Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon everyone and welcome to the July 23rd meeting of the Oklahoma City Planning Commission. I'd like to call us to order and go over a few housekeeping items. Please silence or turn off your phones. If you've never been with us before, here's what you can expect. We'll begin with some simple administrative tasks such as minutes and continuances and then move on to cases that are on the consent docket that are straightforward and can be heard and approved as a group. After that, we move to cases to be heard individually. We'll hear them, discuss, and determine if a recommendation or a decision can be made, or if more time and a continuance is necessary. There are certain cases where this body makes the final decision, but for the majority of the applications we'll hear, we are a recommending body, and the item goes forward to city council, so we are not the final decision. For those, no matter what the decision, you'll have another opportunity to share your concerns again with those applications when it's heard at city council in six to eight weeks. There are certain items such as homeowner association CCRs and agreements between private entities that are not within our purview and are not factors in our discussion and consideration. And we ask for the sake of time that you refrain from using those as justification in your cases. If you're here to speak on an item and are not the applicant, please fill out one of the forms available outside and provide it to Elena or Jared down here below. When your item is heard, you'll be called to the podium. Please come up, give your name and address for the record, and you'll have up to five minutes to speak. If you're here to speak on an item with a large group of people, we encourage you to elect a representative to share your group's concerns. And some additional time for those speakers will be considered in those instances. Where several speakers are going to be heard on the same item, we just ask that you do your best to limit comments to those concerns that we haven't heard yet. We're just trying to limit extensive and repetitious comments. Please direct all your comments and questions to the commission, and if needed, we'll ask for staff or the applicant to respond. Lastly, we appreciate everyone's presence here today and the time that you took away from your other obligations. And we ask for your cooperation in upholding the decorum in the meeting and that you do your best to keep interactions respectful and calm. We ask that you don't speak from the gallery. Thank you for your attendance, attention, and assistance. With that, we'll move on to the next item, which is a receipt of the June 25th, 2026 Planning Commission meeting.

Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion to receive the minutes of June 25th, 2026.

A motion from Commissioner Noble to receive the minutes, seconded by Commissioner Meek. Please cast your votes.

I'm a yes, but it's not coming up. Thanks.

Minutes are received. Item 3 is continuous requests and uncontested requests.

We have several uncontested requests today, starting with item B32. Item B32 is C7761 being deferred to August 13th. Item 33 is CPA 2610 deferred to August 13th. Item 34 is PUD 2146 deferred to August 13th. Item 35 is SPUD 2147, deferred to August 13th. Item 36 is SPUD 1826, deferred to August 13th. Item 37, SPUD 1834, deferred to August 13th. Item 38, SPUD 1838, deferred to August 13th. Item 39, SPUD 1851, deferred to August 13th. Item 40, SPUD 1852, deferred to August 13th. And item 41, which is SPUD 1850, has been withdrawn.

I'll just confirm there's no one here to be heard on any of those items. Seeing none, we're just ready for a motion.

I'll make a motion to approve the uncontested continuance request as read.

A motion to approve the uncontested continuance request from Commissioner Noble. It's been seconded by Commissioner Harrison. Please cast your votes. And those uncontested requests are approved. New requests.

We have two new requests for continuance, which are related. They're items B24, which is CPA 2607, and item 25, PED 2140, and those are requested to defer to our next meeting August 13th.

Anyone here to be heard on either of those two items? Seeing none, I just need a motion.

Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion to approve the new continuous request as read.

I have a motion to approve the new request from Commissioner Noble, seconded by Commissioner Meek. Please cast your votes. and those new requests are approved. Item four, the consent docket.

Okay, again, we have several consent items today. Item number one is C7813, the final plat of Hidden Creek at Surry Hills, phase three. Item two is C7817, the final plat of Northwest 164th and North Council Road storage. Item three is VP12, which is an application to vacate a mutual access agreement in the final plat of Ledgestone Landing. Item four is C7818, the final plat of Ludgestone Landing, which is a replat. Item five is C7820, the final plat of Deer Brook, section seven. Item six is C7821, the final plat of Canyon Ridge Estate, section three. Item seven is C7825, the final plat of Country Colonnade, phase four, a replat of block five. Item eight is VP13, which is an application to vacate the final plat of Magnolia Harbor, phase two. Next page, item nine is PUD 26 SP01, which is a specific plan pursuant to PUD 2066, located at 14028 Quail Book Drive. Item 10 is PUD 2069 SP01, which is an application for a specific plan under PUD 2069, located at 9109 West Hefner Road. Item 11 is PUD 2094 SP01, which is a specific plan for the new Shields building at 14401 North Portland Avenue. And item 12 is PUD 2132 SP01, which is an application for a specific plan for parking at the Academy of Classical Christian Studies at 1328 East Hefner Road.

All right. I'll ask if anyone's here to be heard on any of those items. Seeing none, we just need a motion.

I'd like to make a motion to approve the consent docket.

We have a motion to approve the consent docket from Commissioner Noble. It's been seconded by Commissioner Milner. Please cast your votes. And the consent docket is approved. All right, now we move on to items to be heard individually and requiring a separate vote, and we start with item 13.

