►
From YouTube: Oklahoma City Planning Commission - March 23, 2023
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Good
afternoon,
everyone
and
welcome
to
the
Oklahoma
City
Planning
Commission
before
we
begin
our
meeting
today,
just
want
to
do
a
few
housekeeping
reminders
number
one.
If
you
are
here-
and
you
are
not
in
applicant
for
a
case
but
wish
to
present
to
this
commission,
there
is
a
a
form
for
you
to
sign
up
to
speak
before
the
commission
and
that's
outside
just
outside
the
the
council
chambers
on
the
table.
A
So
please,
if
you,
if
you
would
all
wish
at
any
point
to
speak
to
the
commission-
and
you
are
not
an
applicant-
please
make
sure
you
fill
out
that
form.
In
order
for
you
to
to
be
able
to
speak,
everyone
will
you'll
have
five
minutes
to
address
the
commission.
We
do
ask
that,
if
you're
here
with
a
group,
it
doesn't
look
like
we
have
groups
today,
but
in
general
we
ask
that
you
have
someone
speak
on
behalf
of
the
group.
We
do
reserve
the
right
to
limit
your
comments
if
they
are
repetitive.
A
So
if
your
neighbors
brought
up
an
issue,
that
is
a
concern
for
you
we'd
ask
that
you
go
ahead
and
bring
up
different
and
additional
issues
that
your
neighbor
has
not
already
previously
addressed.
Please
silence
any
cell
phones
and
and
like
every
other
meeting
you
are
in,
we
just
ask
that
you
respect
each
other,
respect
the
commission
and
respect
the
process.
So
with
that
being
said,
we
will
begin
our
agenda
with
the
receipt
of
the
minutes
from
the
the
previous
meeting.
The
is.
C
E
B
A
Why
don't
we
go
ahead
and
do
a
Voice
vote?
The
motion
again
is
to
receive
the
minutes
from
the
March
9th
2023
meeting.
Is
there
a
second
commissioner
Hinkle
seconds
the
motion?
Commissioner?
Claire?
How
do
you
vote
yay,
commissioner
powers,
commissioner
privet,
commissioner
Hinkle,
commissioner
govine,
commissioner
Noble
yeah,
commissioner
laforge.
B
A
A
A
A
A
H
A
A
Okay,
there
we
go
so
the
motion
passes
we're
now
in
line
for
new
continuance
requests.
F
A
Please
bear
with
us,
while
we're
working
through
the
technology
and
just
appreciate
all
of
the
staff
help
as
we
try
to
work
through
that
technology,
but
for
the
sake
of
the
record,
let's
just
go
ahead
and
move
forward
with
The
Voice
vote.
While
while
we
get
all
of
this
assistance,
the
motion
was
made
by
oh,
no,
what's
up
okay,
so
this
is
this.
Is
the
vote
for
okay,
never
mind
I,
guess
we're
getting
it
to
work.
A
The
motion
passes
to
Grant.
The
new
continuance
requests
we're
now
in
line
for
the
consent,
docket.
F
Item
one
is
KC
7545
final
plat
of
Portland
Place,
located
south
of
Northwest
164th,
Street
and
East
of
North,
Portland,
Road
and
item
two
is
kce
1095
application
to
close
180
feet
of
the
north-south
public
easement
west
of
siles,
Avenue
and
south
of
Northeast.
9Th
Street
is.
A
J
So
that's
about
three
and
a
half
dwelling
units
per
acre
as
far
as
density
goes,
it
conforms
to
the
subdivision
regulations
the
zoning,
with
the
exception
of
you'll
notice,
on
te
number
two
we're
requesting
a
variance
for
a
connection
or
a
stub
to
the
west,
but
there's
a
large
stream
that
you
can
see
the
elevation
difference
between
our
street
and
our
Western
property
lines
about
20
feet.
We
just
physically
cannot
get
a
street
in
there
and
get
it
to
work.
A
Thank
you,
and
this
is
in
my
ward,
my
my
question
is
I'm.
Obviously,
in
support
of
great
new
neighborhood
I
think
that's
that's
great
I'm,
just
curious
any
pushback
from
the
neighbors
any
conversation
with
the
neighbors
I
know.
I'm
sure
notice
went
out
yeah.
A
Well
it
it
definitely
is
welcome
to
have
new
housing
in
this
area.
So
that's
greatly
appreciated.
I
think
we
do
have
some
neighbors,
though,
signed
up
to
speak.
Any
questions
comments
from
commissioners
and
I
think
we'll
we'll
hear
from
our
neighbors
first
Herschel
Brown.
K
Thank
you,
commission,
for
letting
me
speak.
I
I
actually
live
in
this
neighborhood
I've.
Actually,
we've
owned
the
house
this
area.
Let
me
get
my
little
pointer
for
everyone.
If
it
works
right
in
this
area,
I
guess
you
can
see
it
right
in
the
southwest
corner,
I
own
the
property,
that's
right,
adjacent
to
that
development.
What
I
I
am
all
for
having
a
Housing
Development,
but
right
along
this
side.
K
There's
the
oak
tree
tributary
and
the
City
of
Oklahoma
City
yeah
right
through
there
I
own
the
property
right
south
west
of
that
area.
All
the
water
that
comes
from
Lottie
over
to
that
tributary
just
drain
down
that
the
streets,
there's
no
drainage
system
from
Kelly
over.
My
question
is,
is
when
you
put
this
large
77-bit
I
mean
room
or
house
thing
are
y'all
going
to
make
sure
that
the
drainage
system
drains
to
Kate,
or
is
it
going
to
go
through
that
tributary?
Because
what
I'm
concerned
about
is
that
it's
going
to
overflow?
K
That
tributary,
which
is
in
my
backyard
and
then
I-
have
problems
the
housing
addition
or
the
apartment?
Edition.
That's
right,
east
of
me
right
there.
We
already
have
that
problem
where
the
water
is
draining
down
and
I
own
all
that
land
about
four
and
a
half
acres
there.
So
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
have
the
appropriate
drainage
that
it
either
drains
over
to
Cade
or
if
the
city
is
going
to
put
in
a
drainage
system.
K
I
had
talked
to
the
city
about
it,
because
I
had
been
worrying
about
it
and
the
water
has
been
collecting
down
there,
but
I
want
to
find
out.
Is
the
city
going
to
put
in
a
sewer
system
or
is
the
the
development
going
to
put
in
a
water
drainage
system?
So
it
does
not
overrun
that
deep
Oak
tribute
tributary
and
that's
my
concern.
I
do
want
it.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
it's
done
right
and
that
we
don't
have
a
problem
where
I
get
flooded
out
and
then
there's
nothing
there.
Excellent.
A
K
Know
that's
the
major
issue
just
making
sure,
because
that
tributary
runs
right
through
my
property
and
it's
not
really
being
serviced
by
the
the
city
at
all,
and
there
was
a
a
oil
well
there
that
that
come
that
combine
resources
that
actually
took
out
this
right
south
of
it.
But
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we
do
have
the
appropriate
drainage
in
the
city
will
have
that,
because,
when
I
talk
to
the
city
about
that,
I
didn't
really
get
up.
Any
yes
answer.
Thank.
L
Yeah
very
large
Oklahoma
City
Public
Works.
As
far
as
the
drainage
is
concerned
for
the
development,
the
Consulting
engineer
will
be
doing
that
design.
It
will
be
submitted
to
the
city
for
review
and
approval
before
they're
allowed
to
to
construct
to
move
on
with
the
filing
recording
of
their
plat.
As
far
as
the
drainage
and
maintenance
within
that
tributary
of
deep
Fork
Creek,
that
is,
it's
not
an
improved
Channel
and
because
of
that
fact,
it
doesn't
fall
under
the
jurisdiction
of
the
City
of
Oklahoma
City,
for
the
any
continued
maintenance
on
that
it
is.
L
It
is
the
responsibility
of
the
property
owners
adjacent
to
that
and
where
that,
where
that
Creek
goes
across
their
property,
the
the
drainage
from
Kelly
that
was
was
being
questioned.
All
of
this
drainage
will
flow
to
that
tributary
of
deep
Fork
Creek.
That's
the
that's
the
natural
low
point,
and
that
is
where
the
this
development
will
be
allowed
to
discharge
all
of
the
storm
water.
That's
coming
from
that.
They
will
be
required
to
comply
with
all
of
the
requirements
of
chapter
16,
which
is
the
the
drainage
ordinance
in
the
the
municipal
code.
A
So
so,
if
I'm
hearing
you
correct
any
as
as
it
stands
with
the
concerns
that
Mr
Brown
was
bringing
up
around
the
the
problems
with
flooding
from
the
the
tributary
onto
his
property
and
I'm
guessing
the
other
neighboring
properties,
that
is
the
responsibility
of
those
Property
Owners,
not
the
City
of
Oklahoma
City
as
it
currently
stands.
Yes,
sir.
That
is
correct,
but
if
we
approve
of
of
this
development,
there
will
have
to
be
some
mitigating
efforts
around
in
order
to
ensure
that
there's
not
any.
L
I
had
I
haven't
looked
to
see
on
this
particular
one.
If
it's
within
the
detention
required
boundary,
Kindle
good
damage
could
because
he's
nodding
his
head.
Yes,
it
is
so
because
it's
within
the
detention
required
boundary
in
the
city,
they
will
be
required
to
do
on-site,
stormwater
detention,
which
will
reduce
or
maintain
the
the
rate
from
the
developed
parcel
to
at
or
below
what
the
historic
runoff
from
that
site
has
been.
So
so
they
won't
be
able
to
exceed
that
rate.
L
A
So,
just
again,
just
for
clarification,
the
city,
the
review
that
the
city
will
do
around.
If,
if
we
were
to
approve
of
this
development,
the
the
goal
is
for
it
to
not
add
to
the
existing
drainage
problems,
which
I'm
certain
is
not
a
satisfactory
answer
to
Mr
Brown.
But
it
sounds
like
it's
an
individual
Property
Owners
issue
to
handle
in
the
first
place.
Yes,
I
think
Commissioners.
A
This
is
another
example
of
of
the
kind
of
issues
that
we
probably
should
have
more
clarity
about
in
study
sessions,
so
that
we
know
what
we
should
be
suggesting
to
the
city
council.
As
far
as
the
law
is
concerned,
my
assumption,
if
I
were
the
property
owner,
would
have
been
that
the
city's
supposed
to
help
me
the
city,
has
an
obligation
to
if
it's
not
on
my
property
directly.
The
city
has
some
obligation
to
assist
me
in
addressing
any
problems
that
may
happen
from
flooding
from
that
area,
because
I
don't
own
it.
A
J
Yeah
Barry's
correct
our
site
actually
has
a
ridge
that
kind
of
runs
north
south
through
the
middle,
the
East
Side
drains
to
the
northeast
corner,
the
West
Side
drains
back
to
the
west
to
the
Deep
Fork
tributary.
J
We
are
our
street
that
you
see
on
the
west
will
cut
off
the
majority
of
drainage,
that's
drained
into
the
West
anyways
and
we're
conveying
it
northward
to
the
common
area
that
you
can
see
there
and
we've
got
a
two
detention
ponds
there
and
then
an
additional
one
in
the
northeast
corner
there
so
again,
we'll
comply
with
all
of
your
regulations.
J
The
post-development
flows
will
be
less
than
or
equal
to
the
pre-development
flows,
and
so,
like
I
say
the
drainage
is
already
addressed.
We've
actually
already
ran
a
flood
analysis
of
the
existing
stream
for
the
flood
elevations,
and
so
we've
already
done
quite
a
bit
of
work,
even
with
the
preliminary
plaque
and
all
those
documents
will
be
going
to
the
city
with
the
final
plot.
So.
A
Thank
you
any.
We
have
no
one
else
signed
up
to
speak.
Are
there
any
other
questions
or
comments
from
commissions
before
I
make
closing
comment,
my
advice?
It
sounds
like
Mr
Brown.
It
may
be
time
for
you
to
visit
with
legal
counsel,
because
it
sounds
like
the
city
is
saying
it's
not
their
responsibility.
You
now
know
that
if
we
were
to
approve
this
development,
they
can't
add
to
they
either
have
to
be.
They
either
have
to
improve
your
jointed
situation
or
be
equal
to.
A
It
sounds
like
if
they
end
up
at
equal
to
that
is
not
an
acceptable
outcome.
So
I'm
happy
to
visit
with
you
if
there's
anything
that
I
can
personally
do
to
help
so
and
I'm.
Certain
staff
can
assist
you
with
getting
my
contact
information
as
well.
Any
other
questions
or
comments
from
commissioners
I
think
we're
ready
for
a
motion.
I
cannot
make
one
and
we'd
have
to
start
with
the
bearings.
D
Correct
I'll
move
to
approve
the
variance
to
section
5.3.1,
Point
D
0.5,
the
subdivision
regulations,
commissioner,.
F
M
Good
afternoon,
commissioners,
my
name
is
Shane
Walker
3031
Northeast
23rd.
We
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
present,
on
behalf
of
our
request,
to
rezone
this
land
from
a
mix
of
I2,
R1
and
C3.
To
I2
worth
noting
is
that
the
auto
sales
auto
parts
sales
Warehouse
directly
to
the
east
is
also
zoned
I2
and
is
a
part
of
this
project.
So
there
will
be
over
10
acres
that
will
be
incorporated
into
this
project.
Moving
forward,
you
can
see
a
a
light
gray
line
there,
just
north
of
that
horizontal
dotted
line
that
identifies
the
property.
M
All
of
that
property
is
currently
zoned
I2,
so
our
and
along
the
frontage
to
Northeast
23rd
is
also
Zone
I2.
So
our
request
is
just
initial
request
was
just
to
extend
that
I2
back
to
that
property
line
to
allow
for
outdoor
storage
and
parking
we're
going
to
be
bringing
in
truck
and
trailer
repair
company.
That
also
provides
a
designated
safe
and
secure
parking
for
for
Oklahoma
City
them.
M
Currently,
there
is
a
national
shortage
of
truck
parking
if
one
in
11
there's
actually
a
one
parking
spot
for
every
11
trucks
on
the
road
and
together
we
are
creating
a
safe
and
secure
designated
facility.
There
will
be
24-hour
access.
There
will
be
lighting
similar
to
lighting
that
you
would
see
in
a
neighborhood
lighting
that
accommodates
parking.
M
We
did
have
the
opportunity
to
meet
with
four
out
of
the
five
neighbors
that
you
can
see
to
the
north
of
the
property
starting
from
the
west
and
working
our
way
back,
East
the
barnetts,
but
the
property
directly
to
our
East,
that
is
zoned
I2
and
Outdoor
Storage.
They
had
no
concerns
with
the
recommendation
recommended
zoning.
The
next
property
to
the
West
is
Miss
Claudette,
who
is
here
this
afternoon
and
I
believe
signed
up
to
speak,
had
a
great
discussion
with
Miss
Claudette.
M
She
was
gracious
enough
to
welcome
us
into
her
home
and
shared
several
concerns
that
she
had
and
she
was
able
to
contact
Miss
Kim,
who
is
owns
the
property
to
the
Far
West
that
butts
our
property
at
that
most
northeast
corner.
They
shared
that
their
concerns
at
that
time
were
marijuana,
which
we
shared,
that
this
was
a
Trucking
Repair
and
storage
and
parking
facility
fire.
M
The
last
year
of
fire
started
at
the
auto
salvage
to
the
west
and
spread
through
that
that
grassy
area,
so
we
reassured
them
that
with
parking
there,
that
would
help
to
mitigate
any
any
chances
of
of
fire,
and
then
the
the
third
concern
was
there's
a
road
directly
that
goes
up
that
West
line
in
the
Forest
Park
area,
that's
bird
drive
and
you
can
see
it
could
potentially
connect
to
that
Western
arm
of
ours.
M
We
reassured
them
that
we
would
not
be
connecting
and
routing
traffic
through
the
through
the
neighborhood,
so
that
would
remain
a
dead
end.
The
next
property
owner
is
Mr
Wayman.
We
had
a
great
opportunity
to
talk
to.
Him
spoke
with
him
for
about
15
minutes
out
in
his
driveway.
His
property
is
there
in
the
middle
and
he
owns
about
75
percent
of
the
property
line
between
our
property
and
the
and
the
neighborhood,
and
he
shared
at
that
time.
He
had
no
concerns.
M
Our
next
stop
was
Miss
Juanita,
who
owns
the
home,
that's
just
north
of
Mr
Wayman
again.
She
shared
no
concerns
with
the
zoning
recommendation
at
the
time.
Earlier
this
week
we
had
an
opportunity
to
meet
with
Miss
Darlene
Davis,
who
was
also
in
attendance
this
afternoon.
Who
is
one
of
the
trustees
for
Forest
Park?
M
She
shared
some
of
the
concerns
where,
where
noise
and
and
and
so
we
shared
with
her-
that
while
there
will
be
you
know,
trucks
Vehicles
entering
the
property,
there
is
a
no
idling
policy,
so
there
won't
be
any
refrigerant
trucks
or
any
trucks
that
are
sitting
there.
Idling
all
night,
there's
no
idling,
so
those
trucks
will
be
turned
off
once
they
have
time
to
park.
