.

Nashvllle. TN

Minimum of two off street parking spaces. No maximum measurement or percentage found.

Raleigh, NC

Minimum of two off street parking spaces. No maximum measurement or percentage found

Cleveland, OH

(3) The maximum width of such driveway shall be thirty (30) feet measured at right angles to the angle of the driveway entrance. Such driveway shall have an apron of six (6) feet radius at the curb, and provide a meãns for motor vehicles to enter and leave $,¡thout obstructing traffic.

l't.¿l 60' ì I T--

I II'UÆ !

I ,t.r'l I _ _ -" ?q: B¿t= I t- I l\ I I {- ¡ I I

I I I tI

(lo (\lo

U x I t i {

i¡' f)" RESIDENCE -=ff'.-. ül =ra,rJ-'-l

: I I 2g B'L Ì

¡ ¡ !iu l.: ll 11'UrE i

I i 60'

SITE PLAN 1 tc ¡.l: t¡ü

17.?2- t-- -t I ¡

I ¡

I I I t7'{" urE I I

! I

I I I

I I I r:::::::::-'_: I I RESIDENCE I I J la .t r¿i qr d rfl sl t- I I I

I t I

I t l-¡ :f'' rd h t' r3 I I It I I I I I I I I I I I I I l¡ì I I ) i so.0" I I I

I I DRIVEWAY I 16'¡- t JE I I

I I I

I ¡ ¡ -'_-__.,-..æ'_(:' t_ J --:-r--::.:_

SITE PI.AN I tcâLE t¡ta

l?,23 Attachment Vl

Code Comparisonsr

l?. )+. City O¡dinance Tulsa Modmum Driveway Width RE RS.I RS.z RS.3 RS4 RS.s (feeÐ Within Right-of-Way 20 20 20 20 20 t2 On the Lot (Outside ROU/) 30 30 30 30 20 12

Bìxby Street 7þe Max Wídth (feet) Arterial 35 Collector 35 Minor 20

Jenks No maximum driveway width.

Owasso Driveways shall be a maximum of 35 feet in width.

Broken Arrow Driveway ingress width shall be no gr€ater than 25 feet exclusïve of curb retums at the street curb or pavement edge for two-car garages and no morc than 27 feet for three-car gârages.

Olenpool No maximum driveway width.

Sand Springs TWo car garage - max 26 feet. Three car garage - max 36 feet"

.-r ìt t r4 Tulsa - Cunrent Within ROW 2020202A20 12 Outside ROW 30 30 30 30 20 12

It¡w lìdsçu tÂ/fu{lh 7ßr+ êff-7¿t ,ß-5çP 3nr-¿S' I acs lhan 3fl Wlthln ROW 30 28 24 20 12 percerÌt Okl¡homa Clty, OK DrhËway ârsa must haw mln width of 8.5 fr br each a¡¡tornot¡ile and ^ A minimum of 25 of the lot shall be maintained as open perk¡ng ana musl be located mora than 5 fr from strêêt psrcment. space with no buildings or parking. Â MaJuity of Urban Consenation Ðistlicls set a maximum dfitaray width of 24 fr. Additional regulations on driwway location and cârports withln the indiüdual Districts. Fort Worth, TX Gargoe Size Aoaroâch Wdth lfrl Â Malority of residenlial districts allow br tr¡uo parkins spaces per 1 carornone 11-15 ôrelling unit, localed behind the font building wall or line. 2 cer 18-24 ^ Additional rcquirements in Historic districts and Urban Villages. 3 carorgreater 28

prohlbited pñate yald pemitted width of 20 t ln f,ont or side yad ^ is in the area and is only in drheways thal lead to a garage or reâr yard pafting area. ^ lnfll listed in Ch 5 of Code. property Clty, at property line - 22 fr ^ The wÍdth of tlæ ddrævrøy at the line shall nol o(ceed the width of the geËgês or parkirç spaces to wtrich the ddrsyay leads. percertage parcment perc€nt ^ Maximum of in f,ont yad - 40 ^ Maximum d in street+ide -n percent widlh - 30 t ^ Maximum 25,55 ¡mpervious coærage of lot ^ Minimum l.$2 automobile apaceo per reeidentlal ur$l of 60 fi or les shall bs limited to ^ I

-t- \,s Attachment Vll

Public Comment:

11 .r7 FILT COPY

Bicycle/Pedestrion ADVISORY COMMFTEE

April 25,2018

Re: Proposed amendment to section 55,090-F of the zoning code

Commissioners:

As pedestrian advocates, BPAC strongly opposes the proposed changes to the zoning code related to residential driveway width.

Wide driveways cause several negative impacts to the comfort and safety of people on foot.

a Driveways, by definition, cross pedestrian pathways. Wider driveways increase the size of this conflict zone, and reduce the comfort and safety of people who walk. a Wide driveways enable higher driving speeds on residential streets and encourage drivers to make faster turns. The extra width allows for a wide turn radius, and eliminates the need to slow while approaching a turn. a Wide driveways are associated with street-facing mult¡-car garages. Street-facing garages mean more blank walls, fewer windows, and fewer "eyes on the street." a Wider driveways mean more asphalt and less green space. They contribute to heat islands, eliminate space for shade trees, and increase runoff to local stormwater sewer systems.

The proposed amendment, if adopted, would mean that residential driveways could be wider than many neighborhood streets throughout Tulsa. lt would also allow people to pave their entire front yards, assuming the "open space" requirements could be met elsewhere on the lot. Tulsa deserves better than this.

For the above reasons, BPAC opposes the proposed amendment.

Thank you,

Larry Mitchell President, BPAC l1.}l FtL t coPy Sawver, Kim

From: Beverly Schafer Sent: Thursday, April26,201B 9:02 AM lo: Sawyer, Kim Subject: Proposed Zone Change to widen driveways

Kim, I have just read your email to Mitch Drummond and his response. I wish to urge you to vote against the proposed driveway zoning change for all the reasons mentioned. 35 year Maple Ridge homeowner, Beverly Schafer

1 l-î.eq FIL E COPT Sawver, Kim

From: Julie Anderson Sent: Thursday, April 26, 201811:20 AM To: Sawyer, Kim Subject: Proposalto Allow Wider Driveways in Maple Ridge

Good morning,

I would like to state my objections to the proposal to allow larger driveways in our vintage neighborhood. We do not want more concrete nor the negative aesthetics of them. Let's preserve our lovely heritage.

Thank you,

Julie Anderson 28L25. CincinnatiAve 28t/3s2-7s89

Sent from my iPhone

1 l?,30 Sawyer, Kim

From: terry meier Sent: Thursday, April 26,2018 4:55 PM To: Sawyer, Kim Subiect: ZCA-10 Proposed Zoning Code Amendment to allow larger driveways

T received todoy the ogendafor the May 2,2018 TMAPC meettng ond f om writíng with regord to item 23. T om odomontly opposed to this omendment os it is qn ossqult on the chorocter of mídtown neighborhoods. While other cities vqlue their neighborhoods close to their downtown hub it seems f oî some reason Tulso ís oll too wílling to destroy them. These neighborhoods ore highly sought for lheir unigue chorocter ond property volues steodily increose. Any request for o giont drívewoy should be consídered on on individuol bosis ond not qn overoll zoning change.

As o 30 yeat resident of midtown I must soy thot the TMAPC process is truly f lowed ond highly suspect. Ci'rizens ore outomoticolly put ot o disadvontoge when a zoning îequest ís mode ond the publíc is kept in the dork until the opprovol process is well on it's woy. The publíc should be notif ied bef ore and not ofler the TMAPC decides to research o zoning request ond determine whether or not they support opprovol. Again f reiterate my oppositíon to ZCA-\O ond respectf ully reguest the TMAPC deny its opprovol.