Item 13 is C7823, the final plat of Rother Farm Section 1, which is located north of West Hefner Road and east of John Kilpatrick Turnpike.

Good afternoon. Kendall Dillon with Kraft and Toll representing the applicant. Obviously, the first phase of Rother Farms, 60 acres, 235 lots. I think it obviously conforms to the PUD as well as the preliminary plat. There's two standard TEs that we're in agreement with. This application should probably be on the consent, but I think you might have received a letter from Piedmont schools asking us to plat less lots, which we're unable to do. I will mention that one of the reasons this plat is so large, or a little larger than normal, is we do have to go all the way from Hefner North to tie into that street connection to meet the access. And so with that, it creates a little bigger first phase. I think it'll be at least a year at a minimum before the first house is built, and then who knows for the absorption after that. So it's not like it still will happen tomorrow. But with that, it conforms, complies, and we'd ask for your approval.

This is Ward 1, so my ward. So I just want to ask for a little bit more detail. So you don't think construction will start for a year? Right. And then do you have any idea, like, the duration for basically all the lots in this plat to be developed?

Yeah, there's no way of really knowing that, depending on the absorption rate. But I would anticipate it'll be at least a year before it's ready for the first house. And then after that, I would expect it to be two to maybe three years. But we're talking multiple years. It could be four or five years before you'll see another face.

Basically, Piedmont School District would bear the full brunt of this development's capacity.

Yeah, so it'll be... I'd say three to five years probably before you're going to see the second phase of this one would be my guess.

All right. I appreciate that additional information. I don't have anything else.

Anything else from any other commissioners? You do agree with the two TEs? Yep. Two standard TEs we agree with. With that, I will recommend approval of C7823.

We have a motion to approve item C7823, subject to the TEs. That's been seconded by Commissioner Meek. Please cast your vote. And that item is approved. Thank you. Thank you.

Item 14. Item 14 is C7816, the final plot of Magnolia Harbor phase one, which is being revised, located south of Northwest 23rd and west of Overholzer Drive, and then also variants to section 5.2.8.B of the subdivision regulations.

definitely marks itself johnson and associates when he shared an avenue uh... this is a final plant of a currently platted piece of property at the street is becoming a private streets of the vacation that you saw on your consent docket uh... was the companion item to this plant that were in agreement with the tds I'd ask staff to maybe clarify, we're happy to continue, same as we did for the original plat, the emergency drive back out to the arterial, so I don't believe the variance would be needed because we're agreeing to the first part of that TE. With that, I'm happy to answer any questions. I'm getting a nod from Jared. so we don't believe the variance 5.2.8.b is necessary the te reads provide the emergency access otherwise a variance is needed we're providing the emergency it's already built yes it was built with the existing phase because that plot's recorded and was done.

I think Jared's gonna answer because we don't think, those two are not the two that are related.

Okay, in either case, we're happy to agree to the construction of the emergency access drive.

Hello, okay. I just wanted to clarify that the vacation was for Magnolia Harbor phase two. Is that right? Which was right next door? Mm-hmm. Okay. All right.

And this is phase one? We're good with no variants? Is that? I think we're great.

Jared Martin, Planning Department. So if you're doing the emergency access drive that then connects back out, then you wouldn't have to have the variance for the number of lots. So that is correct.

Thank you. With that, happy to answer any questions.

Okay. So you are providing the emergency access? Correct. Okay. So we can strike TE2. Okay. I don't have it. This is my ward. I don't have any other questions or concerns.

I don't know that we're striking it.

we're agreeing to the emergency access just need to delete the variant language right we just don't need to vote on the variance we can just go ahead and vote on the item subject to the teas that was right into the record and i just wanted to make one other note and that is that the fire department made a objection because they said that the entrance once wasn't divided but i believe the entrance is divided

One second. Jared, can you zoom in on that? I'm almost positive it's a boulevard entrance. It just, I don't think it showed a little island. It's a, yeah, we don't show the island on there, but it's a boulevard. That'll be in the construction plans that if they pull from Public Works would show it.

Anything else from any other commissioners? No? Ready for a motion? Yes. Then I will make a motion to approve case number C7816 with the four TEs.

A motion to approve the item subject to the technical evaluations as read into the record. It's been seconded by Commissioner Newman. Please cast your votes. And that item is approved. Item 15.

Item 15 is case C7822, the final plot of Mustang Park section three, which is located south of Southwest 44th Street and west of South Mustang Road, and also variants to section 3.6.2.B.6 of the subdivision regulations.

Good afternoon. Kendall Dillon, Kraft & Toll, representing the applicant. And this is the third phase of the Mustang Park Edition, 25 acres, I think, 103 lots. Three TEs. We're in agreement with TE 1 and 3, which are the standard TEs. TE number 2, as Sarah mentioned, we submitted this plat back in May, but then we discovered that the preliminary plat actually expires June the 10th. So we're a month late on that. This plat conforms to the previously approved preliminary plat, as well as the current zoning and the current subdivision regulations. So thereby, we would just ask that the variance for the extension of that preliminary plat be granted with it just being a month old. So with that, happy to answer any questions. Ask for your approval.