M
This
industry
has
been
rooted
in
this
area
for
for
years
and
years
you
can
see
to
our
East.
There
is
already
truck
trailer
repair,
going
on
also
a
little
bit
further
east.
There's
the
Oklahoma
City
bus
barn
that
has
Acres
of
buses
parked
further
to
our
West,
getting
close
to
the
Canadian
river
about
a
mile
away.
There
is
also
a
truck
and
trailer
repair
shop
within
this
area.
There
are
areas
that
are
already
zoned
I2
that
abut
to
residential.
A
To
be
clear,
you're
asking
that
from
at
that
the
northern
Pro
that
the
the
north
from
the
northern
property
line
that
that
the
the
first
30
feet
30
feet
the
i1.
Yes,
sir
and
you're,
expressing
your
intention
to
keep
the
The
Preserve
the
trees.
Yes,
sir,
because
this
is
a
straight
zoning
request.
We
have
no
ability
to
require
that
of
you
and
I
think
that's
just
important
for
our
neighbors
to
have
a
clear
understanding
about
that.
A
In
addition
to
I'm
assuming
and
I'll,
look
to
City
staff
on
this
I'm,
assuming
that
there's
no
additional
need
for
screening
or
buffer
between
i1
and
I2
uses
I'm.
Assuming
there
is
not
one
correct.
F
A
A
So,
okay!
So
if
if
we
were
to
take
the
first
sorry
Sarah
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that,
because
I
know
we
have
a
number
of
people
signed
up
to
speak,
so
I
think
it's
important
that
they
understand
the
current
state
of
what
the
buffer
looks
like.
So,
if,
if
we
agree
to
say
that
there
that
they
can,
they
can
rezone
the
first
15
feet,
the
buffer
between
their
homes,
their
property
line,
and
that
i1
is
what.
A
M
N
M
N
A
That
make
sense,
so
yes,
but
we
wouldn't
be
able
to
mandate
the
tree
cover
I
think
it's
also
I
think
it's
also
important
that
and
I
and
I
respect.
This
I've
had
great
conversations
with
Shane
and
I
appreciate
your
efforts
and
I.
Clearly
you've
had
conversations
with
the
neighbors,
which
I
also
appreciate,
but
I
do
think
it's
important
that
we
understand
that,
just
because
Shane's
intention,
as
the
current
property
owner,
is
not
to
operate
any
marijuana
operation,
that
if
we
do
this
rezoning,
it
would
be
legal
and
allowed
to
occur.
A
N
O
A
O
O
We
had
discussed
it
in
the
past.
There
was
a
sep,
a
different
proposal
which
was
15,
leaving
the
northern
15
feet
R1,
which
then
has
a
further
15-foot
setback
from
the
R1.
This
i1
is
a
slightly
new,
a
new
version
of
it
that
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I'm
sure
we
understand
what
the
difference
between
those
two
and.
M
We
would
be
happy
to
accommodate
either
of
those
the
project
can
allow
for
about
30
feet
before
it.
It
is
a
it
is
a
no-go.
So
whether
excuse
me,
whether
that
first
15
foot
is
R1
and
then
we
start
the
I2
and
we
have
an
additional
15-foot
setback.
I
think
we
have,
you
know
30
foot
to
work
there,
so
we
would
be
more
than
happy
to
accommodate
I
would.
O
It
feels
that
it
offers
more
consistent
protection
to
the
neighbors.
If
that's
why
I
raised.
E
A
M
A
Okay,
any
other
questions
for
the
applicant
before
we
go
to
hear
from
our
neighbors.
I
I
guess
my
first
question
would
be
whether
they're
willing
to
recast
their
zoning
request
as
Spud
or
PUD,
whichever
would
be
appropriate
for
the
amount
of
land
we're
talking
about
PUD,
I,
guess
because
I,
you
know,
I
really
applaud
your
efforts
to
have
met
with
the
neighbors
to
have
worked
out
these
issues
with
them
and
make
your
explanations
and
make
clear
what
your
intention
for
the
use
of
the
property
is.
Unfortunately,
zoning
is
Forever,
at
least
until
we
revisit
it,
and-
and
you
know
we
do
not
have
the
ability
to
memorialize.
I
The
modifications
that
he
is
willing
to
make
but
is
not
required
to
make
so
I,
would
really
much
rather
see
this
application
as
a
PUD,
where
those
things
can
be
built
into
the
zoning.
M
Want
to
respond
to
that
yeah
I
would
also
like
to
share
that
in
Con,
in
discussions
with
Miss
Davis
to
have
a
to
meet
and
have
a
town
hall
with
Forest
Park
next
week.
So
I
think
this
is
a
you
know,
definitely
about
building
a
relationship
and
preparing
for
the
next
step.
With
that
next
step,
we
realize
there
are
still
several
weeks
ahead
of
us
of
working
through
city
council
and
meeting
with
the
neighbors
and
would
prefer
not
to
do
a
PUD.
You
know
not
counting
the
2700
application
fee.
M
It's
going
to
add
you
know
tens
of
thousands
of
dollars
and
delays
to
our
costs.
For
you
know,
coming
back
to
this
group,
you
know
creating
unique
circumstances
for
maybe
any
future
property
buyers
as
well
as
residents
that
may
be
looking
at
moving
into
that
neighborhood
of
being
required
to
do
research
on
you
know
what
might
be
allowed
within
that
property,
so
our
preference
would
be
to
you
know,
move
forward
with
the
zoning
as
requested
today,.
A
I
think
I
think
I
generally
lean
towards
towards
commissioner
Powers
position,
but
I
can
be
certainly
be
persuaded
if
our
neighbors
are
are
satisfied
with
the
amount
of
buffer
that
they're
going
to
receive.
If
we
were
to
approve
of
of
this
recommendation,
but
I
still
think
there
are
some
concerns,
maybe
we
should
hear
from
them
before
we
go
ahead.
Commissioner,.
I
No
idling
policy
in
place
and
having
lived
fairly,
close
north
of
and
so
in,
the
wind
pattern
of
a
of
a
facility
where
caught
where
trucks
were
parked,
especially
Refrigeration
trucks,
and
that
kind
of
thing
it
is
incredible
how
much
noise
those
things
make,
and
so
you
know
that
that
is
one
condition
for
approval
of
this
kind
of
zoning.
That
I
would
need
to
see
built
into
the
zoning.
A
policy
is
fine
and
that's
wonderful,
but
the
the
use
wouldn't
even
have
to
change.
I
P
P
Sure
xenophen
Warrior
5712
North
Lottie
Avenue
North
23rd
Street,
there's
been
a
lot
of
discussion
already
about
this
23rd
Street
Corridor
that
they
have
throughout
the
area.
As
most
of
you
know,
that's
the
section
23rd
is
on
this
particular
application.
P
It's
part
of
the
state
highway
that
cuts
through
the
city,
half
with
that
I
grew
up
and
I
was
grew
up
in
a
and
raised
in
Oklahoma
City
area
and
23rd
Street
was
my
by
North
Star,
wherever
I
may
have
been,
as
I
went
to
far
out
of
Western
or
if
I'd
always
be
able
to
find
my
way
home
by
knowing
where
23rd
Street
is
with
that.
P
Speaking
of
that,
I
can
remember
back
several
decades
ago
the
Northwest
23rd
Street
was
the
the
Uptown
area
had
gone,
has
gone
through
quite
a
bit
of
of
our
Improvement
and
Renovations
over
the
last
several
years
have
with
that,
I
would
hope
that
same
thing
is
going
to
happen
also
along
the
northeast
quadrant
of
the
23rd
Street.
Also
they
have
with
that.
This
particular
street
is
the
gateway
to
the
state
capitol
coming
from
the
East
along
the
particular
area.
P
To
that
there
is
some
maps
for
beautification
projects
that
are
currently
being
discussed,
that
are
talking
about
improvements
along
that
Corridor
of
the
city,
also
that
they
have
with
that.
So
I
think
that
kind
needs
to
be
taking
consideration
and
as
to
we
look
as
you
look
as
either
a
development
of
particular
particular
23rd,
Street
quadrant
that
you
have
with
it
area.
Although
I
can
synthesize
with
the
applicant
Canadian
dies
in
space
to
a
duplicate
type
of
of
work
that
they
do
with
the
18-wheel
tractor-trailer
Park
area
with
that
area.
P
How
do
I
feel
like
that
particular
area
is,
is
not
conducive,
something
that
should
be
used
that
particular
area.
The
question
of
the
land
that's
being
used
as
I
understand,
they're,
going
to
be
having
some
18-wheel
tractor-trailers
and
the
street
Frontage
that
they
have
along
23rd.
P
Street
is
about
from
from
about
home
plate
to
first
base
about
90
feet,
yeah
with
that
area,
as
those
trucks
need
to
come
in
and
out
of
the
particular
area,
they
are
there's
not
enough
turnaround
space
for
them
to
turn
around
is
go
to
the
north
for
the
property,
as
you
leave
23rd
Street.
Therefore,
they
would
have
to
back
in
to
the
property
for
storage
and
repairs
and
that
type
of
thing
and
running
the
actually
running
perpendicular
to
Northeast,
23rd
Street
and
blocking
the
street
that
say,
blue
being
out
of
the
area.
P
That's
currently
occurring
now
with
some
of
the
development
that's
to
further
west
on
the
same
side
street
with
that
trucking
company,
that's
working
with
that
it
tears
up
the
street
with
epto
area
there
are,
is
some
it
kind
of
also
I
thought.
This
particular
area
is
going
east
of
of
Interstate
35
and
at
least
over
to
the
river
and
Sooner
Road
was
going
to
developing
some
more
type
of
commercial
type
of
retail
developments
and
not
more
I2
types
of
element,
particular
area.
There
is
some
plans.
P
Those
are
reconstruction
is
already
starting
on
23rd,
near
23rd
and
and
Coltrane
and
Bartell
Road,
where
there's
a
Housing
Development,
that's
being
developed
right
there
there's
some
other
types
of
housing.
Residential
development.
That's
been
discussed
along
that
23rd
Corridor.
Also
they
have
website
area,
so
I
I
think
I
would
hope.
We
would
look
at
that
as
a
future
development
and
get
away
from
those
types
of
developments
that
are
I,
consider
to
be
a
salvage
yard
type
of
development
type
of
area.
P
That's
not
conducive
to
that
particular
section
of
the
particular
city
that
you
would
have
for
that.
It
is
the
you
do
have
the
entrance
to
the
Clara
Lupa
Corridor
that
begins
right
there
at
about
a
mile.
A
mile
west
of
this
proposed
development
going
toward
Interstate
235.
They
have
to
take
the
area.
I
I've
come
to
a
lot
of
different
types
of
Planning
Commission
meetings
over
the
particular
years
and
I
do
have
some
kind
of
Interest
along
some
other
things
about
urban
planning.
P
I
did
some
some
various
courses
I've
taken
over
the
years
concerning
that
so
I
do
look
at
the
overall
development
of
this
overalls,
620
square
miles
to
be
ready
to
have
for
that,
and
this
particular
area
I
feel
like
that.
We
need
to
try
to
move
towards
some
retail
commercial
type
development
with
some
housing
along
this
Corridor
and
away
from
the
type
of
businesses
that
are
being
proposed
in
particular
project,
whether
it's
being
in
it
being
that
type
of
industrial
type
of
setting
take
consideration
of
one.
P
Avenue
that
comes
out
of
Bricktown
51
years
ago,
that's
that
recycling
plant
was
approved
for
zoning
by
your
bodies
back
in
1951.
a
particular
area
with
that
as
it
being
okay
develop.
That
is
a
is
that
type
of
development
they're
using
the
recycling
type
of
materials,
even
though
it
was
very
close
to
research
neighborhood
to
the
north
of
it.
Now,
there's
been
some
TalkBack
about
with
the
developments
being
done
south
of
the
river
near
the
first
first
American
Museum.
P
With
those
proposals
they
plan
on
doing
this
type
of
development
May.
There
needs
to
be
some
rethinking
about
some
uses
of
that
section
of
the
Reno
Avenue
that
we
have
for
that.
So
those
things
are
kind
of
being
a
graduate
I
think
changing
the
atmosphere
with
that
and
I
think
the
same
thing
can
be
done
along
this
Corridor
of
23rd
Street,
the
bride
Center,
the
Old
Bright
Center
bowling
alley
is
currently
being
a
person.
P
Individual
I,
don't
say
it's
currently
trying
to
do
some
things
about
Remodeling
and
refurbishing
that
particular
area
and
with
the
area
there's
some
possible
houses
available
at
The,
Culinary
of
23rd
and
Bryant.
That
particular
area.
P
For
that,
so
I
think
that
if,
if
we
can't
move
toward
that,
it
would
I
think
enhance
that
particular
area
for
that
concerning
the
neighbors
to
the
north,
that
particular
development
I
believe
many
of
the
Forest
Park
residents
depend
on
on
well
water,
the
update
area
I'm,
not
sure,
with
this
type
of
Services
they'll
be
using
back
there,
you
know
combustible
engines,
they
leak
fluids,
sometimes
and
unintentionally,
there
could
be
some
soil
contamination
that
possibly
get
into
the
groundwater
that
may
affect
the
whales
particular
residents
that
live
to
the
far
north
as
something
to
discuss
with
that.
P
Q
My
name
is
Claudette,
Thomas
I
live
at
2701,
Bert
drive
and
my
property
is
actually
on
the
dotted
line.
I
don't
know
yeah
and
my
concerns
were
a
hundred
percent
agree
with
what
the
gentleman
just
spoke
of.
That
was
one
of
my
concerns
and
then
I
did
look
up
the
company
when
he
came
to
my
home.
He
did
tell
me
it
was
a
storage
for
Trucking.
Q
I
did
look
up
the
company
and
some
of
the
reviews
and
the
issues
that
they
did
have
and
although
and
on
the
Better
Business
Bureau
there,
there
was
complaints
about
the
security
and
the
maintenance
of
the
properties
and
their
rebuttal
was
that
not
all
locations
are
equal,
not
all
locations
will
have
the
same
type
of
security,
not
all
locations
will
have
the
same
type
of
lighting
and
so,
and
they
also
said
that
each
driver
were
to
check
with
those
facilities
to
see
if
those
standards
were
up
to
to
what
they
needed.
Q
So
there's
no
guarantees
for
what
my
issue
is:
there's
no
guarantees
to
what
we
are
to
foresee,
what
the
company
being
there
and
with
the
neighborhood
backing
up
to
my
backyard
and
my
neighbor's
front
yard.
Being
just
that
we
have
small
children,
there's
a
lot
of
elderly,
just
the
noise
control.
It
will
increase
traffic
external
factors,
it's
a
trucking
company,
just
the
type
of
in
and
out
many
out-of-counters
whatsoever.
That
comes
along
with
that
and
just
really
the
security
and
because
I
think
that
will
bleed
over
into
our
neighborhood.
A
Would
it
would
doesn't
I
guess
I'm
just
going
to
ask
you
this
and
I'm
not
asking
you
to
negotiate
against
yourself,
so
you
feel
free
to
tell
me
come
on
nope
I,
don't
agree
to
anything.
You
have
to
say.
A
Part
of
our
discussion
has
been
about
number
one
they'd
be
required
to
put
up
a
sight-proof
fence
between
your
property,
your
neighbor's
property
and
their
operation.
They're
also
saying
right
now
that
their
their
intention
is
to
there
would
be
30
feet
between
your
property
line
and
where
they
could
begin
these
operations
with
the
trucks.
Have
you
what
are
your
thoughts
on
that.
Q
B
Q
R
Q
And
my
concern,
you
know
is
just
the
beautification
of
it
like
I
was
hoping
also
to
go
in
a
different
direction
and
to
make
that
side
of
town
more
productive
as
far
as
maybe
retail
and
things
like
that,
with
with
so
many
things
getting
ready
to
come
further
there
with
the
Indian
museum,
getting
ready
to
put
all
the
money
in
there,
the
resort,
the
from
tent
to
sooner
all
of
that
being
developed
and
also
23rd,
the
beautification
of
just
23rd
Street,
and
that
that
part
of
the
community,
and
so
with
that
I
just
seen
it
just
seems
like
it's
going
to
be
stagnant
and
just
just
not
really
what
we
wanted
to
see
in
our
backyards.
A
C
The
security,
the
health
and
the
beautification
of
this
project,
23rd
Street,
has
been
developed
into
a
better
Street
now
and
Mr
Warrior
made
a
lot
of
good
points
on
the
street
on
the
entrance
of
the
project
where
they
want
to
have
this
Trucking
I
say
a
truck
stop
to
me.
That's
what
it
sounds
like
to
me.
A
truck
stop
may
not
be,
but
that's
what
it
sounded
like
to
me.
We've
had
several
people
come
in
and
say
one
thing
and
do
another
and
that's
the
development
that
I
don't
want
to
see.
C
C
Storage
buildings
right
in
our
backyard,
I,
don't
want
to
see
it
I
say
no
to
all
of
it,
because
every
time
there's
a
project
of
this
nature,
it
always
end
up
in
our
community
and
I-
am
not
satisfied
with
it.
I
have
a
health
problem
already
with
fumes.
