►
From YouTube: Board of Adjustment - May 7, 2020
Description
The regular meeting, via video conference, of the Oklahoma City Board of Adjustment for May 7, 2020.
A
A
You
please
keep
your
phones
on
mute
and
your
computers
on
mute
until
you're
actually
called
upon
and
let's
sort
of
board
and
inverter
board.
Members
can
speak
at
any
time
and
try
to
limit
your
comments
to
time.
First,
three
minutes
to
speak
on
a
matter
and
second,
we
can
only
hear
one
person
at
a
time.
So
keep
that
in
mind
so
that
we
have
a
clear
record
of
this
conference
today.
The
first
item
on
the
agenda
is
through
simple
minutes
for
the
April
16
2020
meeting.
We
have
a
motion
or
any
changes.
C
A
D
F
C
A
And
those
are
approved,
we
have
another
partial
continuance
request,
but
we'll
discuss
that
whenever
that
comes
up
on
the
agenda
next
item
on
the
agenda
is
the
consent
docket
and
we
have
there
lactams
items
on
the
consent
docket.
So
the
next
item
is
the
items
will
or
are
the
items
will
firing
a
separate
vote?
Do
we
call
the
first
item
please
and.
F
G
If
you
look
at
the
lots
and
we've
righted
a
topographic
survey,
but
lots
are
rather
wide
and
shallow
with
steep
slopes
on
the
back
down
to
South
East
74th
Street
three
to
one
slope,
so
they
really
don't
have
a
backyard
and
by
moving
the
homes
forward
ten
feet
we
were
able
to.
Actually
you
know,
build
a
home,
that's
similar
in
size
to
the
ones
in
the
neighborhood.
Now
we've
there
are
a
lot
of
homes
in
this
neighborhood
that
have
30
by
40,
accessory
buildings
to
house,
RVs
and
so
forth
and
user
shops.
G
A
G
A
G
C
A
F
Item
two
is
case:
14
746,
request
of
Allen
and
Angela
Smith
for
a
variance
of
the
non-conforming
use
regulations
and
the
limit
of
one
structure
per
lot
in
the
HP
historic
preservation
district
located
at
509
Northwest,
17th
Street.
This
is
the
application.
That's
chairman
mentioned
at
the
beginning
of
the
meeting
that
at
the
HP
Commission,
the
Commission
recommended
approval
of
the
continuation
of
the
duplex,
but
continued
discussion
on
the
garage
apartment
until
believe.
A
Right
yeah
a
bit
of
a
question
about
whether
we
needed
to
continue
that
Horseman.
If
it's
actually
not
in
front
of
us
but
I,
think
just
to
be
clear,
we
probably
should
go
ahead
and
continue
it.
So
basically,
this
application
is
requesting
two
variances.
One
related
a
non-conforming
use,
two
related
to
the
garage
apartment
that
the
applicants
requesting
and
we
just
need
to
continue
the
garage
apartment
request
for
a
variance.
So
if
we
have
a
motion
for
that,
we
can
hear
that
now.
A
H
A
A
And
that
item
is
continued
or
that
request
for
variances
continued
and
now
we'll
begin.
The
presentation
on
the
other
variance
request.
I
will
note
if
there's
anyone
on
the
line
that
was
intending
to
protest,
the
garage
apartment
portion
of
that
very
blast.
You
can
certainly
stick
around
and
listen
I
understand
that
they
were
going
to
be
a
few
protests
on
that
portion.
But
since
that's
just
been
continued,
we
don't
need
to
hear
protests
on
that
variance
and
with
that
we'll
begin,
the
presentation
portion
from
the
applicant
on
the
non-conforming
use
request
for
variance.
G
Thank
you,
I'm
Alan
Smith.
This
is
my
wife
Angela.
First
of
all,
we'd
like
to
thank
the
Historical
Preservation
Committee
for
their
support
of
the
application.
We
are
asking
the
the
house.
The
structure
was
built
as
a
duplex
back
in
1925
and
at
some
point
in
time
it
was
converted
to
a
single
family
property.
Basically
by
taking
out
three
walls
or
three
small
small
small
doors,
two
of
them
upstairs
one
of
them
is
actually
downstairs.
There
wasn't
anything
else
as
far
as
as
any
you
know,
remodel
on
that
to
change
it
into
a
single-family
home.
G
They
just
opened
up
the
excellent
insights
and
all
we're
asking
prior
to
purchasing
the
property.
I
went
to
to
you
know
to
the
you
know,
the
zoning
office
and
I
asked
them.