1 i|1.31 Fåt fl ffitrtr H Sawyer, Kim

From: Jo Farrimon d Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2018 8:42 PM lo: Sawyer, Kim Subject: Proposal to Allow Wider DrivewaYs

As a resident of yorktown Historic Preservation District, I would like to express my opposition to allowing larger driveways to reduce front yard size. My husband and I specifically chose to live in a historic area because of its charm and because its guidelines would guarantee that the character and tradition of the neighborhood would be maintained. I am a life-long Tulsan. I know what midtown neighborhoods should look like and cry when driving through so many of them that are being ruined by tearing down traditional homes only to erect huge cookie cutter monstrosit¡es that are a totaldisregardforwhatwasthereoriginally. Whilethesenewbuildingscannotbestoppedinmostpartsoftown,lam asking the committee to consider what will happen to our historic preservation districts if they are included in this change. We don't have 3 car garages. Our lots are small and our driveways are narrow. Our own is difficult to maneuver, but it's a trade offthat we were willing to make to live in an area that looks like a L920's or 1930's movie set please consider the ramifications of th¡s zoning change and keep our historic preservat¡on areas sacred.

Mike and Jo Farrimond 2215 E2051

1 17.31- Savw¡er, Kim * ;U*t., U ü" I

From: Terry Heller Sent: Thursday, April26,201B B:59 PM To: Sawyer, Kim Subject: Driveway Expansion

Hi, Kay. l'm a resident of Maple Ridge who cannot understand the need to expand driveways in our beautiful historic neighborhoods or anywhere else in our charming mid-town communities. ln what way does this enhance our neighborhoods? And, can we not just leave them alone?

I fail to see how this adds value. ls it necessary to put south Tulsa in our mid-town yards? Can we not just appreciate the differences and leave our quaint neighborhoods ad they are. As they have always been? I SO value what we have here and I would gladly move to Jenks we're it what I wanted to come home to.

Sincere thanks for your consideration Terry Heller-Auxter

Sent from my iPhone

1 11 .33 FËË-H {;*ü,r' Sawyer, Kim

From: Matt Bayne < [email protected] > Sent: Friday, April 27 ,2018 8:49 AM To: Sawyer, Kim Subject: Driveway Width proposed changes

HiKim!

Wanted to send a quick note about the proposed zoning change to increase the maximum driveway width in residential neighborhoods. I'm strongly opposed to any changes which would allow wider driveways than what is currently allowed in the code. ln fact, I would support changes to REDUCE the allowable width both within the property and within the ROW.

The current garage-centric design of many of the modern infill houses is distasteful, out of character for the neighborhoods, and is fundamentally anti-social. ln addition to reducing the green space area for water absorption within front yards, this proposed change sends the message that our houses and yards exist to accommodate vehicles, not people.

lf widening is being looked at, how about some of the major arterial streets like Peoria and 31st street which aren't even wide enough to fit a large SUV within the lanes. This is said somewhat tongue in cheek as I realize this is a completely different set of codes which govern but I feel makes the point: why should residential driveways be allowed to be wider than many of our major streets?

Thanks for taking and passing along this feedback and for all that you do. Best Regards, Matt

Mott Boyne I mattbavne@sma¡l.com | 405.633.3169

I 11 .3r Sawyer, Kim ä frË- t üt$$,Y

From: Rachel Piotraschke Sent: Friday, April27,201B 10:05 AM To: Sawye¡ Kim Subject: ZCA-10 public opinion

Hello,

As a Tulsa resident and homeowner, I am writing to register my opposition to the proposed Zoning Code amendments regarding maximum driveway width (ZCA-1-0). I can't imagine why we would want to allow people to pave as much of their front yard as they like without having to seek an exception (other than the obvious reason that it's financially beneficialto homebuilders). My home is in an older midtown neighborhood and I am concerned that such developments would have a negative impact on the character of the neighborhood as well as our property values.

Best regards,

Rachel Piotraschke 2219 E 13th St. Tulsa, OK

1 11 .35 ir tr;¡i iì I

Ë' Iu u tú r-jli l,i Sawyer, Kim

From: V. < [email protected]> Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2018 5:26 AM To: esubmit Cc: mayor@cityoftu lsa.org Subject: Public Hearing ltem 23:ZCA-10

Good morning,

I am disheartened to hear about a proposal to allow wide driveways no matter the neighborhood

I leave in the Brookside addition , southwest corner of 3lst and Peoria. My neighborhood is starting seeing builders building big houses ( all grey so far ), which do not fit the quaint look of the neighborhood.

Allowing wide driveway will further destroy the beauty of a the neighborhood, with less green spaces and making it unsafe as well. I moved there because of walkability and beauty of the surroundings.

I would love to see us preserve the beautiful architecture we have, or at least build to fit the neighborhood instead of letting builders build mc mansions to make their profits.

Sincerely, Virginie Cochard 3L245 Owasso av Tulsa, OK 74105

1 l7- 3k F"ËL Sawyer, Kim Ë ffiffiP Y

From: AU DREY ALCORN < audrey-alcorn@ hotmail.com > Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2018 11:32 AM lo: esubmit; mayor@cityoftulsa:org Subject: Public Hearing ltem 23:ZCA-10

Greetings. I would like to express my serious concerns about Public Hearing ltem 23: ZCA-LO, a proposalto change zoning to allow much wider driveways. Now, if this was allowed in a brand new subdivision, in which a large percentage of homeowners wanted 3-car garages and giant driveways, I have no problem' But to change zoning for existing neighborhoods will create eyesores; increase safety risk to bikers and pedestrians (full disclosure: I'm a walker and my husband is a biker); and reduce greenery in neighborhoods. This can be seen in my own neighborhood. Just drive down Trenton south of 71st, and you will see an expanded driveway close to Riverside. lt is hideous, having turned what was once a lovely front yard with a big tree with a swing hanging from it into what is now essentially a parking lot. This is probably against zoning, but it's done and there's no going back. Changing zoning will produce many such driveways. So, while this might make a few builders happy, when a client wants a three-car garage on a new house being built in an existing neighborhood, it w¡ll lead to all kinds of unattractive results, as people will widen driveways on smaller lots with only two car garages, to better accommodate their three, four, or five car households. The love people have for their city begins with the fondness and attachment they have for their neighborhoods, including neighborhood parks and walkable streets. Bigger driveways damage neighborhood personality and charm, and in so doing, are a net loss for Tulsa.

Thank you for your consideration of all sides of this matter

Sincerely, Audrey L. Alcorn

1 11 .n ã*fiß F¡ fri;iil :! Sawyer, Kim ff' Ë &* [. äy u;i i;

From: Jo Farrimon d Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2018 8:27 PM To: esubmit Subject: Opposition to Proposal to Allow Wider Driveways (Public Hearing ltem 23: ZCA-10)

Mr. Covey,

As a resident of Yorktown Historic Preservation District, I would like to express my opposition to allowing larger driveways and thereby reducing front yard sizes. My husband and I specifically chose to live in a historic area because of its charm and because its guidelines would guarantee that the character and tradition of the neighborhood would be maintained. I am a life-long Tulsan. I know what midtown neighborhoods should look like and cry when driving through so many of them that are being ruined by tearing down traditional homes only to erect huge cookie cutter monstrosities that are a total disregard for what was there originally. While these new buildings cannot be stopped in most parts of town, I am asking the committee to consider what will happen to our historic preservation districts if they are included in this change. We don't have, want, or need 3 car garages. Our lots are small and our driveways are narrow. Our own is difficult to maneuver, but it's a trade offthat we were willing to make to live in an area that looks like a 1920's or 1930's movie set. Please consider the ramifications of this zoning change and keep our historic preservation areas sacred.

Mike and Jo Farrimond 2215 E20ST

1 11 .31 h HilH åJ[,Jr'g Sawyer, Kim

From: Mark Wenner < [email protected] > Sent: Sunday, April29, 20187:27 AM To: Sawyer, Kim Subject: proposed zoning code changes to allow larger driveways - NO!

Ms. Sawyer,

I saw on Nextdoor that there are proposed - and recommended - zoning code changes to allow larger/wider driveways in Tulsa neighborhoods. This is a VERY BAD idea, especially for the older city neighborhoods, and should not be approved. I've seen this done before and it looks bad even in newer neighborhoods, it would absolutely ruin the character of older neighborhoods.

I live in Lewiston Gardens and realize that living in these older neighborhoods with their generally small homes and small lots involves certain compromises, but I could certainly live somewhere else if I didn't want to deal with those compromises. Let the people that must have larger homes/garages/driveways live somewhere else, frankly - don't allow our older neighborhoods to be ruined by changes such as this which don't belong there.