I,
don't
want
to
see
a
marijuana
plant
growing
project.
I,
don't
want
to
see
a
trucking
project
because
all
it
does
it
creates
health
problems.
C
And
he's
talking
about
driving
in
off
of
23rd,
that
is
a
poor
section
to
drive
off
into
a
area
like
that.
It's
it's
really
causing
a
accident
prone,
it's
accident
prone!
It's
what
I'm
saying
it's
not!
C
You
have
a
heel
on
the
west
end
and
you
have
a
where
you
got
more
straight
away
on
the
on
on
the
East
end,
but
you
have
a
hill
on
the
west
end
and
when
cars
come
over,
that
23rd
Street
heel
they're
not
doing
the
speed
limit,
they're
doing
50
and
60
miles
an
hour
too
fast
for
a
truck
to
be
turning
in
on
the
North
side
to
pull
into
a
small
area,
it's
not
going
to
work,
so
my
opinion
is
that
he
finds
another
place,
there's
plenty
of
places
that
has
that
type
of
area
where
he
can
put
a
trucking
system
in
try
Reno.
C
A
Thank
you
Mr
Smith.
Next
we
have
kimbler
Gaston
and
I
I
apologize
if
I
did
not
pronounce
her
name
correctly,.
S
My
name
is
Kimber
Gaston
I
live
at
2601
North
Morris
Drive
in
Forest,
Park
I
met
I,
purchased
that
we
purchased
that
property
of
almost
five
years
ago.
My
husband
and
I
built
our
dream
home.
So
we
do
not
want
to
see
trucks
which
we
kind
of
see.
Now
we
have
that
problem
right
now
going
on
and
so
I
can
see
it
being
a
further
problem,
but
the
issue
would
be
it
would
be
directly
in
my
front
yard,
so
their
backyard,
but
my
front
yard.
S
If
the
tree,
even
that's,
why
I
feel
there
needs
to
be
control
of,
as
you
were
speaking
as
well,
Miss
Powers
when
you
stated
it
needed
to
be
a
PUD
I
agree
with
that,
because
we
need
to
have
some
say
in
how
that's
constructed
I
didn't
I,
don't
want
to
sell
or
move
I
love.
The
community
I
live
in
I
was
born
and
raised
in
Oklahoma
City
I've
been
a
real
estate
agent
for
17
years
and
so
I,
don't
just
for
me
seeing
this
I'm.
S
Finally,
seeing
the
development
we're
finally
seeing
movement
on
the
northeast
side
of
Oklahoma
City,
which
has
always
been
my
passion
from
the
beginning
of
my
career
to
see
businesses
come
in
and
we
buy,
we
have
properties
all
over
the
Northeast
side
of
Oklahoma
City
even
doing
some
development
on
our
own
there
to
even
put
in
on
that
project.
So
I
want
to
see
that
happen
further,
but
just
to
not
get
off
subject
with
the
property
line.
I
just
want
to
I.
S
Don't
want
to
look
at
that
if
I
was
able
to
show
it
on
the
map,
I
wish
I
could
have
brought
the
picture.
That's
real
far
away.
But
if
you
turn
and
look
it's
just
directly,
my
gate
is
there
in
the
tree
line.
If
they
were
issued
that
and
could
remove
those
trees.
I
would
look
directly
at
big
trucks
all
the
time,
and
if
you
just
looked
at
the
market,
just
the
taxable
market
value
of
a
home
is
735
000.
You
can
pull
it
up,
so
we
didn't
build
anything
little.
S
We
have
a
nice
home,
we're
trying
to
bring
the
value
and
improve
the
City
of
Oklahoma,
City
and
Forest
Park,
because
we
rest
in
the
middle
of
both
we
kind
of
just
the
the
property.
That's
right
there
and
so
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
I'm
putting
that
forward
and
I
don't
agree
with
it
being
there
either
without.
S
You
know,
maybe
continuing
doing
another
meeting
to
move
forward,
but
the
Pud
is
probably
I
did
I'm
going
because
I
feel
like
they
can
still
change
it,
because
if
it
changes
ownership
then
the
next
person
could
change
what
happens
and
then
we
completely
affected
and
there's
nothing.
We
can
do
so.
That's
where
that's.
Why
I'm
asking
you
all
to
consider
that?
Thank
you.
A
Those
are
all
the
people
that
we
have
signed
up
to
speak.
Do
you
have?
Do
you
want
to
respond
to
some
of
the
before.
A
But
I
I'll
be
honest.
I
appreciate
learning
more
about
how
the
operation,
how
you
conduct
business
but
I,
think
that
the
primary
concern
is
about
what
this
commission
can
and
cannot.
Mandate
of
your
operation
and
the
current
request.
We
have
no
authority
to
require
anything
additionally
of
you
and
so
I
think
that's
really
the
bigger
issue
than
than
any
reassurance
that
your
current
operation
is
is
above
board.
So
I
just
want
to
be
clear
about
what
the
issue
is:
I.
T
Want
to
agree
that,
while
it's
great
you've
heard
it
loud
and
clear
that
oh
the
straight
zoning,
it
doesn't
matter
whether
your
business
is
great
because
the
next
one
might
not
be
so.
We've
got
a
long
time.
I,
don't
know
that
well,
my
mom
would
be
under
the
assumption.
You
have
a
great
business,
but
even
with
that,
it's
got
to
have
to
be
not
a
straight
zoning.
In
my
opinion,
as
well
and
I'm
hearing
most
of
the
Commissioners.
T
The
only
thing
I
wanted
to
ask
for
now
and
I
think
is:
maybe
the
city
staff
I'm,
seeing
mixed
zoning
currently
I'd
like
to
know
more
specifically
what
it
is
right
now.
It
says
R1,
I2
and
C3
exactly
what
is
what
their
if
that
is
predominantly
R1.
Currently
then
I'm,
even
more
sympathetic
of
the
neighbors
that
they
established
this
with
a
lot
of
R1.
So
where
is
the
R1
currently
in
this
odd
shaped
yeah.
N
I
can
answer
that
Sarah
Welch
planning
department,
the
R1,
is
basically
the
large
block
just
south
of
there
and
then
it
stretches
down
the
east
side
and
wraps
around
the
C3
along
the
corridor,
yep
right
there
and
then
on
the
West
Side,
the
strip
that
touches
23rd,
Street,
there's
a
teeny
little
strip
of
R1
and
then
the
rest
of
that
is
I2.
T
Okay,
thank
you
to
me
I'm,
even
if
it's
a
Potter's
but
I'm
concerned
with
all
of
this,
if
that
is
currently
residential
and
these
neighbors
have
been
building
an
investment
on
that
being
residential
30
feet
is
not
near
enough,
and
you
said
this
isn't
doable
with
less
than
30
feet
to
me
that
whole
residential
block
there
needs
to
be
residential,
or
it
needs
to
be
something
much
less
intensive
than
anything
anywhere
near
i1
or
I2,
or
a
trucking
business
or
anything.
T
A
Do
we
want
to
do
you?
Would
you
still
like
your
the
person
you
brought
to
speak?
Do
we
want
to
just
see
where
the
rest
of
the
commission
is
or
yeah?
Do
you
mind
we'll
give
you
that
option
good
afternoon
just
need
your
name
and
address
for
the
record.
U
T
Sir,
only
very
brief
I'm
sorry
to
interrupt,
but
no
it
was
I
not
clear
that
it
does
not
matter
what
your
business
is.
You've
asked
for
rezoning
that
will
apply
to
any
business,
no
matter
how
horrible
the
business
may
be
or
how
great
it
may
be
sure.
So,
the
interest
of
our
time
I
really
don't
know
that
it
helps
for
us
to
hear
about
your
specific
business.
You've
not
applied
for
something
that
is
specific
to
your
business.
U
Briefly,
if
you're
going
to
give
me
a
chance
to
tell
about
it,
we
are
not
a
truck
stop.
We
we
allow
truckers,
who
need
a
place
to
stay
your
community,
your
truckers
that
live
here
to
have
a
place
to
park
and
leave
their
truck
in
a
safe
place
and
have
a
vehicle
sitting
there
to
go
home
in
it's
a
a
great
part
of
your
City
to
have
truckers
that
come
in
bring
their
product
throughout
your
city,
Amazon,
CR,
England.
U
All
these
large
trucking
companies
come
in,
they
have
a
place
to
park,
put
their
vehicles
safely.
We
don't
allow
any
idling
at
night.
We
don't
allow
any.
We
make
the
place
very
secure,
fenced
and
that's
pretty
much
the
way
it
is.
It
is
not
a
truck,
stop
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions
about
it,
but
if
that's
something-
and
you
can
look
us
up
online
storemytruck.com
very
safe
place-
we
have
over
25
000
truckers
that
use
our
facilities
and
it,
as
we
spoke
earlier.
E
I
I
have
a
question
I'm,
assuming
you're,
going
to
take
access
with
the
trucks
on
the
east
side
of
this,
where
the
long
strip
is.
A
Any
other
questions
from
commissioners.
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
I'm
not
going
to
speak
for
a
commissioner
I'm
going
to
well.
Let
me
take
that
back.
I
am
for
just
one
second
and
then
I
want
you
all
to
say
whether
I'm
on
the
right
track
or
not.
I
think
what
I'm
hearing
is.
You
have
two
choices.
The
first
one
is
to
take
a
continuance,
go
back
and
work
on
a
PUD,
and
it
sounds
like
there
are
going
to
be
a
number
of
issues.
A
You'd
have
to
address
the
security,
the
landscape,
buffer,
the
noise,
the
pollution,
the
the
entry
on
the
the
site
layout,
the
entry
and
exit
plan
for
the
vehicles
along
23rd
Street.
It
sounds
like
there
are
a
number
of
things
that
you'd
have
to
to
be
prepared
to
address
through
that
PUD.
So
there's
one
thing,
and
it
sounds
like
a
majority
of
this
commission-
is
supportive
of
a
PUD
any
am
I.
A
If,
if
they
were
at
all
supportive,
then
your
next
option
is
because
it
does
sound
like
you're
on
a
time
that
you're
concerned
about
the
amount
of
time
that
that
process
would
take.
Your
other
option
is
to
potentially
take
a
recommendation
of
denial
from
this
commission,
which
would
still
mean
that
you'd
be
able
to
go
to
city
council
with
your
proposal,
as
is
I
I
will
say,
and
I
am
not
a.
A
This
is
just
my
experience
of
being
on
this
commission
is
that,
based
on
the
proposal
you
currently
have,
and
the
level
of
opposition
that
you
currently
have
I
would
not
expect
a
favorable
response
from
at
least
our
city
councilwoman,
who
represents
Ward
7.,
so
I
think
there
are
some
headwinds.
Should
you
choose
to
go
with
the
proposal
as
it's
correct
with
your
current
request,
but
it's
the
choice
is
still
yours
on
which
direction
you'd
like
for
us
to
to
go.
Does
that
is
that
representative
of
where
we
are
commissioners.
T
Make
a
motion
to
continue
I'm,
sorry
to
believe
in
this
moment,
but
I
will
say:
I
don't
want
to
maybe
it's
just
myself,
but
a
PUD
that
matches
what
you've
said
and
but
it
makes
it
binding.
I
would
still
vote
no
against
30
feet
will
not
be
enough
and
all
these
different
uses
that
still
would
not
be
acceptable
to
me,
even
if
it
came
back
as
a
PUD.
So
it's
not
just
switch
it
and
then
it's
easy.
A
I
think
that's
important
Point,
commissioner
Forge.
If
there
are
other
issues,
I
know
I
named
a
few,
but
I
think
that's
a
very
important
point
that
commissioner
Forge
just
made
about
his
position.
Are
there
any
other
issues
that
the
applicant
should
be
aware
of
before
we
move
forward
with
with
moving
with
this
continuance,
but
I
I
think
that's
important.
Go
ahead,
commissioner.
N
For
converting
it
to
PUD,
and
we
can
get
everything
turned
in
quickly
within
like
the
next
two
weeks,
then
we
could
put
them
on
the
27th
of
April,
but
in
order
to
have
that
complete
master
design
statement
to
a
point
where
neighbors
have
had
time
to
review
it
before
we
notice
the
next
date
would
be
May
11th.
We.
A
A
A
A
J
Afternoon,
Kendall
Dillon
with
crafting
toll
representing
the
applicant.
This
is
a
four
and
a
half
acre
site.
That's
located,
obviously
just
south
of
Northwest
115th,
just
east
of
University
Avenue.
It's
currently
zoned
R1.
The
request
before
you
today
is
to
rezone
that
to
R2
to
obviously
allow
for
a
duplex
development.
The
preliminary
plot-
that's
a
companion
item,
is
obviously
next
time.
I'm
on
your
agenda,
if
you
look
at
we're,
obviously
joined
on
the
south
by
R2,
zoning
on
the
east
side
is
a
PUD
that
allows
for
multi
multifamily.
J
A
Thank
you.
This
is
in
my
ward
and
I
am
in
support.
I
think
this
is
not
a
I
think.
The
benefit
here
is
there's
a
lot
of
non-traditional
uses
that
surround
it,
including
the
R2.
That's
that's
on
the
on
the
south
side
and
so
I
I,
because
of
those
reasons
in
in
the
fact
that
there
is
a
lot
of
R2
and
apartment
complexes.
Etc
in
this
surrounding
area,
I'm
I'm
in
support.
Are
there
any
questions
or
comments
from
the
applicant
for
the
applicant.
A
J
A
You
same
and
I
am
in
sport
questions
from
commissions,
commissioner
Claire
there's.
A
A
And
the
motion
passes.
Thank
you.
I
will
remind
anyone
who's
who's
here
wishing
who
is
not
an
applicant
who
wishes
to
address
the
commission?
Please
remember
you
have
to
fill
out
one
of
these
forms
if
you'd
like
to
address
the
commission,
they
are
available
just
outside
the
outside
the
chambers
on
the
table.
So
just
fill
that
out
and
we
will.
We
will
call
your
name
and
you'll
have
an
opportunity
to
speak
we're
now
in
line
for
item
seven.
V
Good
afternoon
David
box,
522
Concord
Drive
here
on
behalf
of
the
applicant.
This
is
a
PUD
that
would
rezone
what
is
currently
an
Spud
to
allow
some
general
office
uses.
We
originally
brought
this
straight
zoning
application.
At
the
request
of
commissioner
Powers,
we
resubmitted
as
a
PUD.
There
were
some
specific
uses
she
was
concerned
about.
We
have
eliminated
those
uses,
there
are
no
Tes.
However,
there
are
three
Tes
that
commissioner
Powers
has
asked
for
that.
We
can
agree
to.
A
Those
are
all
three
separate
te's.
Yes,
okay,
commissioner
powers.
I
This
is
a
fairly
straightforward
request.
This
is
a
originally
was
an
elementary
school.
It's
been
used
for
quite
some
time
as
an
adult
day
care
facility
and
and
it's
sort
of
an
event
center
community
Gathering
Place
anyway.
It's
it's,
you
know,
as
you
can
see.
Interestingly,
located
I
mean
it's
in
the
middle
of
a
neighborhood.
It's
the
way
we
used
to
build
elementary
schools
in
neighborhoods.
You
know-
and
so
you
know,
as
these
things
are
no
longer
used
for
that
purpose,
it
is.
It
is
sometimes
challenging
to
find
ways
to
to
make
them
useful.
I
My
only
concerns
were
you
know
that
it
be
kept
pretty
much
intact
and
I
think
that
by
converting
it
to
if
he
you
know,
we
were
able
to
accomplish
that
and
I'm
very
much
in
agreement
with
the
the
three
teas
suggested.
I
just
want
to
be
sure.
You
know
we
have
this
thing
with
our
staff
reports
where
they
tend
to
say
you
know,
per
code
per
code
per
code
and
I
just
want
to
be
very
clear
about
the
signage.
I
It's
no
MDA,
no
excess,
non-accessory
signage
and
then,
as
we
had
discussed,
there's
really
no
intention
to
redevelop
this
site.
But
you
know
things
happen
so,
in
the
event
that
it
is
redeveloped,
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
the
height
was
kept
down
to
basically
what
it
is
now
just
as
an
impact
on
the
neighbors,
so
I'm
I'm
good
with
this
request,
is
there
I
haven't
heard
from
anybody?
Is
there
anybody
who
wants
to
be
heard.
A
R
Don't
think
my
name
is
Louis
Jones
Okay
3701,
South,
Ridge
Lane.
My
question
for
you
is:
what
are
they
wanting
to
do
with
this
property?
What
what
are
they
wanting
to
do
with
it,
and
because
we
don't
know,
there's
no
way
for
us
to
know
that
we
don't
live
in
that
area
any
longer,
but
I
have
a
rental
property
there.
That
I
just
would
like
to
know
what
they're
requesting.
What
are
they
going
to
do
with.
A
It
well
it's
important
for
you
to
I
appreciate
that
I
appreciate
that
it's
important
for
you
to
understand
that
there's
with
this
rezone,
there
are
a
certain
there's,
a
list
of
approved
uses.
So
this
request
does
not
mandate
that
any
one
of
those
uses
be
what
they
actually
do
with
the
property.