Mr. Meek, this is your ward, if you want to lead the discussion.

Yes, thank you, Chairman. Yeah, with the variance only being a month past and this being a phase three of a development, I don't see an issue with that. If any other commissioners have any questions, I'll start with the variance. Okay, we're ready for a motion. All right. Let me... I move to approve the variance 3.6.2.B.6 of the subdivision regulations.

I have a motion from Commissioner Meek to approve the variance, seconded by Commissioner Newman. Please cast your votes. That variance is approved.

All right. Now the item. Moving on, I'd like to move to approve C7822 with the TEs.

I have a motion to approve the item subject to the TEs. Seconded by Commissioner Privett. Please cast your votes. That item is approved. Thank you all. Thank you. Item 16.

Okay, item 16 is case C7819, the preliminary plan of the residences at Quail, which is located east of North May Avenue and south of Northwest 150th Street. And there's been a change in the variances that are needed. We do not need the first one listed on the agenda. So the only variance requested is to 5.4.2.E.5 of the subdivision regulations.

Good afternoon. Caitlin Turner, 525 Northwest 11th Street, here on behalf of the applicant. So yes, this is a preliminary plot for the residences at Quail. It's going to be a gated subdivision. We've got 66 townhome and a couple duplex lots. There are five technical evaluations. We agreed to one. Three is that variance that was referenced for? Naming and addressing off of private drives we agreed to four we agreed to five Te number two we would seek to strike so this te is drafted in a pretty vague manner we have that all requirements of the fire department are met alter design accordingly we are more than willing to work with staff and with fire to kind of define what it is that is saying we have a comment from fire that references that turnarounds are required on both sides of the emergency gates that are shown if you see here we've got two emergency gates going to the west. The issue with that comment and that TE is that if we're agreeing to that TE and it encompasses that, that office park to the west is not anything that we own. I'm not sure how I'd be able to get that property owner to change their existing Layout to add a turnaround on that side as well So we just want to see clarity on that make sure everything gets worked out before we submit our final plot Which of course will come back before you so I'd be happy to answer any questions And then again, we would be requesting that variance Hey Commissioner Noble, this is your ward Okay

I'm not sure your description on the fire access and the turnarounds and not providing the turnaround.

Well, on the side that we don't own.

Right, it would be on your property. They're talking about within the gated area you would have to provide a cul-de-sac or turnaround or a hammerhead tee or something like that.

So that was the clarity we were needing then, was whether they were referencing both sides of the gate on Olive Way and Opal, or if he's talking about the west side and the east side. As long as we have that clarification on the record, then we can go ahead and agree to that DE.

Anything else from any other commissioner? Okay with the original variance to change the private access drives to be named and addressed.

All right, you ready for a motion? Yep.

So first I'd like to make a motion to approve the variance to section 5.4.2.E.5. A motion from Commissioner Noble to approve the variance

It's been seconded by Commissioner Meek. Please cast your votes. That is approved. Another item.

I will make a motion to approve case number C7819 with the five TEs.

a motion from Commissioner Noble to approve the item subject to the technical evaluations as written. It's been seconded by Commissioner Newman. Please cast your votes.

Thank you.

And that item is approved. Item 17.

Okay, item 17 is a resolution of the City of Oklahoma City's Planning Commission appointing Lindsey Peaver as the representative of the Planning Commission to serve on all new active Oklahoma City Tax Increment Review Committees. Today is our new commissioner at large, Lindsey Peaver's first meeting, and she has graciously offered to take on a requested role as the TIF Committee Planning Commissioner

since she represents all wards. So that's what happened when you join this company. We start signing you up for stuff right away.

Congratulations. Sarah, how come we didn't do this at the beginning? Just curious.

I don't have an answer. Oh, I don't. Okay.

All right. Okay.

I don't know.

I'm sorry. It seems like it would be a good thing to do at the beginning.

Noted. Noted. Need a motion to approve the resolution.

And I think he was meaning introduce the new commissioner, not put her on the TIF committee. Oh, okay, we're just introducing? Yes. All right. But anyway. I'll make a motion to approve the resolution.

A motion from Commissioner Noble to approve the resolution. It's been seconded by Commissioner Milner. Please cast your votes. And it is approved. Thank you, Commissioner Peaver. Item 18.

Okay, item 18 is case number CE1160, an application to close a portion of the east-west right-of-way of Southwest 46th Street and a portion of the north-south right-of-way for South Barnes Avenue, which is generally west of Penn and Southwest 144th.

Good afternoon, Caitlin Turner, 525 Northwest 11th Street, on behalf of the applicant. So this item, as was stated, is to close that portion of Southwest 46th Street that goes into a drainage channel, and then the portion of the South Barnes Avenue right-of-way that just was never improved, never developed. We do have... Property owner on the west side that obviously is initiated and then a few property owners on the east side as well that have become a part of this for the Barnes Avenue closure Initially, we were only seeking to close half. We're now seeking to close the entire thing So no protest staff does recommend approval.

I'd be happy to answer any questions Mr. Milner, this is your ward if you want to lead the discussion

Sure. I personally don't have any questions. Do we have anybody signed up to speak on this item?