If
it
was
a
duplex
could
be
converted
back
to
a
duplex.
Any
of
that-
and
they
actually
told
me
yes
until
has
the
two
addresses
509
and
511,
and
that
did
it.
You
know
it
could
be
changed
back
to
a
duplex.
We
at
that
time,
and
that's
that's
actually,
my
fault
I
didn't
go
through
all
the
the
you
know.
A
A
Okay,
seeing
none
if
there's
anyone
on
the
line
that
wanted
to
protest
again,
not
the
garage
apartment
portion,
but
the
non-conforming
use
portion
of
this
application.
I
don't
have
anyone
signed
up
for
that
particular
one,
but
I
I
know
we
have
some
protest
letters
so
I'll
open
that
up
now
for
any
protests.
E
A
E
Next
door
to
this
property
for
the
last
30
years
and
have
had
friends
and
neighbors
that
have
lived
in
the
adjacent
houses
over
the
last
34
years
and
and
one
of
our
neighbors
grandparents
lived
in
the
house
next
door
to
us
in
the
40s
and
back
to
that
day,
that
property
had
been.
It
was
a
single-family
dwelling,
so
we
know
at
least
back
almost
eighty
years
ago
the
better
house
was
operating
as
a
single-family
house,
and
we
just
feel
like
most
of
the
neighbors
have
signed
an
agreement.
They
would
like
to
stay
a
single-family
home.
I
Okay
go
ahead,
sir
I
just
want
to
start
by
saying:
I
live
at
504
North
West,
18th,
Street,
Oklahoma
City,
immediately
behind
in
catty-corner
to
the
proposed
property.
My
I
killed.
Many
of
my
neighbor's
sentiments
at
the
conversion
of
the
property
back
to
a
duplex
will
increase
traffic
congestion
and
harmed
the
character
of
the
street
as
most
of
the
homes
are
still
family
dwellings.
I
That
also
like
to
add
that
this
conversion
will
ultimately
result
in
more
additional
street
parking
well
to
make
it
even
more
difficult
for
city
services
like
garbage
trucks,
to
travel
the
road
and
could
impede
emergency
response
vehicles
that
are
required
to
travel
down
a
strip,
a
vehicle
line
street.
In
addition
to
the
voice
concerns,
the
advocates
are
unable
to
show
a
hardship
that
justifies
a
variance
of
non-conforming
use.
I
In
fact,
the
primary
reason
to
convert
the
premises
to
a
duplex
seems
to
be
for
a
commercial
purpose
and
not
the
restoration
of
the
property
to
historic
beginnings.
This
hardship,
if
any,
is
self-created.
The
property
has
been
a
single-family
dwelling
for
at
least
the
past.
30
years,
according
to
the
applicants,
application
no
owner
occupying
the
premises
during
this
time
identified
a
hardship.
Indeed,
the
character
and
nature
of
the
neighborhood
has
been
shifting
in
the
opposite
direction,
from
what
the
applicants
proposed.
Duplexes
are
being
converted
into
single-family
dwellings,
not
the
other
way
around.
I
If
the
applicants
desire
to
live
in
a
duplex
at
least
the
adjoining
unit,
I
could
have
purchased
the
duplex
and
mr.
barking
done
so,
but
they
chose
to
purchase
a
single-family
dwelling,
and
thus
any
hardship
complained
of
today
is
self-created.
I
know
up
on
the
case.
Law
plainly
prohibits
a
variance
from
the
hardship
is
created
by
the
elders
and
the
premises,
and
I
won't
bore
everybody
with
the
resuscitation
of
control
and
case
law.
I
Although
I
oppose
this
variance
today,
I
want
to
make
it
clear
that
the
passionate
statements
made
today
are
because
so
many
people
in
the
neighborhood
care
about
it
and
want
nothing
more
than
the
best
for
it
and
I,
like
everyone
else,
look
forward
to
walking
our
new
neighbors
and
getting
to
know
them
better.
Thank
you
for
the
time.
A
I
A
And
just
for
the
going
forward,
my
understanding
is
all
these
meetings
will
be
on
YouTube
and
so
they'll
be
easy
to
locate
the
record
and
videos
of
all
the
city
meetings
going
forward.
My
my
understanding
at
HP
Commission
their
their
primary
issue
was.
This
is
historically
a
duplex,
then
they're,
trying
to
return
it
to
that
historical
character
and
the
neighborhood
kind
of
respond
saying
we're
trying
to
get
away
from
that
and
they've
gone
through
great
pains
to
get
away
from
that,
but
an
HP
Commission.
That
was
the
primary
kind
of
argument.