Thank you

Mark Wenner

1 l?. 31 Sawyer, Kim f Ë1fl åb*,, r

From: Julie Rowland Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2018 12:00 PM To: esubmit Cc: mayor@cityoftu lsa.org Subiect: Public Hearing ltem 23:ZCA-10

Dear Chairman Covey,

I am writing to advise you of my opposition to the above-referenced proposed amendment to the zoning code

Asyou areaware, current regulations prohibitdrivewayswiderthan 20'insidethe public rightof way. l'm notcertain why the HBA advocates a blanket amendment to the current regulations rather than continuing its current available remedy of applying for a special exemption. Perhaps this proposal is designed to make their lives easier.

I would urge the TMAPC Planning Commissioners to consider the lives of those who live in existing Tulsa neighborhoods. We are watching our neighborhoods slowly eroded by giant homes, crowded lot lines and ever-widening expanses of concrete.

The HBA members already have the option of pouring ever-widening driveways: apply for special exceptions, which they routinely do. But I urge you to oppose this blanket change to the zoning code so that home builders no longer even have to take those steps, which, in theory, provide notice to surrounding landowners and provide them with the opportunity to speak to how exemptions impact them.

Sincerely,

Julie T. Rowland 2721,East22nd Place Tulsa, OK. 74L14

Sent from my iPaÇ

1 ll.tlo FI[- y Sawyer, Kim [ ffffiP

From: Diana Boatman < [email protected]> Sent: Sunday, April29,201B 12:33 PM to: esubmit Subiect: Driveway zoning

I am against expanding driveways in midtown. We have small yards and not only will it reduce our green areas, but ruin the aesthetics of our t92O/3O cottage style homes.

I do not want to look like a south side neighborhood that is all garage and driveways

Thank you in advance for considering my opinion

Sincerely, Diana Boatman 1L28 S Lewis Pl Tulsa, Ok74LO4

Sent from my iPhone

1 l?.ql tü$b,'d Sawver, Kim FgLË

From: Alice Rodgers Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2018 4:47 PM To: esubmit Subject: Wider Driveways

Builders continue to want to insert homes in areas that were designed for beauty and taste. They pay a premium for a home, tear it down and build a large sometimes architecturally 'inappropriate' structure in order to recoup the price they paid scrunching as large a home as possible with amenities what people expect on less expensive property. Half less green space?

"Pave paradise put up a parking lot."

Alice RODGERS Terwilleger Heights

Sent from my iPhone

11. qL r nL t ttPï Sawl¡er, Kim

From: toli debrosse Sent: Sunday, April29,2018 7:53 PM To: esubmit Subiect: 23:ZCA-10

Concerning item numbe r 23.ZCA-LOThis would be a really bad idea for established neighborhoods. Our neighborhoods were not planned to have this kind of a driveway situation. Please do not allow this special interest take away the beauty of midtownl lt would sell our city short.

1 l.7. ç3 F¡L[ üffiPY Savwer, Kim

From: Bil I @ Bi I I Leig hty.Com on behalf of Bi ll@SmartG rowthTu lsa.Org Sent: Monday, April 30, 2018 10:49 AM To: esubmit Cc: Miller, Susan; Wayne Greene Subject: We urge you to oppose ltem #23, ZCA-10

SMART GR{J\T/TH TULSA TÜ ADVOCÁTE AND SHAPE ST4ART PUBLIC FÕLICY

Dear Planning Commission members; l'm writing on behalf of the 1,100 members and 6,300 followers of Smart Growth Tulsa, a local non-profit corporation whose mission is To Advocate and Shape Smart Public Policy. We urge you to oppose ltem #23, ZCA-LO, TMAPC, Amendment of the City of Tulsa Zoning Code to Section 55.090-F3.

This amendment is effectively "blanket zoning." lt is uncalled for and represents a serious threat to the character of Tulsa's beautiful established neighborhoods. There are several zoning tools available to the Home Builders Association of Greater Tulsa for developing new neighborhoods where the demand might exist for wider driveways, without the potential damaging consequences to the rest of the city's residents. lf you were to approve this ill-advised idea and the Council agreed, you would essentially be opting-in every neighborhood and homeowner without their knowledge or consent. There has been virtually no media attention or public discussion about this matter, and the exhibits attached to the Agenda do not in my view paint a true or balanced picture of what the potential outcomes of this amendment could or would look like in Sunset Terrace or the many hundreds of other established neighborhoods in Tulsa.

Please support the existing residential character and development patterns in the older parts of our community; and prevent the possibility of lots becoming fully paved parking areas in front of single family homes.

We support but will not repeat the concerns outlined in BPAC's letter to you that illustrates why this is a bad idea. Without the influence of perceived political pressure, I suspect most professional planners would be outspoken about the lack of merits of this city-wide change to the zoning code. l'm quite confident that that a legitimate professional review and staff recommendation would conclude that this amendment is inconsistent with our adopted comprehensive plan.

Please vote no on this item in favor of another more reasoned approach to solve what some perceive as a problem.

Respectfully submitted,

Bill Leighty, Chair Smart Growth Tulsa

9L8.605.5520

Bil I (ôSma rthG rowthTu lsa.Ors https://www.sma rtsrowthtu lsa.orsl

1 l-1. (tq Sawlrer, Kim F åå. Ë trffi$3'Y

From: Daven Tackett Sent: Monday, April 30, 201811:43 AM To: esubmit Subject: Public Hearing ltem 23:ZCA-10

I am against the widening of driveways included in the ltem 23:ZCA-LO at the Public Hearing. I have owned a home in this area for over 22 years and know first hand this would not be a positive change for everyone. For our neighborhood, this change would not be helpful to our midtown culture of a small town neighborhood where every neighbor knows you and watches out for you. Thank you, Daven Tackett

I l?.{l FIL Sawyer, Kim E Tffitr Y

From: coleman downing < [email protected] > Sent: Monday, April 30, 2018 3:01 PM To: esubmit Cc: mayor@ cityoftu lsa.o rg Subject: Reagarding Public Hearing ltem 23: ZCA-10 and my opposition to Wider Driveways

Dear Mr Covey,

I am writing to inform you that I strongly oppose the proposed changes to the zoning code related to residential driveway width.

Wide driveways cause several negative impacts to the comfort and safety of people on foot

-Driveways, by definition, cross pedestrian pathways. Wider driveways increase the size of this conflict zone, and reduce the comfort and safety of people, especially children who are smaller and less visible, who walk and play in the streets and sidewalk.

-Wide driveways enable higher driving speeds on residential streets and encourage drivers to make faster turns. The extra width allows for a wide turn radius, and eliminates the need to slow while approaching a turn.

-Wide driveways are associated with street-facing multi-car garages. Street-facing garages mean more blank walls, fewer windows, and fewer "eyes on the street."

-Wider driveways mean more asphalt and less green space. They contribute to heat islands, eliminate space for shade trees, and increase runoffto local stormwater sewer systems.

coleman downing www.colema ndowning.com 347-645-8727

1 ll. r{k FIL T COPY Sawyer, Kim

From: Shirley Moore < [email protected] > Sent: Monday, April 30, 2018 3:09 PM lo: esubmit Cc: mayor@cityoftu lsa.org Subject: Driveway width

We feel that 20' is wide enough for any driveway in the city limits. Please leave it at that

Thank you. Shirley Moore 9L8-646-39s2

Sent from my iPhone

1 I 1 .t[? Sawyer, Kim Få[-E ffi,fff] I

From: The COHN Officers Sent: Monday, April 30, 2018 3:35 PM To: Sawyer, Kim Subiect: Item 23, ZCA-10, May 2nd Agenda

Hello Kim,

Please include in this week's packet, thank you.

Cherie

April 30, 2018

TULSA METROPOLITAN AREA PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting No. 2769 May 2,2018,1:30 PM 175 East 2nd Street,2nd Level, One Technology Center Tulsa City Council Chamber

RE: ZCA-10, TMAPC TO: [email protected] FROM: COHN-Coalition of Historic Neighborhoods

COHN is a conduit for broadening awareness of zoning changes that affect the midtown area, especially those with HP designations. Communication was forwarded to our group, last Thursday evening, upon receipt of this week's Agenda, not one resident who contacted COHN were in favor of this change.