No, I do not.

Okay. Commissioners, any questions on this one?

No question, but just a comment. For those of you that are familiar with the area or familiar with Oklahoma City Parks, there is a pedestrian bridge that crosses the drainage channel that allows access to the park from those residences to the east. And you'll see in the following item that that access is still being maintained. So I just wanted to mention that.

And on that note, I did speak with the Oklahoma City Parks director yesterday to just confirm what improvements were going to be occurring on Young's with the Maps 4 project. So confirm that there's not going to be any issue and that bridge will remain there. It's included in our common area so people can still access it.

Great.

Yes.

Yes.

Okay, if there's no other discussion on this, then I will move to recommend CE-1160.

Motion to recommend the item to City Council for approval from Commissioner Milner. Seconded by Commissioner Privett, please cast your votes. That item is recommended for approval. Item 19.

Okay, item 19 is the companion plat. That's case number C7782, the preliminary plat of Barnes Park, which is located west of South Penn, generally, and south of Southwest 44th. And then with the closure, we'll also need to request a variance to table 5.1 in section 5.3.2.A of the subdivision regulations.

Caitlin Turner, 525 Northwest 11th Street, here on behalf of the applicant. So this is the companion... application you all just saw. This is for a plot for all single family lots. Staff does recommend approval subject to the TEs, which we agree to all of them. And then TE3, we would seek for that variance to the length of the cul-de-sac. It's a 250-foot variance so that it can go all the way over to the west. And I'll offer that turnaround. Happy to answer any questions.

Commissioner Milner?

Yep. Again, I don't have any questions. I think this is actually a nice little development here. And just to clarify, as Commissioner Clare said, they are keeping that pedestrian crossing available, so that's good. Do we have anybody signed up to speak on this?

I do not.

Commissioners, do we have any questions on this? I think we're ready for them. Particularly the variance, because there is a variance with this one.

Yeah, we'll take the variance first. Okay.

Okay, let's... Okay, I'm gonna move approval of the variance for section 5.3.2.a of subdivision regulations.

Motion from Commissioner Milner to approve the variance, seconded by Commissioner Meek. Please cast your votes. That variance is approved. Another item?

Okay. And if no other discussion on this item, I would move we recommend approval of C-7782. How many TEs do we have on this one with the four or five TEs? Five. With the five TEs listed, which I just want to clarify, you did agree to all those, correct? Yes. Okay. Okay. Thank you.

All right, so we have a motion to approve the item subject to the technical evaluations as written. It's been seconded by Commissioner Harrison. Please cast your votes.

Thank you.

And that is approved. Item 20.

Item 20 is KCE 1163, an application to close the remainder of the North-South Public Alley within Block 1 of the Northwest Heights Addition, which is between Northwest 65th and Northwest 67th Street, east of Western.

Kevin Turner, 525 Northwest 11th Street, here on behalf of the applicant. So this is a closing application to, again, close this alley here. We've got Ginia just to our north, and then the Old West Restaurant that is within this kind of commercial block. We did close the north portion of this alley. As you can see, a little carve-out up there by the apartments. That was done just last year, so now we're seeking to clean up the rest of the site to allow for future development and a revamp in this area. Staff does recommend approval. We don't have any TEs. I'd be happy to answer any questions.

All right. Commissioner Powers, this is your ward if you want to lead our discussion.

You know, the only thing I'm scratching my head over this deal is how we allowed them to just close half of it back when, but who cares now? Are there actually any utilities in the alleyway itself?

I don't believe so. We'll find out more once we send our petition for the vacation action to all of Oklahoma City and OG&E and all the electric companies. We'll get that confirmed. If there are, we would need to reserve an easement for them to make.

I'm aware of that. I guess it's just a question of if there are, why bother to close it? But I guess that's not my money we're spending. This is a really kind of odd situation because of the difference in grade between the Western Avenue frontage and the Ollie frontage and so on. I can't see any harm that's being done by the closing, so... There's not anybody signed up to speak, is there?

I do not.

Do any of the commissioners have any concerns or questions, comments, whatever? If not, then I will move approval of item number 20, CE 1163.

We have a motion from Commissioner Powers to recommend the item to City Council for approval. It's been seconded by Commissioner Peaver. Please cast your votes. And that item is recommended for approval. Item 21.

Item 21 is case number CE1164, an application to close an east-west portion of Northeast 53rd Street right-of-way, and then an east-west portion of the alley within Block 1 of City View Addition, and a north-south portion of North Walnut Avenue right-of-way. This is all located generally east of North Oklahoma Avenue and north of Northeast 52nd.

paula fever for the applicant five twenty two cold core drive city the applicant is they are a uh... not-for-profit uh... organization that shelters uh... homeless young people uh... excellent organization part of their uh... ongoing concern with with their property is is always to uh... secure the boundaries of their property and keep the young people safe. In this instance, in 2025, they were able to acquire some property at the northwest Corners essentially of their larger facility That this new property was planted as part of the City View addition in 1906 The northeastern quarter of that has never been developed. The rights-of-way have never been opened. They're platted streets and just on paper. What I think you'll see from this aerial photo is it's very rough ground, particularly the north-south run of Walnut there. It's a rough ditch through there. And even if it was opened, essentially it dead ends to the north and dead ends to the east. No likelihood of development here that would require that to be open. Happy to answer any questions you might have.