It
just
gives
them
that
option,
so
I
think
it
may
be
best.
A
Maybe
if
we
just
looks
like
maybe
staff
could
help
with
a
list
of
uses
and
let
her
see
that
list,
but
I
can
tell
you
that
we've
eliminated
the
community
recreation
use.
A
Excuse
me
excluding
the
following:
prohibited
uses:
yeah
we've
eliminated
the
community
recreation
use,
we've
eliminated,
the
funeral
internment
use
and
we've
eliminated
commercial
lodging
as
a
use.
So
why
don't
you?
Why?
Don't
if
you
don't
mind
just
visit
with
them
for
a
minute,
and
maybe
we
can
allow.
R
A
Nancy
Jones
was
that
was
that
you,
that
was
you.
Okay
just
want
to
make
sure
I've
got
it,
got
it
all
together,
I,
don't
believe
we
have
anyone
else
signed
up
to
speak.
A
Do
you
know
of
the
applicant's
intention
and
again
I?
Don't
we
know
that
we're
approving
potential
uses
here.
V
I
so
I,
don't
all
I
can
tell
you
is
they've.
Had
some
interest
in
the
general
office
type
use,
the
building
is
situated
in
a
way
where
you
could
make
that
use,
but
the
current
pod
was
very
specific
for
this
Adult
Day,
Care
type
of
use,
and
so
as
drafted.
Currently,
the
Pud
really
makes
the
building
almost
unusable.
V
So
this
just
simply
allows
it
to
to
be
better
utilized.
Okay,.
A
V
O2
is
is
fairly
Limited
in
terms
of
uses
that
are
allowed,
I
mean
they
tend
to
be
uses
that
don't
generate
traffic.
In
fact,
there
was
another
one
we
did
I
think
that
was
in
your
reward,
Ms
powers
of
a
former
school
that
we
converted
to
an
office
use
similar
to
this
north
of
Hefner.
Maybe-
and
yes,.
T
A
I
I
did
this
morning
again
at
the
O2
uses
in
terms
of
those
that
are
permitted
so
not
having
to
require
additional.
You
know
special
exception
or
special
permit
kind
of
approvals
and
and
they're
very
straightforward
kind
of
office
uses
other
than
the
parking
garage
which
I
can't
see
this
turning
into,
or
you
know
just
flat
parking
which
I
can't
say
this
turning
into
either
so
I
suppose
it's
possible,
but
the
I.
I
It's
hard
for
me
to
see
that
as
a
the
property
like
a
lot
of
elementary
schools
of
this
era,
you
know
most
of
this
most
of
the
classrooms
open
to
the
outside,
and
so
they
make
nice
little
office
spaces
because
you
have
both
the
central
hallway
to
the
school
and
also
a
way
to
exit.
V
My
mother
was
a
Mayfair
chipmunk
and
she
is
happy
to
see
the
building
will
likely
be
retained.
So.
I
T
T
A
A
X
Good
afternoon,
Mark
zitzow
with
Johnson
and
Associates
address
is
one
he
shared
in
as
the
next
applicant
I
appreciate
that
move.
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Laforge.
We
have
before
you
an
application
to
rezone
a
couple
pieces
of,
what's
known
as
the
anisee
development.
The
NFC
development
has
been
going
on
for
a
couple
years
now,
and
this
commission
has
approved
several
plots
track.
One
is
proposed
as
kind
of
a
patio
home
style
portion
of
the
development
that
is
already
preliminary
plat
approved
and
so
we're
not
seeking
changes
on
that.
X
What
we're
seeking
for
is
changes
to
the
setback
regulations,
essentially
that
tract
two
proposes
for
a
small
Office
Park
access
is
being
maintained
from
the
neighborhood
back
out
to
MacArthur
and
that
language
is
written
into
the
SPD
I.
Think
it's
worth
noting
that
about
a
third
of
this
site
is
common
area.
There
are
multiple
drainage
ways
that
were
maintained,
as
well
as
other
common
areas,
sprinkled
throughout
the
development.
So
there's
a
significant
amount
of
amenity
space
within
the
anisee
development.
We
have
two
te's.
X
We
spoke
with
staff
and
got
clarification
on
te1,
so
we
are
in
agreement
with
both
tees
and
I.
Would
like
to
add
an
additional
te
which
would
be
te3,
where
I
would
like
to
state
that
we
will
strike
the
language
following
our
list
of
uses.
The
language
that
we
would
seek
to
strike
is
all
other
conditional
accessory,
special
or
special
exception
uses,
not
specifically
prohibited
shall
be
permitted
subject
to
review
and
the
approval
process
specified
in
the
zoning
code.
So
we'd
seek
to
strike
that.
But
with
that,
we
would
ask
for
a
recommendation
of
approval.
A
Y
Right
so
with
that
I
I,
don't
have
anything
else,
I
don't
think
there
was
a
couple
of
uses,
maybe
that
we.
I
Did
talk
about
General,
retail
and
also
personal
services,
General
I,
don't
think
we
ever
really
landed
on
our
response
to
those
it
isn't.
It
is
governed
by
O2
District.
I
Is
there
any
way
we
can?
We
can
limit
them
either
by
size,
square
footage
or
as
accessory
to
the
office
uses?
Is
this
is
I
I
hate,
frankly,
to
see
retail
development
in
the
middle
of
a
section
like
this
along
a
street
even
as
busy
as
MacArthur
I
know,
there's
a
church
to
the
South,
but
it's
so
far
off
the
section
line,
intersection
I
hate
to
see
General
retail
but
I
I
I'm
not
going
to
make
a
fuss
about
it
if
you're,
okay
with
it
so.
X
So
on
the
retail,
the
preference
would
be
to
keep
it.
I
mean
if
we
want
to
look
at
a
square
footage
restriction.
I
mean
we
can
probably
look
at
something
like
that,
but
I
think
so
we
have
a
Spud
that's
going
to
be
becoming
coming
before
you.
That
was
requested
to
go
from
straight.
Z
A
A
X
The
North
End,
along
with
additional
common
area
to
our
South,
is
the
drive
and
entrance
into
Church
of
the
servant
and
then
to
the
east.
While
it's
gallardian
residential,
there's
significant
setbacks,
it's
not
a
traditional
neighborhood
with
a
back
fences
are
up
against
the
section
line,
there's
common
area
and
then
a
50
foot
wide
right
away
for
Street,
and
then
their
house
is
soaked.
We
don't
really
have
any
what
I
would
consider
sensitive
borders.
That
would
maybe
be
negatively
impacted
by
a
retail
user.
X
My
my
mother's,
not
a
chipmunk
but
I,
believe
she's
supportive
of
the
project
as
well.
If
that
gets
us
anywhere.
X
R
A
A
I
B
V
A
A
A
R
Goal
was
just
to
preserve
that
neighborhood.
It's
been
there
a
long
time
back
in
the
80s
early
80s.
We
when
they
closed
down
the
elementary
school
we
fought
and
fought.
They
wanted
to
put
a
juvenile
detention
center
in
the
middle
of
the
neighborhood.
To
take
up
this,
we
fought
it
and
won
so
they
never
did
it
I'm.
Just
looking
out
for
the
neighborhood
I
have
a
property
there
and
family
lives
in
that
house.
R
X
A
R
I
I
I
I
A
A
Excellent,
the
commission
of
powers
has
moved
to
recommend
approval
of
PUD
1937
to
city
council,
subject
to
the
additional
technical
evaluations.
As
read
into
the
record,
that
motion
has
been
seconded
by
commissioner
Claire.
Please
cast
your
votes
when
available.
V
David
box,
522
call
Court
Drive
here
I'm
going
to
have
the
applicant
also
with
me
is
Mark
Grubbs.
This
isn't
a
PUD
for
a
commercial
development
along
Southwest,
29th
and
Mustang.
This
is
an
area
that
the
commission
knows
has
seen
a
significant
increase
in
development
in
large
part
due
to
the
turnpike
School
District,
all
the
things
going
on
in
the
area.
What
we've
done
in
this
putt
is
put
forth,
uses
that
we
think
makes
sense
based
upon
those
factors
that
are
occurring.
V
V
We
can't
do
20
feet,
the
the
site
is
pretty
narrow,
so
what
we
asked
to
do
is
a
10-foot
landscape
buffer
along
the
South,
with
all
lighting
required
to
be
directed
away
from
the
residents
of
the
South
who
Steph
asked
us
for
for
three
drives.
We
we
need
the
four
it
is
worth
noting.
We
do
already
require,
as
you
can
see,
in
the
site
plan.
Four
drives
would
still
result
in
shared
drive,
so
we'd
asked
the
te2
to
read
four
drives
and
each
Drive
shall
meet
the
city's
separation
requirements.
V
We
agree
to
te3
on
te4.
We
cannot
agree
to
the
150
foot
separation
again
based
upon
the
the
site,
but
what
we're
proposing
I
think
is
a
good
mitigation
effort
as
an
alternative.
So
what
we
can
agree
to
is
that
there
will
be
no
speaker
box
within
50
feet
of
a
residential
property
line
and
any
speaker
box
shall
be
required
to
be
directed
away
from
a
residential
property
and
the
southern
boundary
will
be
required
to
be
a
masonry
wall.
V
So
we're
not
meeting
the
150,
but
we
are
agreeing
to
a
masonry
wall
which
I
think
is
a
much
greater
standard
than
what
has
been
proposed
by
other
similar
commercial
development.
So
no
speaker
boxes
and
50
feet,
any
speaker
box
directed
away
from
a
residential
use
and
a
masonry
wall
along
that
southern
border,
and
then
we
need
to
add
a
fifth
PE
to
add
in
the
outdoor
sales
and
display
use
units
specifically
on
that
site.
Plane
you'll
see
the
second
building
from
the
East.
V
Is
a
hardware
store,
so
the
outdoor
storage
will
be
limited
to
a
small
area
where
you
would
see
seasonal
flowers
and
things
like
that
typically
associated
with
the
hardware
store
I'm,
not
aware
of
any
protests.
We
did
not
hear
of
any.
When
we
visited
with
commissioner
Fraley,
she
seemed
to
be
supportive
and
again
I
followed
up
with
an
email
with
those
technical
evaluations
as
I
just
discussed
and
we'd
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
Thank.
R
A
So
so
just
so,
you
know
about
the
driveways
they're
going
to
meet
the
separation
requirements,
but
they
want
to
do
four
then
on
then
your
thoughts
on
the
masonry
wall,
as
opposed
to
the
150
feet
limitation.
N
Sarah
Welch
planning
department
and
the
200
foot
separation
is
what
we're
really
aiming
at.
We
didn't.
We
weren't
convinced
they
could
get
that
within
the
part
they're
rezoning,
but
if
they
can
agree
to
that,
that's
great
and
then
the
masonry
wall
That's,
the
150
foot
recommendation
is
based
off
of
previous
meetings
with
all
of
you.
So
if
you're
satisfied
with
that,
then
we'll
amend
the
master
design
statement.
V
So
they
have
I
mean
they.
There
is
a
user
that
they
are
engaged
with.
That
is
what
this
user,
that
I
can't
say,
but
you
would
know
who
this
user
was,
and
it's
it's
seasonal
type
things
that
you
would
expect
to
see
at
a
small
hardware
store.
V
But
with
the
eight
foot
masonry
wall
I
do
think
that
that's
probably
the
the
largest
masonry
wall
that's
been
proposed
in
a
in
a
commercial,
so
that
will
have
a
much
greater
impact
on
sound,
obviously
visually
speaking,
I'm,
not
sure
if
anybody
that
other
than
climbing
the
fence
to
see
over
I
think
it
would
solve
the
concerns
that
you
would
typically
expect
to
see
next
to
a
residential
development.
B
A
D
V
Oh,
we
don't
we
don't
know
exactly.
What
all
we're
saying
is
that
we
know
that
we
there's
no
chance
to
have
150
because
of
the
size
of
the
site,
but
as
a
instead.
So
what
would
typically
happen
is
somebody
would
give
you
150
and
it
would
be
a
stockade
fence.
So
what
we're
saying
is
we
can
all
give
you
50.,
but
we're
also
going
to
build
an
eight-foot
masonry
wall
and.
V
No
I
mean
50
was
the
number
when
we
got
down
to
it,
angled
away
from
the
the
residential
with
an
eight
foot
masonry
wall.
I
B
O
Can
we
remove
drive
it
from
the
list?
I
think
it's
covered
with
permitting
ephus,
so
we
don't
need
the
specific
manufacturer
noted
and
you're
limiting
to
a
minimum
of
70
percent,
but
there's
no
statement
on
what
the
other
30
percent
could
be.
O
W
A
Mean
100
I
guess
it
could
be,
but
not
if
we
follow
through
with
what
you're
suggesting
of
getting
rid
of
the
drive
it
right.
So
if
we
eliminate
the
drive
it,
then
you
know
that
70
of
the
facade
is
going
to
either
be
brick,
masonry,
Rock,
Stone,
stucco
or
wood.
At
least
70
of
it
will
be
after
we
make
your
Amendment.
O
O
Because
if
we
remove
drive
it
from
the
first
list,
then
I
think
the
ethus
could
be
100,
so
I'm
just
trying
what
what
do
you
want
to
do?
You
have
a
suggestion
on
what
you
really
want.
V
O
We'll
limit
efus
to
30
and.
V
Sir,
all
right
so
te1
a
10
foot
landscape
buffer
along
the
South,
with
all
lighting
being
directed
away
from
the
residents
two
four
drives
with
meeting
the
separation
requirements.
We
agree
with
te3
four
would
be
a
50-foot
separation
from
a
speaker
box
with
the
addition
that
all
speakers
shall
be
directed
and
angled
away
from
the
adjoining
residential
uses
and
require
an
eight-foot
masonry
wall
along
that
southern
border.
A
Okay,
then
I
think
we're
just
ready
for
a
motion.
A
V
Good
afternoon
David
Vox
522
call
Cord
drive.
This
application
is
for
a
senior
independent
living
facility
along
59th.
It's
an
application.
We've
actually
been
before
you
several
times.
You
may
recall
many
years
ago
we
had
a
limitation
on
the
availability
of
public
sewer.
Since
that
time
development
has
expanded
in
this
area.
We
now
have
the
ability
to
sewer
it,
so
what
we're
seeking
to
do
is
provide
for
senior
independent
living.
There
are
two
Tes,
both
of
which
we
agree
to
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
O
Shy
I
think
I.
Think
the
question
is,
is
there's
cons,
you
know,
I
have
concern
about
the
private
drives
sure
so.
V
What
if
we
agree
that
the
private
drives
would
be
built
to
a
public
Street
Paving
section
allowing
for
mountable
curbs
I,
think
the
concern
is
typically
the
quality
of
the
private
drive,
because
they're
not
required
to
be
built
to
a
city
standard.
So
if
we
allow
the
private
drives
but
allow
them
to
be
built
or
assuming
required
them
to
be
built
to
a
public
Street
Paving
section
with
mountable
curbs
I,
think
that
satisfies
the
concern
that
exists
with
the
private
drives.
Why.
H
V
With
the
private
drives
is
typically
the
the
depth
and
what
you're
actually
building
is
not
as
sturdy
as
a
you
know,
public
Street
here
we're
going
to
agree
to
build
that
same
depth,
so
we're
going
to
meet
the
standard,
but
just
not
for
the
curb.
We
want
a
mountable
curve
which
is
is
fairly
common
and
wants.
H
V
I
mean
I
I,
can't
think
of
many
neighborhoods
that
are
newer,
that
don't
have
mountable
curbs
lots
of
new
single-family
residential
neighborhoods
have
mountable
curves
yeah.
L
Very
large,
Oklahoma,
City,
Public
Works,
don't
be
sure
I'm
on
the
same
topic
since
we're
having
some
other
conversations
too.
As
far
as
the
mountable
curves
I
really
don't
have
an
issue
with
those
that
what
Mark
had
stated
about.
We
build
the
barrier
curbs
when
they
come
in
to
build
a
driveway.
They
have
to
cut
that
curb
out
anyway.
L
So
it
saves
that,
as
far
as
the
issue
is
concerned,
about
going
still
calling
it
a
private
driveway
instead
of
a
private
Street,
that's
probably
where
I
would
have
a
little
bit
more
concern
with
that.
L
If
we,
if
we
go
with
it
as
a
private
Street,
and
require
it
to
be
planted
that
way,
then
there
is
a
platted
right-of-way,
still
going
to
be
maintained
by
the
by
the
property
owners.
But
there
is
a
there
is
a
platted
right-of-way
for
the
construction
of
the
street
Associated
storm
sewer
and
the
the
utilities
that
go
with
it.
If
they
don't
do
that,
they're
going
to
put
it
in
as
an
access
easement
that
is
likely
going
to
be
limited
to
the
back
of
the
curbs
and
then
there'll
be
utility.
Easements
that
are
are
planted.
L
Separate
from
that,
it
just
seems
like
a
much
cleaner
approach
that
if
we
go
with
the
the
private
Street
type
construction
that
that
it
it
goes
with
the
platted
right-of-ways,
the
difference
being
that
it
would
be
constructed
two
City
standards.
All
of
the
maintenance
requirement
would
be
the
responsibility
of
the
property
owners,
so.