This board will hear specifics from those members and other interested parties, each of whom will provide relevant zoning and ordinance details, with pictures and maps, asto why this proposal carries significant detrimental impact on all residentialzoning.

Our general beliel is that it is loosely written with unintended consequences and is being offered on behalf of one special interest group, vs. the overall results for a majority of Tulsa residents. We urge caution and would ask, this proposal, as currently drafted, be denied.

Thank you.

Cherie Cook COHN, Founding Member, Board of Directors 1 l?. 1+( F BL E f;#PV

The Coalition of Historic Neighborhoods of Tulsa COHN Neighborhoods represented under this Coalition are as follows: Brady Heights Crosbie Heights Mayo Meadow Riverview Tracy Park Owen Park White City Lewiston Gardens Swan Lake Maple Ridge Gillette Ranch Acres Renaissance Yorktown Terwilliger Heights

2 17,qÎ z(þ-l D F ¡L E TTPY Sawyer, Kim

From: Daniel Gomez Sent: Monday, April 30, 2018 4:15 PM To: esubmit Subject: Objection to Proposed Amendment to Section 55.90-F of the Zoning Code

To the Planning Commission:

I am a resident and Terrace Drive Neighborhood, in the heart of midtown (11th to 15th, Utica to Lewis), and am vice- president of the Neighborhood Association. Our neighborhood (and my street in particular, 1-4th place, which is south of the BA expressway) consists mostly of small lots and bungalows built circa the 1-920s. Most have one car detached garages which sit towards the back of the property. They use single width driveways. Some houses have wider garages, but they too utilize single width driveways and curb cuts until they widen far back on the property closer to the detached garage. This setup has served our neighborhood well. lt preserves walkability and is consistent with the time during which the houses were built. Two car households such as mine either double up in the single width driveway or use street parking, none of which has been a subject of controversy.

The proposed zoning code amendment is greatly over-inclusive and harmful to older established neighborhoods that dominate midtown. The amendment appears to be for the benefit of newer homes with attached garages that take up significant frontage of the home. As describe above, this does not apply to my neighborhood and dozens like it in midtown, where most garages are detached and to the rear of the property. The proposal is clearly intended to give a single special interest group (the Home Builders Association of Greater Tulsa) the right to build suburban style driveways in existing neighborhoods in midtown without exception. Special exceptions are the only protection midtowners have when a homebuilder tries to build suburban style homes which do not match the existing character of the neighborhood. The special exception process is not onerous and is simply the cost of doing business when tearing down homes and rebuilding in older established neighborhoods. The special exception process should remain the standard.

To the extent homebuilders want more freedom for new neighborhoods in sprawling areas, there are much better solutions that can apply solely to those neighborhoods without removing existing protections for established neighborhoods. Developers can request broad relief applicable to an entire new neighborhood, or can request overlays, or utilize other parts of the zoning code. To make this change city-wide is significantly over-inclusive. The risk to older established neighborhoods vastly outweighs any interest homebuilders have to broad, permanent, city-wide changes to the zoning code. The staff report shows that the special exception process has only been needed 14 times since January 2016, and all have been approved. lt is therefore difficult to see the harm to homebuilders in seeking these exceptions.

I further am in full agreement with the comments and objections made by the Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee concerning the harm to walkability and our city's more recent support for bike friendliness. My street in particular has active sidewalks with kids riding bikes and and parents pushing strollers. We walk often to Cherry Street and its amenities, and is used by pedestrians and cyclists cutting through on their commutes. lf a homebuilder wants to change the character of our neighborhood, it is only fair that they make a case to the commission specific to their plan. I again reiterate that applying this broad amendment city-wide is greatly over-inclusive.

I know that many others in midtown feel the same. Please do not let a single special interest obtain overly broad relief at the expense of concerns citizens of older, established neighborhoods. Please reject the proposed amendment and let the special exception process remain the proper procedure, or find a narrower plan that avoids application to established neighborhoods which work hard to preserve their urban character.

1 11 .gÞ Daniel E.Gomez 1788 East 1-4th Place Tulsa, OK74LO4 qI .)1 I TOPT

2 I'l .51 FIL t tffifij il Kim

From: Hammontree, Tony < htonyl @ostatemai l.okstate.ed u > Sent: Monday, April 30, 2018 4:23 PM To: Sawyer, Kim Cc: Ewing, Blake; Mayor

Subiect: ZCA-10 Sidewalk I ncrease

Kim Sawyer,

I live at 2540 S. Florence Ave. #4 Tulsa, OK.74tI4.

I wanted to voice my concern in regards to the proposed changes to the city Zoning Code in regards to increasing driveway widths. Please do not accept this proposed change.

This change would potentially do the following:

L. Alter the character of many established neighborhoods in Tulsa. 2. Create wider distances for people crossing vehicular zones like drivewals. This would discourage walk-ability and make it more unsafe for children to play and people to use their neighborhoods for recreational activity like jogging, walking, biking, etc. 3. lncrease storm water by adding more pavement in Tulsa, negatively impacting our watersheds and increasing the volume of water to areas that already have flooding issues. 4. ln general, the proposal is to allow for three car garages and/or three cars to park side by side on a single driveway. This would potentially make it more financially feasible to demolish older homes for for larger homes with 3 car garages, which would alter the character of many neighborhoods that many Tulsan's take pride in. 5. This proposed change is also a contradiction to the goals in Tulsa's Comprehensive Plan, by further encouraging vehicular dependence while at the same discouraging alternative means of transit through consequence.

Thank you,

Tony

1 lr.5z FI!.T TffiPY Sawyer, Kim

From: Robert Brejcha < [email protected] > Sent: Tuesday, May 1, 201811:04 AM To: Sawyer, Kim Cc: 'Alice Rodgers'; Martha Blevins; 'Mike Keys';Greg Dukes; [email protected]; Debbie Favell; 'cullen koger'; 'HALL Tracey'; [email protected];[email protected]; 'Alice Rodgers'; 'HALL Tracey'; Martha Blevins; 'Mike Keys'; Greg Dukes; [email protected]; Debbie Favell; 'cullen koger' Subject: May 2,2018 - ZCA-LO, Residential Driveway Width PROPOSED Zoning Code Amendments lmportance: High

Kim

Please advise the Commission of a request to continue the above proposed Zoning Code Amendment regard¡ng w¡der drive-ways for future cons¡deration or deny the proposal for the above Amendments scheduled as ltem 23lor the MPAG Meeting No.2769 to be held on May 2,2018 meeting date. http://wr,vw.tmapc.oro/current aqenda.html

I am the President of the Museum Neighborhood Association which represents home owners in the neighborhood surrounding the Philbrook Museum.

We became aware of this proposal yesterday, April 30.

I have reviewed the Staff Report and note that as of today, May 1 ,2018, the report does not include Examples of how the proposed amendment would operate, however, within the Mid-Town area 30 foot wide drive-ways on 75 foot wide lots would be a significant disruption to the character of the area.

We are experiencing significant teardown / rebuild and remodeling in the area and have properties creating significant hard surface use of the properties (who is checking on the 80% maximum? What if the whole area goes to 80%) as well as questionable uses, such as, astro-turf front yards !

We find the letter you received in opposition to the proposed Amendment from the Bicycle / Pedestrian Advisory Committee, dated August 25,2018, to be compelling.

Our membership is having an Annual Meeting at Philbrook on Wednesday, May 2, and we will advise them of this situation and request their further in-put.

The parties copied on this email are members of the Board of the Association and other interested residents who have raised the issue and support the request to defer action or deny the Amendment at this time.

I have also copied the President of the Maple Ridge Home Owners Association

I would appreciate your acknowledgement of recipient of this email and its transmittal to the Commission

Very truly yours,

Robert Brejcha President, Museum Neighborhood Association 918-605-8272 1 l7,53 This e-mail, including attachments, if any, may include confidential information and may be used only by the person or entity to which it is addressed. lf the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient or his or her authorized agent, the reader is hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is prohibited. lf you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message and delete this e-mail immediately.