A
I
Understand
that
they
check
Commission's
primary
goal
is
to
restore
things
to
their
original
character,
but
we've
seen
many
things
in
both
mr.
Park
and
heritage
Hills,
which
are
not
their
historical
character
to
accommodate
how
things
have
changed
in
the
past
30
years,
so
see
addition
of
carriage
houses
or
garages
that
never
used
to
be
there,
because
people
now
use
vehicles
want
to
keep
them
covered
in
off
the
street.
I
I
think
that
that
shift
is
indicative,
that
you
know
we
are
go
in
a
different
direction
where
these
are
going
to
all
be
single-family
dwellings
and
as
I
mentioned,
even
though
the
goal
of
the
Historical
Preservation
Commission
is
to
restore
everything
to
the
original
character.
State
statute
is
pretty
clear
on
what
a
variance
to
a
zoning
code
is
authorized
and
I
just
can't
find
that
a
hardship
is
shown
here
that
would
justify
returning
this
pack
to
a
duplex.
A
E
Dr.
duplex
HP
Commission
mainly
concerns
I'll,
take
sugar
finish
these
homes
exterior
defense
at
home,
without
changes
all
clear,
duplex
or
single-family.
It's
there's
no
double
doors
going
in
there's
no
changes.
That's
extruder
they'll
be
made
between
the
two
so
HP
problem
with
single-family
because
they
don't
really
address
and.
A
A
G
And
I
absolutely
understand
that,
and
I
can
tell
you
that
the
hardship
absolutely
exists.
I
believe
we
put
that
into
our
documentation
start
with
we
originally
prior
to
purchasing
the
property.
I
purchased
it
specifically
on
the
the
you
know.
These
terms,
I'm
assurance
from
the
you
know
the
zoning
office
that
it
could
be
turned
back
into
a
duplex
that
there
was
two
addresses.
G
To
start
with,
for
us,
you
know
just
with
the
to
the
house
and
and
absolutely
I
understand,
you
know
we,
whoever
we
end
up,
acts
actually
renting
to
they're
gonna,
be
our
neighbors
they're
going
to
be
living
right
next
door.
To
me,
we
are
going
to
be
extremely
diligent
in
who
we
choose
to
have
actually
sharing
a
structure
with
us,
so
that
and
and
I
I
would
not
have
purchased
the
property.
If
I
wasn't
sure
that
I
would
be
able
to
turn
it
to
get.
G
I
I
mean
I
Drive
by
there
every
single
day
and
there's
always
we
don't
want
parking
on
the
street
either
and
our
plan
is
to
ensure
that
the
reason
that
we,
that
we
change
the
you
know
the
date
for
the
you
know,
garage
department
is
because
we
want
our.
You
know
the
architect
to
come
up
with
some
better
plans
for
a
smaller
structure
and
parking
as
well
back
there
to
ensure
that
all
cars
will
be
able
to
park
in
the
backyard.
G
But,
as
I
said,
there's
I
mean
every
day
I
Drive
over
there
there's
seven
or
eight
cars
parked
in
the
street
every
single
day
and
I,
don't
like
that
either
and
so
I'm
just
kind
of
shocked
and
I
know
some
of
the
people
that
have
actually
signed
the
petition
or
some
of
the
street,
the
people
in
their
houses,
their
active
parking
on
the
street,
so
I
just
I
mean
that
kind
of
bothers
me
I
guess
so
anyway.
That's
that's.
G
A
J
F
J
B
B
G
E
G
Absolutely
long
term
renter,
if
we
we
want
somebody
mean
we,
we
want
somebody,
that's
going
to
be
our
best
friends.
Neighbors,
like
I,
said
they're
gonna,
be
this.
Is
our
house
forever?
We
we
love
the
area,
we
absolutely
the
reason
we
purchased
it.
We
had
actually
looked
at
this
house
for
several
months
and
we
started
thinking
about
the
fact.
How
can
we
afford
to
live
there?
Okay,
we
love
the
area,
and
so
we
started
thinking
about
the
fact
that
if
we
could
actually
rent
part
of
this,
you
know
one
side
out.
E
G
G
G
A
A
A
Okay,
sorry,
to
put
you
on
the
spot
here
with
a
legal
analysis,
but
what
are
the
implications
of
a
temporal
limit
on
variants
like
this?
Just
the
non-conforming
use
I,
don't
know
that
I've
done
anything
with
a
temporal
limit
on
something
like
that,
because
it
has
it.
It
has
its
own
temporal
limitations
for
when
it
even
applies.