L
Did
hear
that,
and
that
is
a
requirement.
If
we
go
with
the
private
streets,
they
are
required
to
be
constructed
to
the
public
Street
standards
and
they
are
required
to
be
constructed
by
a
pre-qualified
contractor
by
the
by
the
City
of
Oklahoma
City.
So
the
the
the
major
difference
between
it
becomes
the
the
maintenance
responsibility.
After
it's
all
done
and
and
then
we've
got
a
little
bit
of
latitude
with
this
and
I
think
we
could
allow
the
the
amountable
curbs
to
be
constructed
in
place
of
the
in
place
of
the
normal
barrier.
A
V
We
want
to
be
private
drive.
We
don't
know
that
we'll
plan
it
the
nature
of
senior
independent
living
is
they.
They
are
rental
units,
so
it's
not
likely
that
we'll
even
come
in
with
plats
for
individual
Lots,
like
you
might
have
in
a
single
family
neighborhood.
This
is
likely
going
to
be
rental.
It's
people
typically
downsizing
from
a
home
that
they
own
to
a
form
of
a
rental.
V
It's
like,
if
you
think,
of
an
apartment,
complex,
that's
a
one
lot
plot
you're,
not
plotting
streets
and
lots,
so
we
believe
by
meeting
the
public
Street
section
requirements.
The
concern
I've
always
heard
was
the
private
drives
was
a
maintenance
problem
because
they're
an
inferior
product.
Well,
if
we're
agreeing
to
meet
the
section
of
a
public
Street,
we
need
to
call
them
private
drives.
I,
don't
know,
I,
think
we're
meeting
the
concern
like.
I
V
He
was
talking
about
plotted
right
away.
We
may
not
plaque
this.
It's
one
owner
who's
likely
to
own
all
of
the
development.
So
we're
not
going
to
plot
this.
If
we
plot
it
like
an
apartment,
complex
is
one
lot.
So
we're
not
going
to
plot
it
like
a
typical
neighborhood,
where
we're
dedicating
rights
of
way
with
streets
right,
so
everything's
gonna
be
served
by
private
drives.
I
Or
multiple
owners,
if
you're
putting
in
individual
units,
if
you're
going
to
have
streets,
whether
you
want
to
call
them
wouldn't
that
require
a
plat,
it's
a
residential
development.
It's.
V
I
V
V
I
L
They
could
they
could
do
that
without
being
platted
and
all
in
one
one
owner
I
will
point
out.
Sarah
and
I
were
just
talking
in
their
application.
It
is
specified
that
in
the
senior
living
areas
the
platted
Lots
will
inform.
So
it
seems
in
in
the
document
that
was
prepared
and
submitted
that
they
were
anticipating
platting.
L
One
of
the
concerns
that
I
have
is
that
without
the
platting
and-
and
it
may
not
turn
into
an
issue
at
all,
but
we've
got
this
really
large
drainage
pathway
that
comes
through
this
property
that
the
platting
allows
us
to
put
that
into
a
common
area
that
will
very
specifically
designate
who
the
responsibility
for
the
maintenance
and
and
any
Improvement
is
that
so
again
it
it
looks
like
in
what
they
have
have
submitted,
that
they
were
anticipating
planning
this,
but
trying
to
go
with
the
private,
Street
or
private
driveway
option,
with
it
kind
of
mixing,
mixing
and
matching
things.
L
The
other
thing
that
is
is
included
in
their
proposed.
Pud
document
is
sidewalks.
They
didn't
specifically
say
that
along
the
private
driveways
sidewalks
will
not
be
required.
If
we
go
with
the
option
of
the
private
streets
requiring
that
plat
I
think
then
we
had.
We
had
the
the
option,
then
of
putting
in
the
requirement
for
the
sidewalks,
which
would
seem
to
be
kind
of
important
in
this
type
of
a
development,
but
I'll
leave
that
to
y'all's
discretion.
V
So
I
will
say:
I
mean
right.
It's
a
bit
strange
that
these
concerns
that
exist
are
brought
to
me
and
my
clients
attention
at
318.
As
we're
standing
at
a
Podium
two
Tes
were
presented
in
the
staff
report.
We
can
agree
to
both
of
them.
It
feels
like
additional
concerns
should
be
brought
to
our
attention
prior
to
318,
as
their
representative
is
standing
at
the
podium.
V
So
with
that
said,
on
the
drainage
issue,
building
permit
requirements
will
require
us
to
meet
the
drainage
ordinance
staff
will
get
a
review
of
all
the
drainage
calculations
at
a
building
permit
stage
the
fact
we
don't
plan
it
doesn't
mean
we
get
to
void
ourselves
to
the
drainage
ordinance.
That's
simply
not
true.
V
If,
if
we're
agreeing
to
meet
the
the
section
requirements,
the
section
requirements
for
the
streets
is
where
the
the
concerns
have
always
been,
because
there
is
no
section
requirement
for
private
drive,
so
yeah
we're
going
to
call
them
private
drive,
but
in
so
doing
we're
going
to
build
it
to
the
public
Street
section
I.E,
the
thicker
base
and
all
those
things
that
a
public
Suite
will
be
required
to
build
to.
I
So,
what's
in
terms
of
planning
not
Platinum,
is
it
just
a
matter
of
cost
of
going
through
the
process
or
is
it
is
it
that
there
are
things
that
you
would
have
to
do
if
you
plot
that,
you
don't
have
to
do.
If
you
don't
no.
F
Jeff,
a
quick
question
for
Barry
or
possibly
Jared
the
difference
between
a
private
Street
and
a
private
drive,
and
obviously
we
have
the
the
difference
in
construction
which
we've
talked
about,
but
the
right-of-way
width
and
the
sidewalks
as
I
understand
it.
I
believe.
That's
part
of
the
reason
why
private
streets
would
be
preferred
because
we
would
require
sidewalks
and
to
be
a
right-of-way.
That
would
be
a
standard
width.
Is
that
correct?
Yes,.
L
That
is
correct
and,
and
if
I
can
one
other
point
of
clarification
and
and
this
is
really
going
to
be
the
case-
whether
we
go
with
the
private
drive
or
the
private
Street
option
on
the
construction-
is
that
and
and
David
has
made
the
the
statement
a
couple
of
times
that
they
have
to
comply
with
the
ordinance
and
we're
going
to
review
all
of
that.
But
that
is
not
that's
not
the
case.
L
We
would
ask
them
to
comply
with
the
ordinance,
but
policy
that
was
implemented
in
public
works,
probably
six
to
seven
months
ago,
is
that
for
private
storm
sewer
systems,
Public
Works
engineering
is
not
reviewing
those
plans
and
calculations.
Now
that's
going
to
be
the
case,
whether
it's,
whether
they
call
it
a
private
Street
or
a
private
Drive
Mark,
will
be
aware
of
this
David
you
may
not
be,
but
Mark
will
be
aware
of
that
of
that
policy.
L
Change
that
that
came
about
after
conversations
with
a
lot
of
developers
and
a
lot
of
Engineers
to
make
that
change
and
and
the
idea
behind
that
is
to
speed
up
the
process
of
getting
those
approved,
we're
seeing
a
whole
lot
more
of
those
come
through.
So
we're
relying
totally
on
that
drainage
design
on
the
engineer,
because,
because
my
staff,
it
does
not
review
those
plans,
so
this
is
another
again
that
that
that's
going
to
happen,
whether
it's
a
private
Street,
regardless
of
how
of
whether
we
require
the
planning
and
what
we
call
that.
L
That
would
still
be
the
case
again.
It
would
still
be
what
I
would
prefer
to
see
would
be
the
private
streets
with
the
platting.
That
I
think
gives
us
more
more
Flex,
more
flexibility
from
the
city
standpoint,
maybe
not
from
the
developer
standpoint,
but
it
it
lets
us
have
the
other
requirements
that
can
come.
A
A
Spiegel
sorry
can.
AA
Records
1576
East
Southwest,
59th,
Street
I'm
across
the
street
in
the
Mustang
side
Mike.
My
question
is
I
didn't
know
what
was
going
in
here.
I
thought
previously.
There
had
already
been
approved.
Neighborhood
I
thought
I'd
received
notification
of
that.
But
then
I
received
this
notice
again.
I
guess
my
main
concern
is
it
says
R1
or
Senior,
Living
I,
don't
understand
all
the
language
and
whatnot
if
it.
If
it's
designated,
is
this
whole
thing
going
to
be
Senior
Living,
potentially.
AA
V
Yeah
so
the
way
that
we've
drafted
the
the
Pud-
if
you
look
at
section
8.1,
Sub
C,
it
says
if
it's
not
R1,
it's
the
use,
Unit
8,
200.13
senior
independent
living,
so
it
couldn't
be
a
traditional
apartment.
Complex
it'd,
be
limited
to
a
senior
living
complex.
AA
That's
just
my
concern
on
whether
it's
elevated
structures
or
whatnot
this
this
is
all
besides
to
the
east,
where
there's
neighborhood
being
developed
where
they're
stacking
homes
on
top
of
each
other.
All
this
around
here
is
what
I
know
is
rural
Estates,
it's
five
acres
or
more,
and
it's
it's
farming
area
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure
we're
not
bringing
out
apartment
buildings
and
whatnot
I
guess.
My
other
question
is
once
it's
designated
as
a
senior
living.
AA
A
A
You
any
other
questions.
I
know
we're
back
to
our
discussion
about
private
streets
versus
private
drives
where.
O
Are
we
well
the
reason
why
I
brought
it
up
I
wanted
to
get
clarification
on
the
sidewalk
issue?
I
know,
there's
a
lot
of
kind
of
detailed
technical
concerns
about
drainage,
but
my
my
question
stemmed
from
confusion
over
it
says
very
clearly
in
the
application.
Sidewalks
will
not
be
required
on
private.
B
H
I
think
a
major
difference
in
private
drives
and
private
streets
is
one
on
a
private
Street.
You
have
to
have
the
same
right-of-way
wit
and
two.
A
private
Street
also
allows
requires
that
you
have
a
licensed
bonded
contractor,
just
as
a
public
Street
would
and
and
also
requires
that
that
that
the
same
inspection
process
go
through
that
we
agree
that
you
know
to
build
that
to
those
standards,
but
that
would
allow
for
my.
My
client
would
no
longer
be
able
to
self-perform
those
concrete
drives
so
and
he
self-performs
all
of
his
concrete
drives.
H
He
he
generally
owns
and
operates
all
of
his
facilities,
so
he
keeps
them
so
he's
building
them
to
standards
that
hold
up,
which
is
why
I'm
not
afraid
to
agree
to
the
public
Paving
section.
It's
just
that.
Now,
all
of
a
sudden
he
has
to
bring
in
a
third
party
contractor
to
perform
those
when
you
call
it
a
private
Street.
H
E
H
Private
Drive
is
in
an
apartment,
complex,
a
private
Drive
is
in
an
office,
complex
they're,
still
platted.
They
still
have
access
easements
across
them,
but
they
they
don't
go
through
the
inspection
process
that
the
city
has
so
calling
it.
A
private
drive
versus
a
private
Street
becomes
a
difference.
A
That's
more
than
I
knew
thank
you
Mark,
because
that's
more
than
I
knew
about
about
the
differences
between
the
two
for
the
sake
of
helping
us
to
move
forward.
My
primary
concern
has
always
been
and
will
consistently
be,
that
when
inevitably,
when
we're
building
these
residential
neighborhoods
with
private
drives,
and
then
those
neighbors
have
no
notice
that
these
are
private
drives.
They
assume
that
they're
public
streets
and
then
the
city
need
they
at
some
point.
A
Ask
the
city
to
take
over
those
private
drives
and
the
city
is
not
capable
of
doing
so
because
of
the
standards.
The
fact
that
this
recommended
change
this
this
te
could
require
them
to
have
the
proper
depth
as
David
described
really
and
now
that
I've
been
assured
that
the
the
curb
issue
that
that's
reasonable,
I
I-
think
I'm.
A
For
the
ordinances-
and
so
that's
that's
on
my
mind,
so
my
thought
is
with
that
te
that
that
David's
recommended
I
think
I'm
in
support,
because
now
that
we've
learned
more
about
the
purposes
behind
it,
but
I'm
I'm,
open.
Y
G
G
O
B
V
I
V
So
the
mark
and
I's
client
is
an
individual
that
has
done
this
senior
product
over
and
over
and
over
again
he's
got
several
in
Southwest
Oklahoma
City
he's
got
one
in
El
Reno.
The
senior
market
is
one
that
is
significantly
underserved
with
the
boomer
generation
agent
out
of
wanting
to
own
single-family
homes.
I
Can
you
tell
me
the
the
portion
of
it
that
you're
the
top
portion
of
it
are
those
like
long
buildings
of
attached,
yeah.
H
To
if,
if
somebody
you
know
if,
if
he
gets
a
demand
for
Senior
Living
on
a
smaller
lot
that
wants
to
own
that
product,
then
he
could
do
that
on
those
lots
which
we
would
be
implanting
process
there,
because
you
have
to
have
the
access
and
then
to
have
the
a
product.
That's
more
group
home
wise,
so
tell.
I
H
O
Mr
chairman
I'll,
move
to
approve,
recommend
approval
of
PUD
1940.
with
the
modified
Tes
1
as
written
te2.
O
V
K
A
I
share
that
one
would
think
you're
making
me
feel
a
little
bit
better,
because
I
know
you've
been
on
the
commission
longer
than
me
that
we
still
hear
these
issues
and
I
go
I
clearly
am
not
as
informed
as
I
thought.
I
was
so
well.
I
The
the
manual
curves,
especially
it's
like
that's
a
whole
new
thing
to
me-
I
mean
I
I've,
always
thought
of
that
as
sort
of
an
inferior
product.
Somehow
I
don't
know
why,
but
you
know
that
it
was
just
like
one
step
away
from
a
bar,
ditch
and,
and
why
would
you
do
that
and
surely
a
good
solid
you
know,
separable
curb
there
is
the
way
to
go
and
and
to
to
find
out
that
it's
being
done
commonly
is.
Is
that's
news
to
me
as.
E
I
E
A
Okay,
we're
now
in
live
for
item
11.
AB
Good
afternoon,
a
class
from
Philip
2801
North
Hudson,
and
this
is
a
application
on
behalf
of
Omega
investment,
and
we
did
a
spud
on
the
south
of
this.
The
property
directly
adjacent
to
it
valve
a
few
years
back
and
tension
is
just
to
rezone
it
to
allow
for
four
small
houses.
AB
So
it's
unique
site,
it's
170
feet
deep,
which
is
deeper
than
your
typical
lot,
but
there's
virtually
no
right-of-way.
The
property
line
goes
almost
to
the
curb
on
Indiana
so
similar
to
the
Spud
that
we
did
to
the
South.
We
are
offering
to
basically
Grant
the
city,
an
eight-foot
easement
there
that
we
also
plan
on
running
a
water
line,
extension
down
to
kind
of
create
a
little
bit
more
of
a
separation
from
the
street.
AB
I.
Think
that
there's
some
tees,
we
agree
with
all
the
tees
garages
set
back
at
least
18
feet.
That's
fine
specify
a
maximum
driveway
with
we're
happy
to
do
that.
I,
don't
know
if
you
have
a
specific
width,
we're
thinking
a
single
single
car
drive
for
each
house
and
then
there's
te
number
three.
The
number
of
lots
shall
be
limited
to
three
and
I
wasn't
sure.
AB
R
AB
Have
smaller
houses
anyway,
it's
a
little
bit
more
of
a
smaller
neighborhood,
smaller
houses,
the
North.
So
we
want
the
house
to
be
able
to
more
neighborhood
scale
and
so
by
having
that
fitting
four
smaller
houses
kind
of
fits
the
pattern
of
development
a
little
bit
better
I
think
so.
A
I
think
we're
gonna
have
to
have
a
discussion.
We've
in
the
pre-meeting
I've
spent
more
time
than
I
probably
need
to
for
a
lifetime.
Where's
Dustin
talking
about
utility,
easements
and
fences
Etc,
so
I
I
do
want
to
go
ahead
and
rehash
that
conversation.
But,
commissioner
powers
do
you
have
anything.
I
Well
then,
that's
an
issue
I'm,
okay,
with
the
four
versus
three
on
the
site.
It
is
deeper
than
the
the
lot
to
the
South,
which
has
three
units
on
it,
and
these
are
going
to
be
smaller
units
which
I
think
actually
are
a
little
bit
more
compatible
with
the
surrounding
area
and
probably
more
likely
to
sell
than
those
larger
houses
are.
And
you
know
we
talk
a
lot
about
shortage
of
housing
in
Oklahoma
City.
It
is
not
my
observation
that
there's
an
absence
of
larger
homes
in
the
city.
I
Z
He
had
Dustin
cigarettes
utilities
department
when
I
was
reviewing.
This
is
according
to
the
subdivision
regulations
and
according
to
utilities
policies
you
have
to
be
adjacent
to
City
Utilities
in
order
to
provide
service.
So
what
what
this
is
is
they're
creating
these
Panhandle
lots
and
these
Panhandle
Lots
from
my
understanding
is
actually
the
legal
description
of
that
lot.