,i' tj ;i F er-[ u Et E 'À

2 l7.5rl F¡L I Tü}ü, Y Kim

From: terry meier Sent: Tuesday, May 1, 2018 3:08 PM To: esubmit Subject: Item 23 ZCA-10 on May 2 agenda Attachments: 20170518_12a626jpg

Attn: Chairman Michael Covey Susan Miller has confirmed for me that if this proposed amendment is passed nearly my entire front yard could be turned into a driveway/parking lot if I wanted. This is something I would never do as it would destroy my home and neighborhood near 15th and Utica. I've attached a pic of my 1920's craftsman which has been lovingly updated and cared for. Please deny this zoning amendment as it is builder overreach and would signal a death knell to midtown neighborhoods as we know them.

1J.55 I'TT æ l* lfr ffi ffi' E# - L*r; -.1a =4 \tlts Ftuc0Py Sawyer, Kim

From: Joseph Westervelt Sent: Wednesday, May 2,2018 8:46 AM To: [email protected] Cc: Miller, Susan; Sawyer, Kim;Wilkerson, Dwayne Subject: Three car driveway letter

Robert,

I am im receipt of your memo to Kim Sawyer. As a homeowner in the Museum Neighborhood, I am concerned that you have decided to speak on behalf of others in the neighborhood, that may not share your personal position on three car driveways. I also take exception to your notion that our neighborhood fabric is being threatened by "tear downs." Surly you are not speaking about the Day home, Thomas home, etc. The new homes that have been constructed by our neighborhood in recent years are of high quality and are additions to the Museum Neighborhood that will be admired years from now for their beauty and style.

The changes being sought by the the home building industry will have little affect on homes in our area. Home prices and land prices on our neighborhood are well above the price point that this policy change will affect.

Smaller homes in the Brookside area between Riverside and Peoria, where lot prices have risen from the S60k mark to well over S200k and similar areas in the Tulsa market, that this change is intended to help. This escalation of value in Midtown is due to the positive impact of the Gathering Place, that is attracting young families back into the Midtown area, that have in recent years moved to more suburban areas where schools and amenities that they require were available. The impact on our neighborhood will be modest if at all.

We should embrace the change in demographics that is occurring in the older areas of Tulsa, rather than take a position that is based on creating a fear that is unfounded and inaccurate.

I would remind you that the letter you have submitted to the TMAPC has not had a vote of the members of the Museum Neighborhood, that should determine the positron our neighborhood chooses to support. That vote has not occurred to my knowledge, and I would suggest that you provide concrete examples of the threat to our neighborhood and have an open and honest discussion with the rest of your neighbors, before allowing your personal bias and ignorance of this issue appear to be shared by the association.

At this time your memo should be considered your personal position, and not that of the Museum Neighborhood

Joe Westervelt

Joseph Westervelt Mapleview Associates lnc. 1630 S. Boston Ave. Tulsa, Oklahoma 74L!9 9L8-583-8808 (office) 9L8-607-8808 (cell) iwestervelt@ mapleviewassociates.com

1 l?.51 IILE COPT Savwer. Kim

From: Bill Ramsay < billramsayOl @icloud.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 1, 2018 10:08 PM To: Sawyer, Kim Subject: May 2,2018 - ZCA-LO, Residential Driveway Width PROPOSED Zoning Code Amendments lmportance: High

Kim:

Please advise the Commission of a request to continue the above proposed Zoning Code Amendment regarding wider drive-ways for future consideration or deny the proposal for the above Amendments scheduled as Item 23 for the MPAC Meeting No. 2769 to be held on May 21 2018 meeting date. http://www.tmapc.org/current agenda.html

I found out about this proposed amendment only today, and although I have not yet advised the Southern Pointe Homeowners Association, I will do so tomorrow and I believe the Association would vote to deny this proposal. Thanks for your consideration.

Bill Ramsay 8727 S Hudson Tulsao Ok74l37

1 l-?.5 / t ll-t tüpY Sawyer, Kim

From: Maple Ridge Neighborhood Association Sent: Wednesday, May 2,2018 11:47 AM To: Sawyer, Kim Subject: Statement on Proposed Amendment ZCA-10

Good morning Kim,

Please find below our statement for TMAPC review regarding the proposed Zoning Code Amendment to Driveway Widths:

Maple Ridge Neighbors [Maple Ridge neighborhood association) supports the current City of Tulsa Zoning Code regarding driveway width. When it is proposed that a residential single family property wishes to increase the width of their driveway beyond the current Code restrictions, Maple Ridge Neighbors supports the careful review of each application, on a case by case basis, to determine if the exception is in harmony with the spirit and intent of the Code.

The proposed Amendment to the current Code could lead to unintended safety issues and prove detrimental to the historical and aesthetic character of neighborhoods under Historic Preservation Overlay as well as those that embrace our unique urban forest setting and celebrate the intrinsic value of green spaces.

Respectfully,

Cullen Koger MRN, President

1 17. 51 F nå- Ë üË.üË, Y Sawyer, Kim

From: Robert Brejcha < [email protected] > Sent: Wednesday, May 2,2018 12:14 PM To: Sawyer, Kim Cc: 'Alice Rodgers'; Martha Blevins;'Mike Keys'; Greg Dukes; [email protected]; Debbie

Favell;'cu I len koger';' HALL Tracey'; [email protected]; [email protected] Subiect: RE: May 2,2018 - ZCA-LO, Residential Driveway Width PROPOSED Zoning Code Amendments lmportance: High

Kim:

It has been brought to my attention that despite my statements below as follows:

"The parties copied on this email (emphasis added) are members of the Board of the Association and other interested residents who have raised the issue and support the request to defer action or (emphasis added) deny the Amendment at this time.";

And,

"Our membership is having an Annual Meeting at Philbrook on Wednesday, May 2, and we will advise them of this situation and request their further in-put.";

There may be an impression that this matter has been voted upon by our general membership.

So let me be clear - The Museum Neighborhood Association has not had a vote on this matter - the request to defer or deny "at this time" represents the various opinions of those copied on the email and is not a representation of the qeneral membership of the Association.

Obviously for those requesting a deferment of action, the opportunity to review the matter with the Exhibits you provided this morning and to discuss the matter with a reasonable time for consideration is desirable.

Please transmit this clarification to the Commission

Thank you

Robert Brelcha President, Museum Neighborhood Association 918-605-8272

This e-mail, including attachments, if any, may include confidential information and may be used only by the person or entity to which it is addressed. lf the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient or his or her authorized agent, the reader is hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is prohibited. lf you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message and delete this e-mail immediately.

From: Robert Brejcha Sent: Tuesday, May L,2OL81"1:04 AM To:' ksawyer@ incog.o rg' Cc: 'Alice Rodgers' ; Martha Blevins ([email protected]) ; 1 l?.kÐ 'Mike Keys'; Greg Dukes ([email protected]); Rodney Schewey ([email protected] ; Debbie Favell ([email protected]) ; 'cullen koger' ; 'HALL Tracey' ; '[email protected]' ; '[email protected]' ; 'Alice Rodgers' ; 'HALL Tracey' ; Martha Blevins ([email protected]) ; 'Mike Keys' ; Greg Dukes ([email protected]) ; Rodney Schewey ([email protected] ; Debbie Favell ([email protected]); 'cullen koger' Subject: May 2,2018 - ZCA-LO, Residential Driveway Width PROPOSED Zoning Code Amendments lmportance: High tffir'Y Kim: FTLE.

Please advise the Gommission of a request to continue the above proposed Zoning Code Amendment regard¡ng wider drive-ways for future cons¡deration or deny the proposal for the above Amendments scheduled as ltem 231or the MPAC Meeting No.2769 to be held on May 2,2018 meeting date. http://www.tmapc.orq/current aqenda.html

I am the President of the Museum Neighborhood Association which represents home owners in the neighborhood surrounding the Philbrook Museum.

We became aware of this proposal yesterday, April 30.

We find the letter you received in opposition to the proposed Amendment from the Bicycle / Pedestrian Advisory Committee, dated August 25,2018, to be compelling.

Our membership is having an Annual Meeting at Philbrook on Wednesday, May 2, and we will advise them of this situation and request their further in-put. i

I have also copied the President of the Maple Ridge Home Owners Association

I would appreciate your acknowledgement of recipient of this email and its transmittal to the Commission

Very truly yours,

Robert Brejcha President, Museum Neighborhood Association 918-605-8272

This e-mail, including attachments, if any, may include confidential information and may be used only by the person or entity to which it is addressed. lf the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient or his or her authorized agent, the reader is hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is prohibitéd. lf you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message and delete this e-mail immediately.