Okay. Commissioner Harrison, this is your ward. If you want to lead our discussion, I don't have anyone signed up to speak. No one signed up to speak.

Any other commissioners have any questions regarding this particular request?

Purely out of curiosity, what plans do they have? What use are they going to make of this property?

Well, they don't have anything firm at this point, but it does probably serve best as sort of a a warehouse storage facility just on the edge of their campus, and it also acts as a buffer to the numerous tiny homes they have in the northwest quarter of their larger campus.

So no plan to increase the size of the tiny home village?

Not to the west. Okay. It will continue on to the east.

Okay. Okay. Thank you.

Okay. Any further discussion? If not, I will move forward to recommend item 21CE-11644.

We have a motion to recommend approval of city council from Commissioner Harrison. It's been seconded by Commissioner Powers. Please cast your votes. And that item is recommended for approval. Thank you. Thank you. Item 22.

Item 22 is KCE 1165, an application to close, it's a north-south storm sewer easement located within block 34 of the East Britain Addition, so that's near northwest 87th Street.

Good afternoon. Caitlin Turner, 525 Northwest 11th Street. I'm here on behalf of the applicant. So there are structures that have been developed encroaching into this easement. There's the storm sewer easement, and then there's another one from 1952, I believe. So cleaning up the encroachment piece. Obviously, if there's any utilities within those, which again, a couple of them look pretty old. One was a temporary easement. I don't know if there's anything there specifically. But of course we'll have to address it with the vacation action and looking at the toposurvey It does look like there are some utilities that are north of the site not to our east and that rear But again as I stated well, we'll make sure and get that cleaned up Accordingly with the vacation action, so I would be happy to answer any questions that you all have Mr.

Powers Ward 2 again. I know I don't have anyone sign up speak I

Thank you. So since this is a storm sewer easement, do we not know whether there's actually a storm sewer in it or not?

I'm not totally sure. Because a storm sewer is more of, I mean, the city would have that information on if they have anything back there. So again, just something that we would address at that point. I'm not sure if staff is...

confirmed whether there actually is anything. We are not able to confirm that. Nobody has been able to confirm it.

That's municipal counselor's office job whenever we get that petition filed.

We just don't know. Barry? But when we, this is, it's really, when we were trying to, when we were doing intake on the application, it's really interesting because it's got a temporary easement that covers the whole thing and then a portion of it is only along the east side. And they've had, my understanding is we've had, they've had surveyors out there. We can't confirm there's anything in there.

Very large public works. We have not tried to verify it at this point. So I can't confirm or deny. I'm more than happy to look into that, but it looks like with the easement that they are leaving in place, that it would cover at least what we have shown storm sewer-wise on the Atlas maps. The parts that they're looking to close and vacate would be off of the area where the storm sewer is shown to exist.

We're comfortable with it, is what you're telling me?

As with everything that I know at this point, yes, we are comfortable with that. This would give us a chance, going through the closure and vacation, at least before it gets to district court for the actual vacation of that, we can research that. And if there's a problem with it, then we have the opportunity then to reserve that easement. So this isn't the last time that we look at it.

And or reopen it, if all we're doing is closing it.

Yes, if it was there, we would reopen it, or they would have the option to relocate it if they needed to in order to build the structures that they want to put on there. So with what we have and kind of the processes going through, we are comfortable with that.

Okay. If you're good, I'm good. Anybody else?

And I tried to find it, too. I saw no evidence of storm sewer back there. There are two inlets on 88th Street. I think it ties back to the west in an existing old storm sewer. So it's probably an easement that was granted for future, but...

Okay. Well, as long as we're comfortable that we're not doing anything to damage our own interests here as a city. Given all that, I'll make a motion to approve item number 22, CE 1165.

We have a motion from Commissioner Powers to recommend the item to the City Council for approval. It's been seconded by Commissioner Harrison. Please cast your votes. And that item's recommended for approval. Item 23.

Item 23 is case number PC11004, which is an application to rezone 10101 North Classen Boulevard from the I-1 district to the I-2 moderate industrial district.

Caitlin Turner, 525 Northwest 11th Street, here on behalf of the applicant. So this is a straight rezoning application from R1 to the I-2. This will look familiar to you. We just closed up those rights-of-way that you see referenced there just a few months ago. So now going into rezone, as you can see, there's lots of I-2 in the area, lots that is kind of going into larger project in the future. So this is just a part of that. Staff does recommend approval. We have not had any protest and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Commissioner Harrison, this is Ward 7. I do not have anyone signed up to speak.

Commissioner, is there anything else to add to this particular request? Then we'll move forward to recommend item number 23 PC-11004 to be approved.

Motion to recommend the item City Council for approval by Commissioner Harrison. It's been seconded by Commissioner Privett. Please cast your votes.

Thank you.

That item's recommended for approval. Item 24 and 25 have been continued, so we'll go to item 26.