Is
that
correct.
AB
Yeah,
so
what
we've
done
in
the
past-
and
actually
the
original
exhibit
had
Panhandle
Lots
in
it,
but
I
did
speak
with
a
city
a
little
bit
about
the
utility
Arrangement,
and
so
what
we
had
kind
of
come
up
with
was
that
we
could
do
lot
splits
without
the
panhandles
and
having
to
easement
there
but
yeah.
So
in
the
past.
What
we
do
is
log
split
it
with
the
Panhandle
so
legally
that
you
know
that
you
know
Panhandle
is
you
know
it'd
be
like
the
middle
house
would
have
a
flagpole.
Z
Go
wrong,
and
so
so
what
these
Panhandle
lots
are
creating
the
the
house,
two
of
the
South
has
no
backyard
because
legally
that
land
is
not
his
if
these
were
actually
legal
descriptions
and
actually
Panhandle
Lots.
So
the
reason
why
they
have
to
do
this
is
to
be
able
to
be
adjacent
to
City,
Utilities
and
so
they're,
going
to
run
their
private
service
line,
both
Water
and
Sewer,
because
when
this
was
originally
planted,
the
slot
was.
You
have
sewer
on
the
North
I'm,
sorry,
water,
on
the
North
and
Sewer
on
the
south.
Z
So
now
you
take
this
long
split
it
and
make
it
go
East-West
when
it
was
designed
to
go
north
south,
and
so
now
those
two
homes
are
not
adjacent
to
you.
None
of
them
are
adjacent
to
both
water
or
sewer.
So
this
is
a
creative
way
to
kind
of
bypass
the
requirement
of
actually
extending
Public
Utilities
to
be
able
to
serve
them
to
be
adjacent.
Z
Now
we
get
into
the
situation
that
by
doing
this
legally
it
is
you
have
all
right
and
pervy
to
do
this
as
the
Planning
Commission
to
allow
this
to
be
split
like
this.
But
these
are
the
issues
that
we
are
seeing
in
the,
although
we've
done
it
in
the
past.
Is
that
we're
trying
to
find
a
a
correct
way
of
trying
to
prevent
it
in
the
future?
So
what
happens?
Z
Is
the
homeowner
on
the
south
when
all
of
a
sudden,
his
sewer
line
breaks
or
the
homeowner
in
the
north,
the
sewer
line
breaks
now
he
has
to
go
through
three
different
properties
to
be
able
to
get
into
his
service
and
to
be
able
to
to
fix
it,
and
so
now
he's
out
that
that
the
cost-
and
so
was
the
solution.
I
I,
don't
know-
and
this
is
where
infill
development
is-
is
the
toughest,
because
we
are
trying
to
be
creative
to
be
able
to
do
it.
I
don't
want
to
discourage
it.
Z
I
just
want
to
present
this
to
you
as
the
issues
that
we
are
seeing
because
the
homeowners
when
they
call
this
and
we've
been
receiving
multiple
phone
calls
here
lately
that
my
service
line
is
is
broken.
But
now
I
have
to
go
through
two
of
my
neighbor's
yards
to
be
able
to
get
to
it
and
if
there
wasn't
a
private
agreement
filed
with
the
county,
because
we
do
not
keep
up
with
those,
it
now
becomes
a
private
issue.
Now
the
landowners
they
can.
Z
Z
So,
as
a
city,
we
can't
do
anything,
and
so
this
is
where
we're
trying
to
prevent
this
in
the
sea
and
to
come
up
with
a
great
solution
to
be
able
to
figure
out
how
to
do
this
and
to
be
more
responsible
to
be
able
to
help
overcome
some
of
the
challenges
that
we
are
facing,
and
some
of
the
issues
that
we
are
seeing
now
from
the
decisions
of
going
with
these
flag
locks
in
the
past
will
easements
work.
Easements
will
work.
Z
I
would
prefer
easements
there
rather
than
legal
descriptions,
because
at
least
that
way
the
home
to
the
South.
He
actually
owns
the
land,
but
now
he
has
four
easements
on
his
property.
He
still
can't
build
anything
there
because
of
the
easements
they
still
got
to
get.
You
know
access
to
it,
so
this
is.
This
is
a
very
unique
situation.
The
cleanest
and
most
proper
thing
to
do
is
to
extend
both
the
utilities
of
water
and
sewer.
Z
That
was
just
my
concern
and
I
wanted
to
bring
it
to
bring
it
to
your
attention.
So
that
way,
as
you
continue
to
see
cases
like
this,
that
you
take
that
into
consideration
now
and
I,
think
I
was
talking
with
staff
on
this
and
the
reason
why
we
set
three
well.
Maybe
it
gives
you
a
little
bit
more
room
for
some
utilities
or
for
the
easements
and
you're
not
trying
to
cram
everything
together,
and
so,
when
something
breaks
you
have
to
repair
it
there's
actually
room
two
repair.
Z
AB
I
actually
I
appreciate
you
saying
that,
because
these
are
exactly
the
concerns
we've
had
and
I
think
you
know
any
developer.
I've
worked
with
who's
approached
a
project
like
this
I
mean
they
hate.
The
log
split
I
mean
the
the
Panhandle
Watts.
For
exactly
that
reason,
you
end
up
with
you
know:
someone's
five
foot.
AB
You
know
property
going
through
your
backyard
and
I'm
sure
there
could
be
legal
issues
with
that,
and
the
issue
that
we've
faced
is
that
the
city
had
that
requirement
that
you
had
to
be
adjacent
to
the
public
utility
and
so
really
the
only
I
think
legal
way
that
we
could
do.
It
was
to
do
these
panhandles.
AB
So
the
only
way
to
see
you
know
this
kind
of
infill
development,
which
is
you
know
and
all
we
need
it
I
think
it's
even
promoted
in
the
comp
plan,
and
so
you
know
we
we've
had
to
go
through
this
Panhandle
approach,
and
you
know
just
now
we're
getting
to
where
easements
might
be
an
option
and
and
I
kind
of
I
like
the
idea
of
easements.
For
several
reasons,
I
don't
know
if
the
city
wants
a
ton
of
short
runs
of
of
public
sewer
line
that
they're
going
to
have
to
maintain.
AB
You
know
for
any
little
development
like
this
I
mean
you've
got
if
it's
an
easement,
still
everyone's
private
sewer
from
the
public
sewer.
But
you
don't
have
to
you
know
the
city
is
not
responsible
for
maintaining.
You
know,
30
feet
of
sewer
line
and
then
another
manhole
or
whatever,
and
it
is
cost
prohibitive
for
sure.
As.
Z
The
best
of
yeah-
and
this
is
something
that
we've
been
discussing
internally
as
well-
is-
is:
what's
the
number
you
know?
Is
it
one
house?
Is
it
two
houses?
Is
it
three
units
four?
Where
do
you
stop
at?
What
point
in
time?
Do
you
say
extend
the
utilities,
you
know
when
does
it
become
feasible,
and
so
these
are
all
the
issues
that
I
don't
have
answers
for.
We
won't
solve
it
today
here,
but
I
do
think
that
and
I
don't
know
if
a
variance
needs
to
be
issued.
Z
When
they
see
the
plant
that
they'll
have
those
private
easements
there
that
might
be
I,
don't
know
Jeff.
If
that's.
Z
B
Z
Z
You
can
still
have
it
in
the
easement
now
if
this
was
now
a
way
around
this.
If
this
was
one
lot,
okay,
four
structures
leased
out,
but
not
going
to
be
individually
sold.
Now
it
all
becomes
private.
Now
we
will
put
one
meter,
Master
Meter,
and
then
you
can
share
a
common
one
line
and
then
you
can
connect
to
it
that
way,
exactly
what
you're
saying,
but
because
it
is
four
separate
structures
for
separate
ownerships.
You
have
to
have
a
private
service
line
for
each
individual
unit.
Z
That
correct,
yes,
that
is
correct,
because
if
you,
if
you
had
to
share
a
common
line
individually,
then
what
happens
is
when
your
neighbor
flushes
down
whatever
and
a
clogs
that
private
service
line.
Then
you
flush
and
it
floods
your
house,
then
they
you
get
into
that
whose
responsibility
isn't
so
that's
according
to
the
plumbing
code
and
I.
Think
their
intention
of
this
is
to
be
able
to
sell
these
off
separately
and
not
lease
them
out
or
rent
them
out
and
be
underneath
one
ownership.
F
For
the
commissions,
just
as
a
reminder
we'll
be
discussing
this
very
issue
in
the
next
study
session,
so
we'll
kind
of
we
and
we
intend
to
meet
with
utilities
before
then
come
up
with
some
options,
discuss
the
pros
and
cons
in
more
depth.
Z
Correct
and
I
just
want
and
and
with
this
is
I
think
and
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
to
make
sure
if
these
are
actually
panhandles
legal
descriptions
or
if
we
could,
you
know
if
they're,
if
they
needed
to
be
a
variance
to
be
able
to
change
it
so
that
way,
they're
not
associated
they're,
not
adjacent
to
utilities,
but
yet
we
are
understanding
that
they
can
have
an
easement
there
and
I.
Don't
know
the
legality
of
that
or
whatnot.
So
that's
there,
one.
I
Z
AC
So
I
did
find
a
provision
in
the
zoning
code
that
allows
us
to,
in
a
PUD
to
Grant
variances
to
the
subdivision,
regulations
and
other
development
regulations.
However,
we
cannot.
We
cannot
vary
the
plumbing
codes
like
any
like
the
plumbing
electrical
mechanical,
those
type
of
codes.
So
if
this
is
actually
a
requirement
in
the
plumbing
code,.
Z
Z
Because
it
will,
because
by
by
platin
it
we
would
plant
separate
private,
you
could
just
have
like
a
15-foot
private
easement,
but
but
each
one
would
have
a
separate
service
line
running
through
that
15-foot
private
easement,
you
see
so
that's
where
we
could
help
kind
of
solve.
This
immediate
need.
Yeah.
I
On
the
Planning
Commission
was
that
we
needed
more
info
housing
in
the
core
and
that
we
needed
to
at
least
pledge
ourselves
to
get
out
of
the
way
you
know
and
to
kind
of
go
through
the
code
as
best
we
could
and
find
these
kinds
of
issues
and
weed
them
out
and
deal
with
them,
and
this
is
one
that
we're
still
dealing
with
every
time
we
do
this
kind
of
infield
development.
The
issue
of
access
to
utilities
is,
is
still
an
issue
I'm
all
in
favor
of
finding.
I
You
know
something
that
makes
sense
so
that
we
don't
keep
stubbing
our
toe
on
this.
Every
time
we
do
a
residential
infill
I'm
more
than
happy
to
have
meetings
and
there's
it's
a
relatively
small
community
of
infill
developers
in
the
core
that
have
this
issue
that
comes
up
again
and
again,
I'm
sure
they'd
be
more
than
happy
to
come
and
meet
and
offer
their
insight
and
input.
Ab
staff.
You
know,
let's,
let's
figure
it
out,
yeah.
AB
I
Yeah
and
it's
you
know
it's
one
of
those
things:
it's
not
it's
not
really
a
question
of.
Oh
they
just
don't
want
to
spend
the
money.
There
is
a
point
it
cost
is
just
prohibitive
for
infill
development,
so
yeah.
Z
A
AB
Yeah
I
think
staff,
when
you
know
after
this
and
figure
out
the
best
approach
but
I,
don't
think
there's
anything
the
language
of
the
Spud
that
I
can
think
of
that
would
have
to
change
for
us
to
do
really
either
version
I
think
I
took
out.
We
may
have
at
one
point
that
MDS
I
think
we
had.
Maybe
somebody
was
allowed
for
five
foot
panhandles
or
you
know
first
but
I
think
we
took
that
out.
I,
don't
know
so.
D
Setback
or
something
I'm
just
looking
at
this
far
south
lot,
they've
got
technically
there's
no
room
behind
there.
You've
got
to
have
some
place
for
a
AC
condenser,
which
it
could
go
on
the
North
side.
There's
three
foot
looks
like
there's
three
foot
of
property
on
the
North
side,
but
I
mean
if
you're
gonna
wash
windows
put
on
storm
windows.
Whatever
this
that
that
unit
doesn't
have
technically,
has
zero
access
to
the
back
of
their
house.
To
that
facade,
problematic
you
get
you
get
you
get
a
neighbor,
you
don't
like.
AB
Yeah
the
unique
condition
on
this
one:
normally
we
would
have
a
setback
on
that
side,
but
there's
a
20-foot
alley
like
right
there
that
hasn't
been
closed
or
vacated.
So
it's
still
open
and
you
got
like
there's
a
sewer
line
in
there
and
overhead
power
line.
So
you
know
that
that
setback
requirement
is
normally
for
fire
and
since
you
can't
build
a
house
in
that
alley
anyway,
you
know
that's
kind
of
why.
D
AB
D
AB
D
A
Cleared
to
that
end,
I
mean
that's,
that's
what
te3
is
getting
at
is
just
let's
just
only
do
three
houses
so
that
you
can
ensure
that
there's
sufficient
space
between
the
homes
to
accommodate
that
issue.
So
I
think
that
is
the
question
is:
are
we
in
agreement
it's
for
too
much
I?
My
concern
I
can
I
personally
can
live
with
four.
My
concern
is:
how
is
the
the
buyer
of
that
southern
lot
on
notice
that
they
don't
own
any
piece
of
grass
behind
their
house
and
I?
A
Think
I
I
mean
I,
don't
know
how
we
guarantee
that
people
are
that
are
notified
about
that,
and
so
I
don't
care
as
long
as
people
have
noticed,
but
I
don't
think
we
have
any
any
ability
to
impose
that
notice.
So
you
know,
for
that
reason,
and
the
reasons
that
that
commissioner
Claire
said
I
mean
it
makes
a
lot
of
sense
to
me
to
only
do
three
but
well
yeah.
AB
AB
Okay,
so
we
have,
if
this
is
the
most
up-to-date
staff
reports
is
2.5
foot
for
utilities,
the
2.5
that
was
for
potential
water
lines,
but
I'm
happy
to
you
know,
maybe
put
in
a
tea
or
something
I
mean
if
we
can
do
an
easement
here,
which
is
what
my
discussions
with
the
city
indicated.
We
might
be
able
to
do,
and
especially
if
we
plant
it
that
way,
we.
AB
Into
the
you
know,
that
would
be
ideal.
I
don't
want
to
do
the
the
panhandles.
If
we
can
avoid
it
and
then
you
wouldn't.
You
would
eliminate
that
issue
that
commissioner
Claire
brought
up,
but
actually
having
the
four
houses
here.
If
we
did
it
kind
of
like
we
did
it
in
the
past,
with
a
five
foot
sewer
line,
we
actually
have
more
room
here,
because
five
foot
was
that
kind
of
City
standard
private
sewer
line
with
so
normally
we've
done
three
houses.
AB
The
back
house
would
have
direct
access
to
sewer
line.
That
we'd
have
two
houses
I
needed
that
Panhandle.
So.
B
AB
It's
not
our
intention.
We
had
I
know
it's
misleading,
because
the
exhibit
when
I
first
filed
this
in
I
think
January
I
was
still
under
the
impression
that
we
had
to
do
panhandles
to
do
any
kind
of
infill
development
like
this
and
that
changed
just
in
the
last
you
know
month
and
a
half
and
discussing
with
the
city.
You
know
it
was
like
well
we're
more
open
to
doing
easements
now
so
I
was
like.
Well
that's
great.
Let's
see
that
instead
of
you
know
the
panhandles
so
sounds.
T
Thanks
for
clarifying
that,
because
if
we
didn't
have
another
bite
at
the
Apple
I'm
going
City
staff's
recommendation
of
only
three
because
I'm
looking
at
this
going
you're
packing
in
too
much
it's
going
to
be
very
affordable,
but
whoever's
going
to
buy,
it
isn't
going
to
know
what
they
just
bought.
I
wouldn't
have
known
they're,
going
to
potentially
be
tricked
into
having
something
that
was
way
too
tight
and
this
issues
with
them
button
right
up
on
somebody's
property.
T
But
if
we're
getting
another
bite
out
at
the
Apple
at
a
plat,
then
okay,
then
convince
me
that
four
can
fit
here,
but
everything
I
just
heard
for
the
last
30
minutes
this.
This
does
not
fit
for
right
now,
so
I
think
you
can
solve
it.
I
hope
you
do.
I'd
love
to
approve
four
I'm,
only
approving
it,
because
we
have
pulmonary
chance
to
say
that
it
doesn't
work.
AB
On
from
a
density
and
setback
standpoint,
it's
the
same
exact
as
a
typical
property
with
three
houses,
but
this
property
is
170
feet
deep
as
well.
I
guess
I
understand
what
you're
saying,
but
this
site
is
unique
in
a
sense:
I
did
it.
It
is
deeper
by
30
feet
than
a
typical
lot.
So
you
know
where
we've
done.
These
we've
actually
done
four
houses
on
a
typical
50
foot
by
140
foot
lot.
But
so
in
this
case
we
have
that
extra
30
foot,
which
makes
it
a
little
bit
of
unique.
AB
It's
not
like
your
typical
normal
platter,.