2 17.t?f Sawyer, Kim

From: Robert Brejcha < [email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, May 2,2018 12:22 PM To: 'Joseph Westervelt' Cc: Miller, Susan; Sawyer, Kim;Wilkerson, Dwayne Subject: FW: May 2,2018 - ZCA-LO, Residential Driveway Width PROPOSED Zoning Code Amendments lmportance: High

ffiffitr1f Joseph: FItE,

Please see the clarification emailto the Commission below

Robert Bre¡cha President, Museum Neighborhood Association 918-605-8272

From: Robert Brejcha Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 L2:L4 PM

To:'ksawyer@ i ncog.o rg' Cc: 'Alice Rodgers'; Martha Blevins ([email protected]) ; 'Mike Keys'; Greg Dukes ([email protected]); Rodney Schewey ([email protected] ; Debbie Favell ([email protected]) ; 'cullen koger' ; 'HALL Tracey' ; '[email protected]' ; '[email protected]' Subject: RE: May 2,2OL8 -ZCA-LO, Residential Driveway Width PROPOSED Zoning Code Amendments lmportance: High

Kim:

It has been brought to my attention that despite my statements below as follows: .'The@(emphasisadded)arememberSoftheBoardoftheAssociationandother interested residents who have raised the issue and support the request to defer action ot (emphasrs added,) deny the Amendment at this time.";

And,

"Our membership is having an Annual Meeting at Philbrook on Wednesday, May 2, and we will advise them of this situation and request their further in-put.";

There may be an impression that this matter has been voted upon by our general membership.

1 l'1. It1', So let me be clear - The Museum Neighborhood Association has not had a vote on this matter - the request to defer or deny "at this time" represents the various opinions of those copied on the email and is not a representation of the qeneral membership of the Association.

Please transmit this clarification to the Commission

Thank you F fifl-Ë üffi[,Y Robert Brejcha President, Museum Neighborhood Association 918-605-8272

From: Robert Brejcha Sent: Tuesday, May t,2018 LL:04 AM

To :' ksa wye r @ i n co g. o rg' Cc: 'Alice Rodgers' ; Martha Blevins (mmblevins(ôhotmail.com) ; 'Mike Keys'; Greg Dukes (Greedukes(asbcslobal.net); Rodney Schewey ([email protected] ; Debbie Favell ([email protected]) ; 'cullen koger' ; 'HALL Tracey' ; '[email protected]' ; '[email protected]' ; 'Alice Rodgers' ; 'HALL Tracey' ; Martha Blevins (mmblevins(ôhotmail.com); 'Mike Keys'; Greg Dukes ([email protected]) ; Rodney Schewey ([email protected] ; Debbie Favell ([email protected]); 'cullen koger' Subject: May 2,2OL8 -ZCA-LO, Residential Driveway Width PROPOSED Zoning Code Amendments lmportance: High

Kim

Please advise the Commission of a request to continue the above proposed Zoning Gode Amendment regard¡ng wider drive-ways for future consideration or deny the proposal for the above Amendments scheduled as ltem 23for the MPAG Meeting No.2769 to be held on lûay 2,2018 meeting date. http://www.tmapc.orq/current aqenda.html

I am the President of the Museum Neighborhood Association which represents home owners in the neighborhood surrounding the Philbrook Museum.

We became aware of this proposal yesterday, April 30.

I have reviewed the Staff Report and note that as of today, May '1 ,2018, the report does not include Examples of how the proposed amendment would operate, however, within the Mid-Town area 30 foot wide drive-ways on 75 foot wide lots would be a significant disruption to the character of the area.

2 t1 ,la3 We are experiencing significant teardown / rebuild and remodeling in the area and have properties creating significant hard surface use of the properties (who is checking on the 80% maximum? What if the whole area goes to 80%) as well as questionable uses, such as, astro{urf front yards !

We find the letter you received in opposition to the proposed Amendment from the Bicycle / Pedestrian Advisory Committee, dated August 25,2018, to be compelling.

Our membership is having an Annual Meeting at Philbrook on Wednesday, May 2, and we will advise them of this situation and request their further in-put.

I have also copied the President of the Maple Ridge Home Owners Association

I would appreciate your acknowledgement of recipient of this email and its transmittal to the Commission

Very truly yours, FtL t 88P y Robert Brejcha President, Museum Neighborhood Association 918-605-8272

3 l?,b,f Kim

From: Susan White < [email protected] > Sent: Wednesday, May 2,2018 12:41 PM To: esubmit Subject: Item: Amendment of Section 55.090-F3 of the City of Tulsa Zoning Code

Mr. Michoel Covey:

RE: Item: Amendment of Section 55.090-F3 of the CiIy of Tulso Zoning Code (Moximum Width of Residentíql Drívewoys in RE ond RS Districts) to revise the moximum drivewoy wídth regulotions estoblished by thot section.

f woufd like to express my disgust with TMAPC ond the City of Tulso, in general. f know mokíng money is ímportont to the City, but to render our older estoblished midtown oreos to look líke oll of the south Tulso neighborhoods is unforgiveoble.

I hove líved in Tulso forTOyears qnd in my current home for 39 yeors near 22nd ond Lewis. Whot hos been hoppening to the pride of midtown Tulso is unforgiveable. Brookside neighborhoods hove almost disoppeored.

Tulso needs fo stop ollowing buílders to put money in theír pockets qt the expense of mídtown Tulsqns who hove lived in these qreos becouse welove the history of our city and the archítecture of our homes. We know whqt o wonderful oreq this is to live, but to ollow buílders to ?emove oll the homes just so they con moke money does not seem to be preserving whot odds to the beouty of our City. During my 30 yøors os o reqltor, f hove given mony clients moving to Tulso o "welcome tour" down Riverside Drive ond through the older neíghborhoods to show just whot Tulso hos to off er - q little bil of everything!

P\eose help midtowners keep whot is lefl of our little oreo of Tulso by getting the qbove omendment turned down. Allowing buílders to odd three cor drivewoys ond garages is not whot midtown is obout. Pleose - let's preserve whqt is left of this oreo so that our grondchildren ond their grondchíldren con olso enjoy this port of Tulso's history.

Sincerely,

Suson White

Suson White ll.b5 swhí[email protected] Cellz 918-637-0517 Officet9tS-74g -8374 Fox:918 747 -8458 r¡Lt ttPr Í1 we ever foryel thot ¡vc't'e one notion undcr 6od,

then we will be o notion gone underl (Ronold Reogon)

2 l?.bk Kim

From: Jackie Hope Sent: Wednesday, May 2,2018 12:46 PM To: esubmit

Midtown needs to be preserved - the City is allowing too much construction - like the Marshall property - the is ruining the property value.

Sent from my iPhone

1 l? .l;l FILE O&PT Sawyer, Kim

From: Bill Thomas Sent: Wednesday, May 2,2018 1:04 PM To: Sawyer, Kim; Wilkerson, Dwayne Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: INCOG Related Hearing/May 2,2018

Kim and Dwayne,

My name is Bill Thomas; I reside at l376East29rh Street, having built that home between 2010 and 2012. Additionally, our family has lived in the mid-town area for over forty years. Our family also contributed to the Gathering Place. Vy'e are very excited about the positive impact it will have on Tulsa, mid-town and beyond. I remember well my first move into mid-town with kids in tow. To see new opportunities in this new age for such a youthful influx is very exciting, again.

A neighbor brought to my attention this morning that a hearing is scheduled this afternoon to consider certain proposed restrictions that may affect midtown residential properties. I was also made aware that Bob Brejcha (copied here) has reached out to you by letter with recommendations on and/or about such matters. Because Bob lives in the neighborhood surrounding Philbrook Museum of Art and very kindly (and voluntarily) serves as the President of the Museum Neighborhood Association (Association),I am cautiously concerned that you (INCOG or others) may interpret Bob's personal recommendations as recommendations made on behalf of the Association. Accordingly, I spoke with my neighbor and friend Mike Keys, who serves as Vice President and Communications officer of the Association, to ascertain that the letter reflected Bob's personal views only. Mike assured me that Bob's letter to you was appropriately only his personal entreaties on the matters.