Item 26 is case number SPUD 1846, which is a request to rezone 6200 North Robinson Avenue from the I-1 Light Industrial District to New Spud.

Caitlin Turner, 525 Northwest 11th Street, here on behalf of the applicant. So yes, this is a SPUD application to convert an existing hotel into a multifamily development. We do have it capped at 180 units. We have two TEs with our recommendation of approval. We agree to both of them. TE2 is to specify a minimum amount of usable open slash green space to be added with a change to a residential use. So we would seek to include the verbiage for TE2 that there shall be a minimum of 7,000 square feet of usable open slash green space required for any residential use. We have not received any protest, and I'm happy to answer any questions that you have.

Commissioner Powers, this is Ward 2. If you'd like to lead our discussion, I do not have anyone signed up to speak.

There's a reason I went to law school. I'm not great with the spatial stuff. 7,000 square feet doesn't sound like a lot of open space. There's a sea of asphalt on this property. I have no problem at all with the idea of it being converted into housing at all. I think that's probably a great idea. I would like to see the signage limited since it's not going to need signage anymore. um i would like to see a plan for the landscaping and one for the open space um i i i this Also, there's some reference in the MDS or in the staff report to construction of sidewalks with new construction. There need to be sidewalks. I mean, you're not going to change the building, are you? So there's not going to be new construction, is there?

Correct. Likely no. It would be to the interior of the site and then the outside. But you need sidewalks. Yeah.

You need sidewalks on both streets, in my view, but certainly along Robinson.

I believe there are sidewalks that are existing. I can't see it's dotted right here, but I believe there are existing sidewalks. Sarah, do you know if there's any existing sidewalks? You don't think so? Okay. So landscaping, open space plan, installation of sidewalks. Did you have, oh, and then you said the signage. So right now we just have per code for our signage. I'll have to review the sign code to see what exactly is allowed. But since we're just meeting codes, there are different...

I mean, you've got a highway on one side and Robinson on the other, so I'm guessing you could probably, you know, it is R4. I mean, you're changing your base zoning district, but still, yeah, I would like to see that.

I know that with the... Highway to our east if we stayed commercial we'd be able to do a taller non accessory sign potentially with our for it is much more limited under the sign code, but So if there's you know a specific restriction you'd want to put on that but

Well, I mean, I'd like to see the kind of signage that you would have for an apartment complex of this size, you know, something monument, you know, on Robinson, the only way anybody's going to be accessing the property. So it probably doesn't even need to be lit, but it certainly doesn't need to be any kind of, you know, commercial type signage, so.

Understood. Well, we'll see if I can get, I know they're working with an architect and we can probably provide some renderings. Are there any other questions or comments that commissioners have?

So the site proof fencing also are for, it's probably not going to be just a, you're, you're, you know, your typical. six foot tall wood fence. It's probably something else. I would hope to envision something else. I want to go back to the green space and the amount of green space. Originally it was a minimum of 15,000 square feet.

We did 15%.

So 15%. It's just 180 units, affordable housing, potential for a lot of kids. I'd like to see something. I'd like to see it actually on the site plan.

And you've got the room for it. I mean, even with 180 units, the parking lot is huge. So I think you've got the room to provide substantial amount of space. green space that's actually useful, with maybe some amenities.

Yes, we will definitely look into that. And then screening. When you say site-proof, I mean with like an iron fence or something that looks attractive.

Yeah, usually across the front it'd be iron, and then maybe down the sides and across the back it'd be solid and opaque, but just... more typical to an apartment complex. I wanna start this off in this type of development right, because I think we're gonna see a lot more of it, and so if we can set a precedent today, I think it'll help us in the future.

And we can certainly provide those. I'm wondering if those are items that we can produce to be a part of this SPUD between now and council, or if you're wanting this to come back.

I'd like to see it. So I'd like you to come back.

Okay. So continuance for two weeks, and we'll work on obtaining that information and getting that to you.

Great. Okay. Anybody else? If not, move for continuation of item 26, SBU 1846, to our next scheduled meeting, which is what day? August 13th. August 13th. August 13th.

I have a motion from Commissioner Powers to continue the item to the August 13th meeting. It's been seconded by Commissioner Peaver. Please cast your votes.

Thank you.

And that item is continued. Item 28, excuse me, 27.

Item 27 is SPUD 1853, an application to rezone 16100 Ironstone Place from PED 1382 to SPED 1853.

I promise I'll sit down for a minute after this one. Caitlin Turner, 525 Northwest 11th Street, here on behalf of the applicant. So this property is currently in a PUD that would allow for commercial development in this area. We are doing a SPUD as we are seeking or needing the construction sales and services use unit for a retail electrical supplies type use. So we have staffs recommendation of approval. We agree to the one te removing the animal sales and services There's actually a animal clinic just to the north of us. So we're kind of swapping out uses here to allow for This end user to operate So I'll be happy to answer any questions. We don't have any protest and again, we agree to that one te I

Thank you. Commissioner Noble, this is your ward, and I do not have anyone signed up to speak.

Thanks. I met with the applicant on this and talked about it. It's a good fit for the location. I have no problems as long as there's an agreement with the TEs. Anything else from anyone? No? No. then I will recommend approval, make a motion to recommend approval of SPUD 1853. Subject to the technical evaluation? Yes.