O
Can
I
can
I
make
a
a
suggestion
or
question
here?
I
guess,
is
you
know
the
Panhandle
versus
easement
conversation
is
gonna,
we're
gonna
have
another,
buy
it
out.
That's
gonna!
There's
no!
There's
nothing
set
in
stone
that
your
floor
plan
or
your
you
know.
Your
footprint
of
that
alley.
Adjacent
home
is
set,
so
there
could
still
be
a
setback
requirement
for
a
home
so
that,
no
matter
what
you
have
you
can
access
all
sides
of
your
property
and
maintain
your
property.
O
So
the
Panhandle
could
also.
This
could
still
work.
If
we
said
you
have
to
have
a
three
foot
setback
to
that
lot
line.
That
just
means
that
footprint
gets
smaller
because
it's
right
against
the
property
line,
so
that
one
shrinks
which
probably
makes
sense
because
you're
not
going
to
be
able
to
sell
it
for
as
much
anyway,
because
it's
the
lot
you're
buying
is
smaller
and
less.
O
Reporting
I'm
saying
Panhandle
stand
exactly
like
they
are
in
in
in
you
know
in
theory,
and
you
don't
have
a
zero
foot
setback
in
this
Spud.
You
have
a
three
foot
minimum
on
the
well
I
guess
it
would
be
a
rear
yard
adjacent
to
the
20-foot
alley.
That
would
go
to
three
feet,
and
then
it
just
means
that
that
footprint
has
to
get
smaller.
AC
AB
AB
AB
A
A
T
T
AB
So
just
to
be
clear
on
the
on
this
additional
team.
So
basically
we're
saying
we'd.
Add
a
three
foot
setback
off
that
Panhandle
for
that
back
house,
so
that
you'd
still
have
that
owner
would
sell
their
own
property.
You
know
a
little
buffer
between
the
Panhandle,
but
if
we
could
get
the
easement
approved,
then
that's
a
new
Point.
O
AB
O
A
So
sounds
like
it's.
According
to
staff's
interpretation
of
what
this
discussion
does
adding
an
additional
three
feet
of
setback
on
the
West
Side
requiring
that
is
that
helpful
in
addressing
the
two
primary
concerns
utility
access
and
ensuring
that
any
person
who
purchases
one
of
these
homes
will
at
least
have
some
access
to
their
front
yard.
Or
do
we
make
it
a
more
narrow,
Amendment
and
say
that
the
fourth
house,
you
know
is
the
one
that
has
to
have
the
three
feet.
E
Z
You
could,
if
we
go
with
the
plotted
easement,
then
that
entire
space
is
that
house
and
I.
That
is
the
direction
when
they
plant
it
they're
going
to
plot
it
as
a
private
easement.
So
they
will
have
that
backyard
will
be
that
South
house,
property,
yeah,
I,
think
those
so
I
I
think
the
intent
is
that
you
don't
have
to
have
a
three
foot
set
back
but
they're
going
to
plait
it
as
such,
that
that
is
a
private
easement
I.
O
AB
I
T
A
A
I
thought
we
had
to
do
it
here
because
it
sounds
like
it
sounds.
Like
I
mean
we're
opening.
It
sounds
like
we're
opening
ourselves
up
to
a
conflict
between
what
we've
approved.
So
if
we
were
to
impose
the
three
foot
setback
at
the
platting
stage,
but
the
zoning
said
that
they
they're
not
required
to
have
that
setback.
Then,
wouldn't
there
be
a
conflict.
Y
A
I
T
AB
Just
thinking
out
loud
but
I,
don't
know
if
it
would
help
or
hurt,
but
getting
a
variance.
You
have
to
show
hardships,
I,
don't
know
if
it
was
something
that
was
a
key
here
that
was
like.
We
require
an
easement.
You
know
the
service,
that's
with
the
private
utilities,
but.
A
I
Okay,
I
I
do
have
some
sense
of
Reliance
on
the
fact
that
we're
all
committed
to
find
a
working
solution
to
this
issue
yeah.
Obviously
it
would
not
make
any
sense
at
all
for
someone
to
purchase
the
house
that
they
couldn't
have
access
to
the
back
of
you
know
even
to
wash
windows
or
whatever
so,
but
now
that
you've
put
this
idea
in
my
head
I'm
a
little
concerned
about
whether
the
conflict
would
preclude
us
from
requiring
it
at
platting
stage.
I.
A
I
A
AB
O
T
Was
agree
with
chairman
councilman
Powers,
but
commissioner
powersman
but
I
would
say
West.
Let's
just
be
clear:
West
because
I
don't
know
what
the
back
is
on
that
picture.
It's
the
West!
So
just
three
foot
period
to
the
West
three
foot
to
the
West
period.
AB
Okay,
I
have
one
final
thought
on
this:
if
you,
if
you
don't
mind
so
what's
also
unique
about
this
site,
is
that
so
close
to
the
easement
I
mean
to
the
to
the
curb
on
Indiana
and
so
we're
already
granting
the
city
eight
foot
of
an
easement
coming
off
Indiana
and
then
we've
got
the
15
feet
for
the
sewer
line,
so
we're
already
pretty
squeezed
in
in
this
direction
and
I'm
wondering
just
for
argument's
sake.
AB
I
mean
the
way
that
we
have
been
approving
these
up
to
now
for
the
last
five
six
years
is
in
this
kind
of
configuration.
So
typically,
if
I'd
come
with
a
typical
lot
and
said
we
want
to
do,
three
houses
would
have
had
10
foot
setback.
We
would
have
just
had
the
10
feet
off
the
property
line,
and
that's
what
you
know
the
Panhandle
would
have
been
up
against
the
house.
I'd
understand,
commissioner
govian's
comment
on
on
having
to
access.
Actually,
commissioner
Claire.
B
AB
AB
AB
T
R
AB
Yeah,
we
can't
do
the
easement
and
we'll
take
the
three
feet
off
and
make
it
work,
but
yeah
we'll
go
with
the
hope
that
we
can
get
the
use
met.
O
A
I
I
I
A
A
The
motion
commissioner
Powers,
has
moved
to
recommend
approval
of
Spud
1498
to
city
council,
subject
to
the
technical
evaluations
as
read
into
the
record
that
motion's
been
seconded
by
commissioner
govine.
Please
cash
your
votes
when
available.
A
I
pledge
to
move
continuances
on
any
case
like
this
again
until
we
have
a
solution
like
I,
just
don't
think
it's
appropriate
for
us
to
be
able
to
handle
things.
This
complex
as
a
unit
like
this,
like
I,
think
we
need
to
have
a
better
Collective
solution
for
how
we
deal
with
this.
It's
two
on
issues
that
are
this
highly
technical.
We
need
to
start
to
flag
them
and
have
a
committee
that
addresses
them
and
bring
us
come
back
with
some
proposed
Solutions.
A
A
A
We
are
in
line
for
item
12.
item.
F
V
David
box
522
Concord
Drive
here
on
behalf
of
the
applicant.
This
is
perhaps
one
of
the
most
oh
we've
lost
it.
Can
we
go
back
to
that?
One
of
the
most
unique
cases
I
think
I've
handled
the
reason.
I
say
that
is:
oh
there
we
go
when
when
you
look
at
the
subject
tracked,
it's
within
a
neighborhood,
it's
within
PUD
1575..
V
However,
the
owner
of
the
property
is
the
owner
of
the
five
acres
to
the
West
and,
like
this
commission
throughout
the
years,
has
said
to
protesters.
If
you
like
the
view
of
that
field
or
if
you
enjoy
that
field
next
to
you,
go
buy
it.
So
this
individual,
rather
than
being
the
fly
in
the
ointment
during
the
approval
process
of
PUD
1575,
bought
it
her
good
deed,
is
now
being
punished.
V
She
bought.
It
worked
out
a
deal
with
the
developer
where
she
is
void
from
the
covenants.
She
is
void
and
not
a
member
of
the
HOA,
but
it's
zoned
residential.
It's
not
zoned,
agriculturally
this
site,
as
you
can
see
immediately
to
the
West.
It's
a
pond
has
some
great
issues.
She
tried
her
best
to
mow
it
for
years.
There
was
a
portion
of
it
that
she
couldn't
mow.
A
Ryan
lawnmower
was
turned
on
an
individual
that
was
trying
to
mow
it,
and
so
she
got
cited
for
a
tall
grass.
V
If
you
could
show
the
images,
because
this
is
really
her
backyard,
do
you
have
the
fence
yeah?
She
installed
a
those
chain
link
black
vinyl
coated
fences
around
set
off
40
feet
to
ensure
that
it
is
protected
and
controlled
in
its
her
backyard.
V
So
again,
her
to
her
credit.
She
went
and
did
what
we've
always
said
to
do.
Go,
go,
buy
it
and
now,
because
it's
not
zoned
a
a
and
it's
zoned
or
something
she's
suffix
to
the
no
yeah
this
one.
You
should
already
have
it
in
the
packet.
It's
the
you
subject
to
what
R
requires
in
terms
of
mowing.
So
what
we
seek
to
do
here
and
because
it's
less
than
five
acres,
we
couldn't
Zone
at
AA
to
match
the
rest
for
a
property.
V
We
had
to
Zone
it
in
a
spud
to
allow
a
a
less
than
five
acres.
There
is
a
te
asking
that
we
have
Landscaping
outside
of
the
front
yard
fence.
We
agreed
to
do
that
and
talking
to
commissioner
Claire,
he
has
suggested
that
we
would
have
seeding
with
a
mix
of
native
grass
wildflowers
and
put
up
a
sign
that
shows
its
native
wild
Wildflower
and
no
MO
area.
My
clients
agreeable
to
that
we're
simply
seeking
to
be
able
to
utilize
this
in
the
manner
that
she
intended
when
she
bought
this
out
of
this
development.
V
There
are
neighbors
on
I
think
two
sides
that
are
happy
with
what
she's
done
in
agreement
with
what
she's
done.
Presumably,
there
is
a
neighbor
that
is
turning
her
in,
which
is,
of
course,
how
she
ended
up
in
my
office
seeking
to
have
her
prosecuted
for
Tall
Weeds,
so
we're
trying
to
make
the
situation
go
away
and
allow
her
to
continue
to
maintain
this
in
a
manner
consistent
with
her
property
to
the
West.
V
A
From
you,
we
do,
would
you
like
me
to
call
on
them
Dan
Fife.
A
AD
AD
Is
directly
right:
there
we
moved
in
four
years
ago
this
past
winter,
the
contractor
had
house
nearly
done
the.
What
he
told
us
was
that
the
developers
had
bought
this
property
and
from
this
from
this
lady
that
she
wanted
to
maintain
this
acreage
here.
So
she
wouldn't
have
a
neighbor.
She
didn't
want
anybody
up
against
her,
her
property,
hey
in
honesty,
I,
don't
blame
her
I've
got
a
little
ranch.
I!
Don't
want
anybody!
Anybody
up
against
me
either!
AD
So,
but
she
said
everybody
said
yeah
but
she's
going
to
keep
me
nice
she's,
going
to
keep
it
cleaned
up.
It's
all
going
to
look
good!
Well,
I
brought
pictures,
I'm,
sorry,
I
didn't
get
them
sent
to
you,
because
I
was
at
a
funeral
and
but
I
have
some
photos
of
our
house.
Every
house
in
this
development
is
between
500
and
million
dollars.
A
AD
The
only
time
she
ever
cleaned
the
property
is
like
he
said,
someone
would
complain
because
the
weeds,
the
trash
and
everything
for
very
bad,
the
fence
got
put
up
about
two
months
ago.
It
only
got
put
up,
I
can't
put
up
that
fence,
she
put
up
the
fence.
Actually,
we
have
to
have
a
gated.
We
can
only
put
up
chain
link
on
the
sides
and
on
the
back,
we
have
to
have
a
a
steel
on
the
front
to
make
it
look
good,
but
she
she
went
up.
AD
No
none
of
us
knew
about
it.
She
wouldn't
put
her
own
fence
up
on
the
property.
We
just
haven't
had
a
whole
lot
of
luck.
You
know
with
the
fact
that
that
this
was
a
situation
where
it
was
offered
for
sale.
She
said
that
nobody,
she
she
wanted
this
property
separate,
because
she
didn't
want
anybody
living
next
year.
I
got
you,
keep
it
cleaned
up,
R1.
Well,
if
it
goes
to
agriculture.
AD
She
doesn't
have
key
up
on
it
at
all
now.
There's
some
agreements
out
there
that
supposedly
she's
made
with
some
individuals
like
well
we're
gonna.
We
we
promised
to
do
this.
We
promised
to
do
that
no
offense
to
the
developer,
but
you
know
he
also
promises
to
put
in
a
lot
of
stuff
that
he
never
did,
and
so
there's
no
reason
to
believe
that
she's
going
to
keep
up
it
any
better
when
it's
in
agriculture
with
when
it's
less
restricted
than
under
the
Restriction
that
it
is
inside
of
this
residential
area.
AD
If
I'd
have
known
that,
she
was
going
to
be
able
to
turn
it
into
agricultural
area
where
she
can
do
all
kinds
of
different
stuff
with
it
and
then,
even
if
the
agreements
were
made
now
somewhere
down
the
road,
her
son
or
somebody
else,
comes
in
and
tries
to
amend
it
and
then
amend
it
and
amend
it
before
you
know
it.
There's
marijuana
growing
over
there
or
there's
something
else
going
on
over
there
and
and
I
don't
want
that
across
from
my
house.
AD
I
bought
this
house
with
the
intention
of
moving
when
I
retire
and
using
it
to
try
to
to
build
a
smaller
house
somewhere
else.
You
should
have
got
a
letter
from
the
neighbor
on
the
North
side.
If
you
he
he
is,
he
was
also
complaining.
I've
spoken
with
everybody
in
the
neighborhood.
Most
of
us
all
worked
for
a
living.
They
didn't
come
today,
but
I
didn't
meet
a
single
person
that
was
okay
with
this,
as
he
said,
and
I
spoke
with
all
the
neighbors
there's
only
four
houses
within
300
feet.
AD
Or,
however,
that
works
300
yards
whatever,
whatever
the
whatever
it
is,
I
didn't
get
my
stuff
sent
any
time
give.
AD
The
only
people
who
cleans
up
the
trash
is
me:
I
cut
her
grass
I,
mower
fence,
I
I
pick
up
all
the
trash
and
you're
going
to
see.
Pictures
of
the
trash
that
I
bet
it
didn't
pick
up
last
week
would
concrete
all
kind
of
it's
just
it's
bare
it's
ugly,
it's
not
being
taken
care
of
now
and
it's
not
going
to
get
taken
care
of.
We
rezone
it
and
allow
her
to
do
it.
AD
Agriculture,
I,
don't
know,
I
really
don't
want
any
cow
across
my
from
my
house,
I
might
have
a
problem
trying
to
sell
it
and
with
all
the
promos
that
have
been
made
like
I
said
from
the
from
the
developer,
who
was
good
friends
with
her
I
mean
he's
already
got
enough
problems
across
the
street
with
his
water
issue,
with
you
guys,
so
there's
no
reason
to
believe
anything.
He
says
on
this
is
is
going
to
be
true
either.
AD
So
all
I'm
asking
is
that
you
please
look
it
over
and
and
it
needs
to
stay
the
way
it
is
I.
Don't
want
agricultural
there.
If
she
she
got
what
she
wanted.
No
Neighbors
keep
keep
it
clean
and-
and
the
last
thing
I'll
say,
is
this.
The
main
reason
I
heard
this
week.
I
heard
this
morning
actually
from
one
of
our
attorneys
said
the
main
reason
she
wants
to
do.
AD
This
is
because
she's
going
to
get
lower
taxes,
she'll
get
lower
taxes
because
because
I
pay
a
crap
load
of
taxes
on
my
house,
if
you
let
me
put
a
big
Garden
in
my
back
house
backyard,
you
give
me
a
one
two
we'll
be
okay,
but
she
she
wants
to
lower
taxes,
because
it's
she's
paying
paying
taxes
on
three
lots,
and
it's
going
to
be
a
lot
less
under
the
Agriculture
and
that's
all
I
had
do
you
have
any
questions
for
me.
Can.
A
I
ask
a
question,
but
I,
but
I
I
know
in
this
late
hour,
I'm
asking
for
you
to.
Please
give
me
a
very,
very
brief
response.
Yes,
sir,
if
I'm
under
am
I
understanding
your
objection
correctly,
your
first
objection
is
that
the
property
is
not
well
maintained,
that
it
is
that
there
is
debris,
and
so
you
are
concerned
that
if
we
are
to
redo
this,
if
we
were
to
rezone
this
property,
you
are
concerned
about
the
quality
at
which
it
will
be
maintained.
Is
that
accurate?
That's
not.
A
AD
There's
no
trust
between
our
organization.
We've
been
trying
to
get
our
HOA
forever.
There's
no
trust
between
our
organization,
our
group,
the
people
that
live
here
and
and
and
her
and
the
developers
it's
just
there's
just
none,
because
we've
we've
tried
working
together
for
I,
don't
think
our
swimming
pool,
which
was
supposed
to
be
a
kid's,
pulling
a
Raider
pull
and
when
it
was
finally
built,
it
looked
like
something
that
I
would
use
well,.