So in my caution to make be clear on this, I am writing you to make sure that you do not interpret Bob's letter recommendations as on behalf of the Association; otherwise, you may tangentially misconstrue my personal thinking on the matters, merely because I am a dues-paying member of the Association.

Hopefully, this clarifies my concern. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me. My cell is 918-691-0348.

Kindly, -Bi[

Note: Copied are the officers of Association. I much appreciate their service to the Association whose original founding in 2010, was exclusively to serve a neighborhood fully unified in security/safety concems.

Bill Thomas

1 17 ,ug Co-Owner 1516 S. Boston Avenue, Ste. 301 . Tulsa, OK74lI9 P (918) se2-4400 FtL t 00Pr CâRF¡fr reditedfør -ler"rrfte b€nmr^fí Ercell¿we ifi Cúrs f;f Stûr Cllck Here to vl¡lt ¡enlorstar.corn

2 l? .bq g{tpy Savwer. Kim Ff [" E

From: pf [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, May 2,2018 1:52 PM To: esubmit Subject: 3 car driveways

I am a resident of a mid-city historic district neighborhood. I am opposed to allowing an increase in the allowable size of parking areas and drives in my neighborhood. A two car garage and curb parking should be ample for a family. I suspect this is proposal is being shopped by the Airbnb industry that has ruined so many formerly desirable districts around the world.

Paul Moore 1611S Detroit Ave Tulsa OK 74120

Sent from my HTC phone.

1 11 .70 TulsoHBA.com HBA 'll545tast4lrdStreet.luls¿,0klahoma74.l46 HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION ITULSA offrce:(9,l8)663-1100 fax:i918)628-0493

May 2,20t8

Mr. Michael Covey, Chairman Ff{. Ð {?#Py Tulsa Metropolitan Area Planning Commission Two West 2nd Street, Suite 800 Tulsa, OK 74LO3 Delivered in person at TMAPC meeting

Subject: ZCA-10, Residential Driveway Width-Zoning Code Amendment

Dear Commissioner Covey,

Allow me to first apologize for being out of state and not being in attendance at today's TMAPC meeting where ZCA-7O, the proposed zoning code amendment regarding residentialdriveway width willbe heard,

' I have been meeting with Dawn Warrick, Susan Miller, and the Mayor's office for the last 14 months to develop a zoning code amendment that facilitates consumer demand for wider driveways in the City of Tulsa. With construction of the Gathering Place nearing completion as well as other area attractions and amenities, the city is experiencing increased demand for new residential construction, This demand is coming primarily from young families who want to live and work near these developments. This is exciting news for the City of Tulsa as we expect increased population growth to result. For those who are raising families comes the need for maximum garage space and corresponding driveway width to accommodate off-street vehicle parking, storage needs, and family sports and activities.

Yesterdaç I became aware of one objection in particular from an existing homeowner who has been led to believe that "if this proposed amendment is passed nearly my entire front yard could be turned into a driveway/parking lot if I wanted". Nothing could be further from the truth since the Zoning Code's open space coverage requirement is not subject to change. For example, a RS-3 zoned property requires a

minimum of 7 ,2OA square feet with an open space of 4,000 square feet. That leaves 3,200 square feet for the home's living space, garage, patios, driveway, and walkways. This will not result in a paving allor nearly all of the front yard because the open space requirement simply won't allow it.

This amendment has been specifically developed wìth City of Tulsa staff input to promote residential development and to protect existing neighborhoods. TMAPC approval of this proposed amendment serves to provide a variety of housing options that accommodates both housing types and affordabílity in all areas of the city in accordance w¡th the Comprehensive Plan. The HBA is in agreement with the lJ.

\(ottt I lrttttt, ()tt¡ Pr¡¡t¡'sstr¡¡t staff recommendat¡on for approval of the proposed amendments to the City of Tulsa Zoning Code as shown in Attachment l.

I am, however, concerned that the exhibit packet for this agenda item did not include all referenced attachments when the agenda was released for public notice, and that Attachments ll and lll have been distributed to TMAPC members less than 24 hours in advance of this meeting. I believe it is in everyone's best interest to continue this item to.another date so that all attachments perta¡ning to this proposed amendment receive the attention they deserve by all interested parties, and that this material accurately communicates what will and will not be allowed.

Sincerely,

Jeffrey Smith Executive Vice Preside nt/CEO

lz.1L ilLt c0Pr Kim

From: Alice Rodgers Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2018 5:45 PM lo: Sawyer, Kim Subject: Committee

l volunteer to be on committee to discuss driveway widening proposal.

Alice RODGERS L519 East 26th Pl Tulsa, OK74LL4

918344870L [email protected]

Sent from my iPhone

1 l?.13 ilLt 00Pr Sawyer, Kim

From: Ronnie Cookson Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2018 6:41 PM To: esubmit Subiect: re:driveway lengths Attachments: Paved yardjpg

TMAPC,

Please do not consider increasing widths for driveways. I live in midtown and do not want my neighborhood to be filled with mcmansion driveways on lots meant for bungalow houses. This decreases the livability of the neighborhood and decreases property value. lf a person would like to live in a mcmansion with a three car garage, they can purchase one in other Tulsa neighborhoods where lots are larger.

Thank you for your time.

Ronnie Cookson

Sent from Mailfor Windows L0

1 t1 a lrl tL' Ll

Åd83 ilËi FrL t coPr Sawyer, Kim

From: Eileen Shane < [email protected] > Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 9:51 AM To: Sawyer, Kim Subject: Please block changes.

My husband and myself are very much against changing the plan for South Maple Ridge. Wider streets would change the Looking and feeling of our family neiborhood. Wide driveways would destroy trees and landscaping that have been here for decades apon decades. It would encouage "dead cars" in driveways and much more water in our yards and streets. Banking you in advance for your support.

Eileen and John Shane 2828 S CincinnatiAve

1 t1 lu Sawyer, Kim FtLt c0Py

From: Mark Leavitt Sent: Friday, May 18, 2018 10:13 AM To: esubmit; Miller, Susan Cc: Kathy Taylor Subject: re: Public Hearing ltem 23:ZCA-10

I am troubled by this specific proposed amendment to the zoning code. The amendment would arguably be a step backwards in achieving the goals of Midtown neighborhoods'comprehensive plan. Current regulations prohibit driveways that are wider than 20' inside the public right of way, and for good reason. Driveways generally cross pedestrian pathways and keeping them narrow helps create the kind of safe, walkable neighborhoods that are typically high priorities in the place-making strategies of smart cities. The current zoning code establishes residential driveway width based on zoning districts by applying specific dimensions, which was determined to be easier for applicants to calculate and for staff to administer.

Sincerely, Mark Leavitt Renaissa nce Neighborhood

1 l1.J'l Sawyer, Kim Ft[t c0Pr

From: karen mccall dunning Sent: Sunday, May 20,2018 12:28 PM To: esubmit Cc: M iller, Susa n; mayor@cityoftu lsa.org;'dist4@tu lsacou ncil.org.' Subiect: Public Hearing ltem 23: ZCA-10

Dear Mr. Covey,

As a licensed architect and District 4 Midtown resident, I am contacting you to voice my opposition to the proposal to allow increased paving surface for driveways.

I oppose the measure for the following reasons:

a lmpact on water run off o As you know, infill in older neighborhoods has impacted the community in many ways, both good and bad. Due to the smaller lot size and relative high cost of land acquisition (land prices + (frequently) the cost to demolish existing structures to make room for new), builders choose to dramatically increase the size of building footprint on a lot thereby also decreasing pervious land area, creating greater water runoff. The older sewer systems have a difficult time processing the water and our high level of vegetation in Midtown often exacerbates this issue due to clogged collection points. Additionally, my experience has been that builders often change existing drainage patterns as part ofthe process, thereby causing adjacent properties to be negatively affected, sometimes with more minor consequences (standing water, silted patios, ruined landscaping) and other times with major problems such as house/basement flooding. Allowing larger expanses of paving will amplify the issue by further decreasing the percolation area on the lot. o Our zoning codes contain green space requirements requiring minimum pervious open area on properties. Midtown is primarily composed of RS-l, RS-2, and RS-3 properties. For these, the green (impervious)space required is 53% - 58% of the lot space (see charts below). lt has been my observation that this ordinance is rarely followed nor enforced, neither in new construction nor in additions to existing structures. One does not have to be a design professional to recognize this, one only has to drive through our Midtown neighborhoods to see structures built from setback to setback (even in the backyard) to know that the lot does not comply with these green space requirements of greater than 50%. Allowing additional driveway width will further hinder compliance and increase water runoff issues.