I have a motion from Commissioner Noble to recommend the item City Council for approval subject to the technical evaluation. It's been seconded by Commissioner Meek. Please cast your vote. That item is recommended. Thank you. Item 28.

Item 28 is case number SPD 1848, an application to rezone 1210 Northwest 30th Street from the R2 Residential District to Spud 1848.

Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Greg Massey with Cowan Group Engineering representing the applicant. I've had a chance to review the TEs on this application. We are in agreement with one, three, and four. Yes. Sorry one two and four Item three I would like some clarification or perhaps some relief on that This lot is only 50 foot wide and we're proposing a four plex unit on it and With all the parking in the back and the access drive getting to the back, it makes it difficult to facilitate all the uses. Again, we'll have access to two of the units on the north side adjacent to 30th Street. and access to the south units on the south parking lot. If we get two parking spaces allowed on the north side off of 30th Street, that would accommodate those uses. At the very least, we would request one space allowed on the north side for potential ADA access. The developer would like to have at least one of these four units ADA accessible on the ground unit, and it makes more sense to do that from the frontage rather than the back where they've got to park across the drive and take up additional spaces that would limit the number of parking we could get in the back. I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Okay, thank you. Commissioner Powers, this is your ward, and I do not have anyone signed up to speak.

I'm thinking seriously about the ADA unit. I have a need that's going out. I'm going to have it replaced. And so ADA compliance is becoming a bigger thing to me. I don't think I can get there, though, on the front. Parking it's it's There's got to be a way to design the rear parking. Maybe the whole thing needs to be smaller I don't know. Maybe it needs to be two units rather than one building I you know, I don't know don't want to try to design your site for you But I don't think I can get there on the parking in the front. That's not Something that I can favor the idea of a quad flex on the lot is not a problem for me at all, but Would you be willing to grant 180 a space?

At the frontage for 30th Street?

Really not. I don't think, I'm all in favor of ADA compliance, but it's not inherently front or back appropriate, so.

If we have to place an ADA space on the backside of the lot, we will not be able to have four parking spaces for the four units. We only have 50 foot. We would need a minimum of 52 feet to be ADA compliant with the nine foot parking spaces.

Okay. You know, I... And if that's an issue, then we will accept all the TEs.

we may have to come back before you, after the construction's done, to try and get an ADA accessible space.

So just, Commissioner Powers, I know you're familiar with the area, but as I look at Street View, there's several homes on this street that basically have full-on parking pads in the front yard.

And I'd like to see them all go away. And any time any of them come down here needing something from us, that's going to be what they're going to hear from me. I would prefer that you take the TE's, as they are, but I would be happy to meet with you and Traffic Commissioner Rob Littlefield, who's an expert on ADA compliance, to talk about ways that that might be able to work within the site you have.

I think that's reasonable.

Okay, let's do that.

All right. One other comment. You might look at that rear parking because I don't see how you're going to make the rear parking work. There's hardly any maneuvering area.

With the size of the building they're showing, the print they show?

The way it's drawn isn't going to work.

We will make it work.

Okay.

Yeah, normally it's 18 parking, 24 foot to back up, and this thing's not proportionate.

Again, it's a private driveway, and... You still gotta get a car in and out, though. Yes, they have to make it work.

There's actually not an existing driveway, right? I mean, there's not anything there at the moment.

Oh no, there is nothing there at the moment.

Okay. Anybody else? You wanna join the meeting? I'm gonna move approval of item number 28, SPD 1848, subject to the TEs.

We have a motion from Commissioner Powers to recommend the item to City Council for approval subject to the technical evaluations as written. And seconded by Commissioner Milner, please cast your vote. And that item is recommended for approval. Thank you, Commissioners. Thank you.

Item 29. Item 29 is case number SPUD 1849, an application to rezone 10901 Northwestern Avenue from Spud 1365 to Spud 1849.

Hi, my name is Crystal Brown, address 2304 Northwest 153rd Street. I'm in Oklahoma. I am stepping in for the applicant. I don't have a lot of information on me at the moment, but I just know that we have 2.46 acres that we are trying to rezone for a commercial slash residential property.

Okay. Commissioner Harrison, this is your ward. I do not have anyone signed up to speak.

Yeah, I took a good look at this one. Do you all have any thoughts on this one?

I have some thoughts on it. First, I want, and I don't know if you can answer this because you might not have the information, but there's a note from the fire about a turnaround at the rear. So they'd have to put a turnaround at the back of the property for a fire. The other concern I had was the height. The overall height in the PUD is 55 feet, and that to me is just entirely too tall for this location, and so I'd like that to be reduced, a maximum of three stories, and then we could discuss the height, and maybe you know, maybe you don't know how high you'd be willing to go. And if you can't answer these questions today, I mean, I think a deferral would be probably best for you.

Okay. I'm okay with that.