A
Not
not
to
believe
the
point
and
I
and
I
appreciate
all
of
that,
but
we
can't
no
matter
what
decision
we
make
today.
I
can't
resolve,
nor
that
can
this
commission
resolve
the
trust
issue
between
you
and
your
neighbors
and
I
respect
that
and
you
you.
If
you've
listened
to
our
commission
meetings.
I
can't
say
enough
things
about
how
much
I
wish
that
developers
or
Realtors
would
be
very
honest
and
clear
with
the
property
owners
about
what
rights
and
responsibilities
they
have
and
what
rights
and
responsibilities
their
neighbors
have.
But.
AD
She
does
not
maintain
code
under
under
the
coaches
and
now
she's,
not
legal.
If
you
go
out
there,
she
has
the
same
restrictions.
I
do.
If
you
look
at
her
property,
she
doesn't
maintain
her
property
to
code.
If
you
give
her
an
even
more
open
code
it
that
property
is
going
to
do
nothing
but
get
worse,
my
property
value
and
everybody
property
value
around.
It
is
going
to
get
worse
and
I.
Don't
want
to
lose
money.
AD
AD
I'm
glad
you
had
the
money
to
do
or
you
sold
everything
else
and
kept
that
that
little
portion
I
guess,
is
what
it
really
was.
That's
that's
great.
No
problem.
You
know
I,
agree,
I,
understand
that
smart
move,
but
that's
not
what
we're
talking
about
now
we're
talking
about
changing
a
changing,
a
designation
from
a
residential
to
an
agricultural,
completely
different.
T
Commissioners,
I
just
have
one
one
quick
comment:
Mr
Box,
you
said
at
the
beginning
and
I
appreciate
you
right.
We
tell
people,
then
you
should
have
bought
it.
If
you
want
to
control
what
was
there?
Arguably
that's
a
bit
of
a
timing
issue
though
she
didn't
buy
it
back
when
it
was
surrounded
by
agriculture.
She
waited
until
it
was
bought
by
a
housing
developer,
who
turned
it
into
housing,
lots
and
it
was
Zone
residential
and
she
bought
three
residential
lots.
T
So
we're
we're
a
little
bit
in
the
middle
I,
absolutely
appreciate
what
she's
trying
to
do,
but
there's
got
to
be
a
balance
here
and
I.
Don't
know
if
the
balance
is
AG
with
some
restrictions,
a
lot
more
restrictions
than
what
I
see
here
or
if
the
solution
is
no,
it
needs
to
be
residential
because
she,
when
she
bought
it,
she
bought
three
residential
lots.
V
So
much
like
the
gentleman
she
was
misled
by
the
developer.
She
raised
the
issue
early
on
I
guess
in
a
desire
to
save
money
on
surveying
costs
so
that
he
wouldn't
have
to
come
up
with
a
new
legal
description
and
carve
those
out.
He
assured
her.
It's
not
a
big
deal
because
here's
the
covenants,
you're,
not
a
part
of
the
neighborhood,
so
here's
what
you're
going
to
buy
so
she
bought,
unfortunately,
three
lots.
She
thought
she
was
protected
because
she's
not
subject
to
the
Covenants.
Well,
it
ended
up
being
inaccurate.
V
V
So
we
understand
the
frustrations
of
the
individual
that
spoke
frankly.
That's
why
she's,
where
she
is
had,
he
spent
a
little
bit
extra
money
to
re-survey
it
to
carve
out
the
legal
description
that
now
comprises
her
property.
She
would
have
just
still
been
a
a
and
PUD
1575
would
have
gone
around
it.
He
didn't
want
to
do
that
because
he
assured
her
heard
the
covenants
and
shows
you're,
not
part
of
it
you're
good.
Here
we
are.
T
Commissioner,
Clary
even
though
sounds
like
the
neighbors,
maybe
they're
saying
they
can't
compromise
I
think
they
can
I
think
there's
a
middle
ground
here.
Do
you
think
you
could,
or
we
could
suggest
the
right
details
of
tees
here,
like
he's
saying,
put
enough
restrictions
on
here
that
we're
going
to
settle
it
for
him.
D
I
think
so
I
mean
it
sounds
to
me.
Like
you
know
again,
there
were
some
legal
matters
that
were
came
before
us
and
again
we
don't
concern
ourselves
with
those
and
those
weren't
gone
about
in
the
appropriate
way.
That's
that's
out
of
our
hands
right
now,
depending
you
know,
if
the
covenants
require
Mr
Fife
mentioned
the
chain
link
fencing
down
the
side,
but
ornamental
metal
fencing
across
the
front.
D
That's
part
of
the
Covenant,
that's
part
of
the
Covenant
sounds
like
she's
excluded
from
the
Covenant,
and
that's
that's
one
of
those
details
that
got
missed.
So
that's
unfortunate
for
for
the
owner.
What.
T
V
T
Production
crops,
the
last
piece
that
seems
we
need
is
this
landscape
buffer.
Just
doesn't
seem
clear
enough
to
me,
but
I
refer
to
you
guys,
but
it
seems
like
it
needs
to
be
if
I
mean
making
sure
it's
not
completely
unruly
and
and
there's
some
level
of
maintaining
it,
some
something
I,
don't
know
I'll
leave
that
to
you
guys,
but
this.
B
T
A
V
Think
what
commissioner
Claire
was
suggesting
to
be
planted
was
with
inside
the
inside.
The
fence
was
my
belief,
that's
correct.
We
can
agree
that
there
will
be
three
trees
planted
along
the
landscape
buffer,
okay
I
mean.
If
you
look
at
the
image,
perhaps
it'll
be
the
only
trees
that
exist.
I
mean
this.
Was
a
wheat
field
turned
into
a
single
family
neighborhood,
so
we'll
plant
Three
Trees
along
that
street
Frontage
outside
of
the
fence
that
she
had
built.
D
D
Of
the
erosion,
so
if
part
of
the
landscape
is
that
it's
going
to
be
soldered
or
landscaped
too,
you
know
the
road
or
the
right
way.
I,
don't
know
if
there's
platted
right
away
or
not,
but
that
might
be
something
to
consider
so
trees
and
grass
yeah
I
mean
just
you,
I
would
say,
vegetative
cover.
I
A
I
must
admit:
I
I,
don't
feel
particularly
good.
I'm
gonna
agree
to
all
the
changes.
I
just
don't
feel
good
about
it.
How
many
times
have
we
been
sat
at
this
horseshoe
and
watched?
Listen
to
people
beg
to
live
next
to
AAA
beg
to
have
less
intensity.
We
have
literally,
are
about
to
grant
that
to
someone
and
we
are
imposing
some
pretty
incredible
restrictions
on
them
to
have
a
less
intense
use
than
they
already
have
right
now.
A
V
D
For
a
motion,
okay
I
will
move
to
recommend
approval
of
City
Council
on
Spud
1505,
subject
to
technical
evaluation,
one
and
the
addition
of
technical
evaluation.
2
that
says
no
production,
crops,
livestock
or
structures
shall
occur
on
parcel.
V
B
A
W
Fallon
Brooks
733
Northwest
22nd,
representing
applicant
this
one's
pretty
straightforward.
It's
mostly
just
a
change
to
some
setbacks.
I
did
have
a
little
bit
of
a
concern.
I
guess
that
I
want
to
make
sure
is
alleviated
before
we
finish
this
I
guess,
but
to
the
the
property.
The
legal
description
and
the
deed
gives
a
westernmost
boundary
of
the
property
as
being
the
east.
A
O
O
B
O
W
W
B
W
B
I
N
Well,
we
mentioned
from
the
property
line,
but
I
mean
we've
been:
we've
been
allowing
reduced
setbacks,
especially
on
these
north-style
streets.
So
I
guess
one
solution,
I,
don't
when
we
would
be
that
normally
we
would
say
the
garage.
Any
garages
would
have
to
be
at
least
18
feet,
but
otherwise
I
think
setting
a
shallower
setback
just
to
ensure
that
you're
okay
I
mean
we've
given
five
feet
to
folks.
You
know
for
buildings
along
North
South
Streets
in
the
core.
N
If
you
all
are
okay
with
that
and
want
to
play
it
safe.
It's
just
we've
always
been
concerned
about
garages
being
too
close
to
the
streets
to
prevent
people
from
parking
or
the
sidewalks
are
right
of
way,
they're
not
proposing
that
here
they're
proposing
parking
in
the
middle.
So
we
didn't
identify
that
as
a
as
a
te
for
the
setback,
but
I
mean
if
you
want
to
play
it
safe.
What.
A
W
More
where's
the
property
line,
it
just
says
it's
in
the
east
side
of
Douglas,
literally
that's
what
the
deed
says.
So,
if
the
is
it
the
front
of
the
curb,
is
it
the
back
of
the
curb?
Is
it
the
edge
of
the
gutter?
Is
it
five
feet
from
that?
It's
there's
no
real
way
to
determine
where
the
property
line
is
I'm.
W
Property,
it
does
it's
very
weird,
and
so
that's
why,
before
before
this
gets
passed,
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that,
because
we
can't
identify
exactly
where
that
is,
you
know,
are
we
going
to
go
with
the
spirit
of
what
we're
trying
to
do
here
or
do
we
want
to
say
that
the
setback
has
is
so
fun
in
Oklahoma?
If
you're
on.
A
Sounds
like
so
would
it
be
a
reasonable
solution
to
say
that
the
setback
will
be
from
the
property
line
or
from
Douglas?
Whichever
is
further.
A
From
the
property
line
or
from
Douglas,
whichever
is
further
from
this,
whichever
would
place
the
home
further
or
the
the
residence
furthest
from
the
street.
A
G
R
G
A
I
mean
after
talking
to
council,
it
sounds
like
that's
going
to
be
a
private
agreement
like
you're,
going
to
have
to
reach
resolution
on
where
how
to
define
that
it
sounds
like
if
we
went
with
the
with
the
right
of
way
it
doesn't
it
mean
it
we,
we
could
go
with
that
proposed
solution.
So
you
know
my
initial
suggestion,
based
on
on
what
commissioner
privet
is
saying.
So
do
you
want
to
add
that
language.
A
The
property,
if
the
property
line
cannot
be
determined,
then
the
setback
will
be
based
on
the
distance
from
the
right-of-way.
I
A
So,
based
on
this
from
the
center
line,
okay,
so
then
it
would
be
a
te
that
reads
if
we
cannot,
if,
if
the
property
line
cannot
be
determined,
the
setback
will
be
based
will
be
determined
based
on
the
distance
from
the
center
line
of
Douglas
Avenue.
W
A
W
N
Look
like
I'm
good
with
that
I
just
I
just
want
just
one
quick
thing
on
our
on
this
map
on
our
case
map.
Normally
it's
not
a
science,
but
where
you
see
the
zoning
line
is
what
we
consider
to
be
private
property,
and
you
can
see
that
the
buildings
are
right
up
against
there.
So
if
you
are
comfortable
with
a
shallower
setback
for
structures,
it
would
probably
be
beneficial
to
the
applicant
to
at
least
reduce
that
proposed
12.83
to
something
less.
W
A
W
A
A
We're
now
in
line
for
item
the
motion,
passes
we're
now
in
line
for
item
number.
G
W
Here
representing
the
applicant
I
have
nothing
to
say
about
this
one:
just
it's
there's
an
existing
building
there
and
it
currently
doesn't
meet
the
base
zoning
after
the
lot
split,
so
we're
just
trying
to
make
sure
that
that
happens,
and
then
we
can
we've
added
a
live,
work,
use
and
a
multi-family
or
well
duplex
option
in
case
he
tears
it
down.
So
that's
it
I.
O
It's
very
similar
to
the
the
last
one.
Although
I
was
I,
did
go
by
the
site
and
notice.
There
is
a
it
there's.
A
home
under
construction
on
the
site.
Right
is,
am
I.
Oh.
O
O
O
Yeah
and
I
wanted
to
have
the
chance
to
to
get
a
little
more
info
on
this
from
you,
but
we
haven't
had
a
chance
to
connect,
so
I
didn't
have
any
immediate
concerns.
I
don't
know
if
any
other
Commissioners
do
I
had
one
question
that
I
had
noted
here:
architecture
future
development
to
meet
requirements
of
adjacent
governing
Design
District,
where
applicable
as
amended.
O
W
B
O
W
Lives
down
the
street,
he
does
a
lot
of
development
in
the
Metro
Park
area,
and
so
mostly
it's
storage
for
tools
and
things
like
that
and
then
in
the
long
run
the
idea
is
to
build
a
duplex
there,
but
that's
years
down
the
road.
So
that's
why
we
did
that
in
the
Zoning
for
future
development.
Okay,.
W
And
that's
what
we
tried
to
prevent
there
just
requiring
a
certain
amount
of
you,
know
masonry
and
siding,
and
things
like
that.
Instead
of
a
metal
shop,
building.
W
No
So,
currently
it's
like
a
little
shop
building
that
was
behind
the
house
and
then
somebody
split
it
off,
sold
it
and
he
it's.
It
doesn't
meet
the
setbacks
currently
of
the
baystonian
district,
and
so
that's
what
the
Spud
was
for
and
also
to
add
the
use
of
live
work.
If
he
wants
to
rent
it
to
someone,
that's
going
to
use
it
as
a
storage
for
something
like
you
know,
tools
which
is
what
he's
using
it.
W
I
It's
R3
even
with
a
live
work,
I'm
not
sure
you're
going
to
be
allowed
to
make
that
kind
of
use
of
it.
Would
it
still
be
I,
don't
think
it's
still
non-conforming
if
you
rezone
it
so
I,
you
better
make
sure
that
you
can
make
the
use
you
want
to
make
of
it.
Now,
with
the
zoning
you're
asking
for.
B
I
K
N
N
That
Sarah
yeah
and
then
they
would
it
would
become
I
guess
I,
don't
want
to
say
words
like
legal
non-conforming
in
a
public
forum
in
case,
that's
not
correct,
but
they
wouldn't
be
able
to
expand
it,
and
if
it
were
demolished
or
destroyed
by
more
than
60,
they
wouldn't
be
able
to
build
back
what
they
had.
They'd
have
to
comply
with
the
existing
zoning,
which
would
then
be
the
Spud.
W
A
Okay,
we
made
it
I
believe
there
are
no
additional
items
we're
now
in
line
for
communications
and
reports
and
Planning
Commission
committees,
no
reports,
committees,
Planning
Commission
members,
commissioner.
A
For
me,
commissioner
powers,
commissioner
Privet
commissioner
Hinkle.
B
O
Govine,
nothing
other
than
I
wanted
to
make
one
quick
note
on
the
I
know:
we
have
our
Panhandle
study
session
coming
up
and
having
dealt
with
one
of
those
in
the
past.
One
of
the
issues
that
comes
up
is
and
Klaus
is
saying
developers
don't
like
this
either
kind
of
true,
but
what
they
do
like
is
the
even
if
they're
going
to
rent
it,
they
like
the
ability
to
know
they
can
sell
it
with
the
fee,
simple
title,
and
so
hopefully
that
will
feature
in
the
conversation
is
like.
O
O
A
Chernobyl
commercial
Forge
I
will
say
that
for
those
who
have
not
heard
my
wife
and
I
are
expecting
a
baby
on
April
10th
and
we
are
very
excited
about
it,
but
that
will
mean
that
I
will
not
be
at
the
next
Planning
Commission
meeting
and
so
you'll
be
in
very
good
hands
in
with
commissioner
Claire,
so
I
I'm,
assuming
that
I'll
be
able
to
come
to
the
next
to
the
to
the
second
meeting
in
April,
but
not
promising
to
do
so,
but
just
I
will
miss
you.
A
F
Just
wanted
to
mention
the
upcoming
study
sessions
like
was
mentioned,
we'll
be
covering
flag
lots
and
so
much
more
April,
27th
and
I'll
send
us
out
on
an
email,
but
that's
the
first
one
and
it's
coming
soon.
April
27th
we'll
send
out
an
email
and
you
can
respond
if
that
doesn't
work
for
you
all.
F
We
haven't
talked
about
it
enough
yeah
tomorrow
morning
is
the
training
session
looking
forward
to
seeing
as
many
of
you
as
possible
there,
stakeholder
advisory
team
for
the
code
update
is
next
week
and
by
the
way
the
new
code
does
does
work
into
some
some
clarifications
of
some
of
the
things
that
we
talked
about
today,
for
example
the
setback
issue
and
whether
the
zoning
or
the
platting
trumps,
so
we're
I've
been
furiously
taking
notes.
F
So
every
you
know
the
things
that
we
talk
about
on
a
day-to-day
basis
were
kind
of
stress
testing,
the
new
code.
For
as
we
go
to
the
extent
we
get
it.
But
so
that's
we're
excited
to
take
another
step
forward
next
week
and
start
getting
more
information
out.
So
that's
good.
A
Right
we'll
we'll
be
here
for
another
hour,
commissioner
Hinkle
citizen,
Municipal
counselor's
office
citizens
to
be
heard
sounds
like
none
other
business,
seeing
no
further
business.
We
are
now
adjourned.