FROM 5/LO/t8 Tulsa Zoning Code loþaf 5.¡: tJ FiÍ'h:r Cúl sn't &¡¡ùtr* ttÊpfì¡rüi1r *.Aul*þn¡ H lrr RIJ fl.:t F.l *99 x¡ ßt ilr,¡ ttt-t $¡.r ür¡ n$H I¡5þtreÈ4.r-t D.ildralkr 2¡g.oo rÀáûr r¡ü Lrþo rSoo txÞ s.5aõ t5p $ût l$û tst ¡rÈ r¡æ F .+ hd* 69æ 91&' !3ûê L94ß 5¡{È !.5& L"E- 9-!A} 55S {.çt}: 4.90:r tlI'È t?94 ì.Ê{ú l.{rF} t.¡¿* î.ÈSi Iú¡ç r:!ltiü. h(@ dÞ1 - I tfnt 15.fi.}1çt{a 1r{fÍ}l S.fLì] r ri¡Ì'! r tf.] ft{il4, Þ.F¡ hçfi' 5}{B {rK* {¡.Sú {'.F¡} r¡'¡fi fr!.J} r¡fîo Hutt,¡n1 tru4 ¡.au'G944 3.!fi 9.!4+ r.tiç 9_5$] 9-56 ÀHts"Énik4ry* . !ô.ffi lÊ.f¡.¡} 6.ürr .'¿.¡114 - Mo¡klþmr F{rt - lrl otFê .¡leF, Þ{il,kr!ilL¡h .,8, !.!ì¡ I t X¡¡ å-!& t1È: t3e3 5 r{ç 3.:,0} :. tfr¡ ! ¿¡l{r] I lÐ¡ 1¿ f{.¡ r:.Iff I }.ù}t I ¿m+ ì ¡.!'(.¡ I ¡.DC{, | ¡.trt

1:# : .tæ Í,!,il l'..S l.:¡C rlæ l.:.æ !.'Æe. l.lIF ?.¡rll .i':({ t:O: !.tîS t5i.i !."s r }¡r} 45¡lö ¡.¡0O ¡.?!e r.ÈdO 1.6{+ 1.6(¡} 1,6Ð+. ¡.Ê{* - ¡?r¡-. ¡,1:€ ¡,rtê ¡,;ið l,I..s i..?rÈ ¡ tr*

1 f ? ,_1y èrlùlx¡ùrr! ü ,Ér *tX Êt.! ti{ nt.l [B It ltr¡ô ,r¡¡-l ar¿.f d¡.¡ ß]¡ll ¡)ilfiâ¡ - ¿åt{¡ {it4 !.¡'5û l¡5É l{'i ,{iÉ i¡l¡J l{ll !{1ü M[:,,¡t hwî ' 1ül !j!ûû t.e&] t Br{| l.lïç MJ El¡¡ tFtrirllkFJ+ t-ù{/.' I .l9S ! I l* JS{ ttt ar à."ffit b.¡¡r¡rF!,rH Èflficrd br r{f< SIEdl r¡r$tF-ft ,r,*o, rio, i ;.r*i: r ¡ ;lû, ¡¡to t ¡,:rr,, * irr, r r"o,'iH,'urHr tt K ,1i; tttH, l¡tarr ¡.attllthlfll ft6¡da{ lqÆ r50 lm t5 úa, 50 F rû 9t !1! T, !,0 rû F{Ê.: lÞrF " r,i, :,¡¡ $ 1{ 1jJ ",IJ ì0 1.: ÌðÊès.rtt -11 Ì+r ¡:, ¡1 "0¡0 .í'iì ttl ¡0 lC (çla{g! lÞtr dqrl 7t ft r-, 73 13 13 ¡a ¡.Jt fuFrù r!. ?t -!i 'ß *rj {{l 44 {4 Mx:¡s! l(.d{ ¡J.rìlq ¡ Lt +a,\r !_.ËJ 4r ñ¡w1, lÞ,.1h3ütõ ,lÊrê,rqfit br..l¡rd 'Ìù 1¡J l9 bt çi¡ .¡ :3 4¡l *4 9J $ Jd !J !;rÈ;*ì t¡if3{r:.\ ìÞu llai :Llt ,Yj ti¡: 1ßJ 3C¡j 1t¿l ]m -1Sì !Èrl 1C{ il¡rùár 1¡ra{ I ffilátt- 8ñ'¡q¡ld þ*þHr! lll Mt! tÕ:€& F¡ttÌ*l¡lnrtlç Uþt 8¡rild¡rç LtùxLr {rL I l:.õ,lll fftÉrdl!f ff,i ÉrdÉ r'J ì1 1l .rt li :.{ t1 lr ]ç {q¡ar st{Fu .I4 IF IT rtì ltr i$tfliffr lqi '5 3 å91¡ : ltsi 5{Èi ItÊi r{':¡ Ì{?: nr¡r iJl :5 Jl ¡! lt¡ .1!r ;r:1 ,ú ¡'i rt th ltËl fÊJuñÍ lrâ, n-ì l¡H ?¡æ '¡^t¡F ¿Ullt¡.:æ È& ¡c{a r¡! t2m NFO ¡g . ¡too

a Neighborhood aesthetics, viability, and value o Data shows that "walkability" is a key factor in the value and desirability of our inner neighborhoods. lt is my contention that promot¡ng greater vehicle use and increasing the size of curb cuts will negatively affect this aspect of Midtown living. r From the zoning charts above, one can see that in an RS-1, RS-2, or RS3 districts, (most of Midtown), the minimum lot width is 100', 70',60' (resp.). Allowing larger driveways and wider curb cuts would result in driveway access being as much as 5O% of the street frontage. I suggest that this increases riskto pedestrians and decreases the aesthetic appealof ourolder neighborhoods. While there may not be a statistically measurable cause/effect relationship, I would contend that both these will negatively affect Midtown neighborhood viability and value.

Thank you for considering these potential ramifications when you assess the proposed changes to the code. Feel free to contact me by return email or at 918.85L.5058 with any questions.

Karen McCall Dunning

Unbelievable German World War 2 Photo Shocks Americans' pro. naturalhealthresponse. com

2 l't.11 FtLt c0Pr Sawver, Kim

From: terry meier Sent: Tuesday, May 29,2018 8:26 PM To: esubmit Subject: zc\-10

Attn: Choirmon Míchoel Covey My emoil oddresses inoccurotø statements in the l,l\ay 2,20t8 letter to you f rom treffrey Smith with the HBA. fn porogroph 3, Mr. Smith discusses o porticulor objection from on existíng homeowner ond why thot objection is without merit. While he does not state the homeowner's nome it is cleor thot he is ref erencing my objection qnd my home at 1760 E,. 14th Place. You moy recall my objection os f ottoched q picture of my craftsmon bungolow.

Surprisingly Mr. Smith opporently locks o full understonding of the existing R5-3 zoning cnd it's opplicotion to my porticulor property which is typicol of the many 1920's homes buílt in Tulsq's originol footprínt. Hís stqtements directly controdict the onolysis of my home under the proposed zoning omendment thqt Suson Miller ot INCOG wos grocious enough to provide to me. f trust she hos o comprehensive ond detoiled understonding of the zoning code ond f hove no reoson to believe she would be onything other thon occurote. f seríously doubt Suson Miller is wrong ond f feel thqt if she díscovered she had mode an error she would hove let me know ond f hove heord nothing from her to thot eff ect. INCOG hos been very helpful in helpíng me understond the scope of ZCA-\O ond whot it would look like in the reol world. Clearly theHBA is confused ond to avoid qny possible confusion f would like the record to reflect the inoccuracy of Mr. Smith's stotements in porogroph 3.

1 t7 a vD