So
do
you
know
off
the
top
your
head.
K
Well,
just
thinking
through
it,
there
would
probably
be
some
issues
with
enforcement.
I,
don't
know
how
we'd
be
able
to
track
whether
or
not
two
separate
families
we're
living
on
the
premises.
I
don't
know
if
JJ
might
have
some
ideas
as
to
that,
but
if
the
board
were
to
put
a
five
year
limitation
on
the
use
as
a
duplex
I,
don't
know
that
you
would
be
able
to
verify
at
the
end
of
the
five
years
whether
or
not
I
was
still
being
used
in
that
manner.
I.
B
A
One
issue
with
enforcement:
please
make
sure
I'm
unmuted
here.
One
issue
with
enforcement
is
if
any
area
of
Oklahoma
City
has
neighbors
that
are
paying
attention.
I
think
it's
probably
this
area,
and
so
you
know
if
there
was
something
it
could
be
kind
of
self-enforcing
after
a
certain
period
of
time
and.
C
A
Saying
that
that's
what
we
would
want
to
do
or
anything,
but
just
thinking
through
the
options
that
came
to
mind
ISM
may
be
a
potential
solution
is
to
have
this
temporal
variance
granted
for
a
period
of
years,
and
if
there
are
no
issues
during
that
period
of
time,
then
it
can
be
continued
for
another
period
of
time
or
indefinitely,
and
if
there
are
issues
of
computer
s
reassessed
at
that
time.
Okay,.
B
C
A
L
J
G
G
A
Yeah
I
mean
I
will
say
that
the
variance
case
and
I
think
the
protest
since
have
kind
of
made
this
clear,
but
the
variance
is
an
exception
to
the
general
rule
that
you're
not
allowed
to
do
this,
and
so
to
overcome
that
you,
it's
a
pretty
high
high
bar
to
overcome
that
that
said,
I
do
agree
with
the
remarks
that
were
made
about
parking
from
the
applicants.
I
mean
my
analysis
kind
of
applying
some
of
the
analysis
analysis
that
we
use
in
some
of
the
home
sharing
applications.
A
If
you
had
teenagers
in
the
home,
there
would
be.
You
know
two
extra
cars
there
that
were
a
driving
age.
If
you
you
know,
if
it
were
already
a
you
know,
however,
many
rooms
are
in
that
area.
I
mean
I
think
that
we
could
say
that
there
would
be
that
much
extra
parking.
So
just
the
fact
that
you
would
want
to
split
this
up
and
have
new
people.
There
doesn't
really
to
me,
add
parking.
A
A
How
can
we
afford
to
live
in
this
neighborhood?
Well,
bringing
in
another
you
know
thousand
dollars
1200
hours,
whatever
it's
gonna
be
per
month
is
one
way
we
could
possibly
do
that,
and
so
there
are
arguments
on
all
sides
of
this.
It's
a
difficult
issue,
but
those
are
kind
of
my
thoughts
right
now
board
member
well
at
first,
you
can
address
those
than
board
members
have
any
other
questions
or
comments
they
can
chime
in
as
well.
A
B
B
A
K
Is
correct
so,
regardless,
whether
or
not
it's
a
duplex
or
they're,
whatever
structures
might
be
on
the
premises,
they
would
still
need
to
get
because
it's
in
a
historic
preservation
district,
they
would
started
to
get
a
special
exception,
and
that
would
be
a
separate
application
that
that
would
first
go
to
the
Historic
Preservation
Commission.
Before
coming
to
the
board.
A
B
A
A
H
A
A
A
E
H
D
A
L
Yes,
we're
asking
for
a
variance.
The
city
came
back
based
upon
our
current
zoning,
I
believe
saying
that
we
required
roughly
30
plus
parking
spaces
for
our
restaurant
and
unfortunately,
in
that
particular
lot.
It
hasn't
been
properly
striped
in
probably
quite
a
few
years,
but
my
guess
would
be
your
your
roughly
10
to
12
parking
spaces,
including
88
compliant
parking
spaces,
and
so
we
were
asking
for
a
variance
on
that.
A
A
L
A
Okay-
and
this
is
a
pretty
large
variance,
one
thought
that
immediately
immediately
came
to
mind
for
me
was
whether
you
looked
into
the
alternatives
that
the
code
allows
so
bike,
racks
and
landscaping.
I
believe,
if
you
added
those,
you
could
reduce
your
parking
requirement.
So
have
you
added
those.
A
C
A
You,
where
I'm
going
here,
one
of
the
elements
that
we
have
to
meet
my
state
statute,
is
that
the
variance
that
we
grant
and
the
application
sets
forth,
that
the
variance
is
the
minimum
necessary
to
alleviate
your
hardship
and
so
for
these
situations.
We
generally
require
you
to
exhaust
all
other
alternatives
and
get
that
fix
down
to
the
smallest
amount
necessary
before
we
entertain
a
motion.
L
We
would
be
more
than
happy
to
put
the
bike
racks
and
as
well
as
landscaping,
we
would
have
to
look
at
some
some
ideas
on
how
we
could
accomplish
that,
as
there
is
no
real
greenery
along
the
face
of
the
building.
But
you
know,
planters
and
what-have-you
would
be
more
than
I'm
sure
the
owner
would
be
more
than
happy
to
consider
putting
those
in
okay.
A
Yeah
and
that's
my
that
was
my
only
thought:
I
currently
can't
support
it.
The
application
I'm
only
one
board
member
but
I-
can't
support
the
application
just
because
it's
a
huge
variance,
and
if
you
get
that
down
by
some
of
these
alternatives
like
bike,
racks
and
landscaping
or
whatever
else
you
can
think
of
or
even
widening
spaces
I
could
I
could
get
on
board
with
it
I
think,
but
as
it
stands
right
now,
I
think
the
variance
is
too
large
for
me
personally.
L
Well,
we'd
also
done
some
other
things
that
have
not
yet
been
submitted
to
the
city
to
bring
our
overall
occupancy
load
down,
which
would
also
in
turn
bring
the
amount
of
required
parking
spaces
down
as
well.
At
this
point
that
had
not
been
submitted
just
because
we
would
still
run
into
the
same
issue
of
needing
variance.
L
So
if
the
proper
protocol
and
procedure
is
for
us
to
implement
those
things,
resubmit
it
to
the
city
and
then
come
back
for
a
variance,
you
know,
we
could
certainly
do
that.
You
know
I
think.
Ideally,
within
this
particular
property,
we
could
probably
get
somewhere
in
the
neighborhood
depending
on
how
we
re
stripe
it
and
get
creative
with
the
the
overall
property.
A
Yeah
I
mean
I.
Think
personally
for
me.
If
you
could
get
that
number
up,
so
in
14
or
15,
and
then
through
these
alternatives
reduced
the
number-
that's
actually
required
so
that
instead
of
35,
maybe
it's
20,
then
your
variance
would
only
be
5
parking
spaces
and
I.
Think
you
get
a
lot
more
support
from
the
board
or
at
least
for
me
board
members.
Any
questions
or
comments.
A
Yeah-
and
this
is
he's
I-
think
sort
of
touching
on
that,
with
reducing
the
capacity
they're
talking
about
potentially
changing
that,
so
the
capacity
might
be
more
than
50,
which
would
change
your
calculus
and
then
additionally,
I
mean
I
a
lot
of
times.
The
the
bike
RAK
adjustment
doesn't
really
make
a
lot
of
sense
in
some
instances.
So,
for
example,
there
was
one
where
it
was
a
rehabilitation
center
or
something
and
they
added
bike
racks.
A
So
back
to
the
applicant
generally,
in
these
circumstances,
we'd
grant
a
continuance
instead
of
you
know,
denying
the
application
so
that
you
waste
the
money
we'd
grant
a
continuance
so
that
you
can
kind
of
make
these
adjustments
and
then
present
a
renewed
application
to
the
board.
Is
that
something
you
could
do.
L
We
could
turn
this
around
quite
quickly.
In
fact,
within
a
few
days,
we're
we're
you
know
really
trying
to
push
forward
with
the
project
and
I
think
the
owner
is
wanting
to
take
the
opportunity
right
now,
especially
considering
all
the
circumstances
with
kovin
to
try
to
you
know,
get
a
little
get
up
and
running
to
as
much
as
he
can
so.
I
could
have
a
revised
information
to
you
here
in
a
couple
days.
L
A
D
Sorry
to
interrupt
this
is
Mickey
with
the
City
Clerk's
office,
so
staff
we're
gonna
need
to
make.
Have
the
chair?
Not
the
chair.
Sorry,
the
Commission
revote
item
two,
the
second
motion
on
item
two
and
this
current
item,
because
so
when
you
open
the
vote,
when
they're
done
voting,
you
need
to
click
close
vote
and
then
you
need
to
pause
till
it
displace
and
then
click
Save
and
close.
Otherwise
we're
not
seeing
the
votes
on
the
screen
and
that's
a
requirement
for
the
public
for
the
virtual
meetings.