Okay. Fantastic. That's what I was definitely going to suggest, which I saw several things that we need to have a discussion about. So if we can get with the applicant, we can move forward with that.

that johnson planning department so this is actually a second edition site plan uh... that was redesigned to take into account some of those items uh... the original site plan didn't accommodate much for open space it didn't accommodate much for dumpster service and it certainly didn't accommodate any space for a turnaround The original addition actually had buildings along the west side of that property blocking everything off. So they have made some accommodations to account for those things in this copy of the site plan. Thank you for that.

Well, I recommend that we continue this item, 29 SB UD 1849, for two weeks to give the applicant time to address some of the concerns that have been mentioned here today. Okay.

Thank you.

All right. We have a motion from Commissioner Harrison to continue the item to the August 13th meeting.

It just didn't come up.

So move, I don't know. It's not coming up. All right.

He's moved it.

Somebody second for me. Or move it for me.

You might need to refresh, Commissioner Harrison. We're good? I don't have a, maybe I need to refresh.

Okay.

All right, that was seconded by Commissioner Noble and approved to be deferred to the August 13th meeting. All right, item 30.

Item 30 is case number SPUD 1839, an application to rezone 5200 Class and Circle from the C4 General Commercial District to Spud 1839.

Caitlin Turner, 525 Northwest 11th Street, here on behalf of the applicant who is here with me. So this is a rezoning application to rezone this property that has historically been a sleep-in to a facility to allow for a sober living. The use unit associated with that you'll see is the one use unit that we allow in our master design statement other than the C3 based zoning district uses. The site is currently C4, so what we're seeking to do is to down zone from C4 to C3, and again just add that one singular use unit that is permitted by right in all residential zoning districts from R1 to R4. I say that for the reason that if this had been an apartment rather than a hotel, we would not have to be here rezoning it now, and we would have similar density allowances. We are also seeking a use unit that is quite literally begins with a low impact institutional use unit. The site is surrounded by C4 property. We also have some office uses. We have some residential and office to our south. And as you can see right in front of the subject property, you have that street network where if you're getting off Northwest Expressway, you're either going straight to the highway, that's I-44 that we're looking at in this photo, or around the corner through those other commercial properties to Western. It is a bit tucked away as you can see here if you're on Western or on Getting off of Northwest Expressway. It is a unique site It's also worth mentioning that we are within walking distance. We're just a few hundred feet away from the Western Club which is on Western just north of 51st Street and The Western Club is important because it's essentially already operating with what we are seeking to do. Of course, we're adding that residential component, but the Western Club's permitted by right to be there. If you are in that area, you have no idea it's there, and it's that same kind of AA treatment program that they provide onsite there. I also want to mention that a big part of what we're seeking to do here also includes the case management and the AA. That is all permitted by right currently. Although this is not a special permit application, you'll see that we have submitted a program description with our SPUD. Although that is not super common, we did have a couple of neighborhood meetings. We heard the concerns and we went ahead to be accommodating and try to mitigate those concerns. Submitted this program description where we have it limited to the level three sober living that's further defined in our program description. It must be OCAR certified. It has the supervision, that not other facilities like this would otherwise have We do have a cap on the maximum number of residents at 85 There are background checks that are required They have a breakdown of the first 30 days the residents will stay inside and handle their classes do their curriculum and then it breaks down kind of what the rest of the time looks like and We do have a 10 p.m. curfew that is required. There is 24-hour oversight and staff on site at all times. We also even have it limited to the first floor being utilized for the office administrative space, classrooms, dining. The second floor you'll see will consist of a maximum of 20 beds for women. The third floor will consist of a maximum of 30 beds for men. and it says the third floor again, I'll need to add a TE to modify that to the fourth floor, will consist of those residents that are staying an additional year. So with that being said we do have a recommendation of approval from Oklahoma City staff We have two te's both of which we agree to Te one is going to ultimately read That there shall be a minimum of 1,000 square feet of usable open space green space to be required for use unit eighty two hundred point five You'll also see in our master design statement that we have agreed to do a decorative iron screening around the entire boundary of the site. Again, it will be gated controlled access. There's also going to be increased landscaping around the site. So all of those things we've done just to, again, show our commitment to cleaning the site up currently and being a good neighbor. I understand there are many people here to speak. My client is also here if you all have any questions at this time or if you would like to turn it over to neighbors. I just want to end my initial opening with this is a zoning application. We've got to look at the use, the surrounding area, the restrictions that we've imposed upon ourselves and not voting on the operator or the people that will ultimately utilize this facility. So I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. Commissioner Powers, this is Ward 2.

I assume that there are a number of people who are signed up to speak. Yes. Can you give me a ballpark estimate?

We have 12.

12. Not that bad. I thought there would be more. Before we hear from them, which is what I want to do next, And I will just say that during the numerous meetings, phone calls, emails, texts I've had on this topic over the last few weeks, everyone I've spoken to has been civil. And I hope that will continue here today. Everyone that I've spoken to has expressed an appreciation for the importance of this type of facility and the need for it in the city. And I believe that those expressions have been entirely sincere. And so let's hear from people about their concerns and go from there. Okay, wonderful.

All right, we'll start with Tommy Lucas. And again, if you could come up and give your name and address for the record, and then you'll have five minutes.

Hello.

Good afternoon.

Tammy Lucas, 804 Woodlawn Drive, Yukon. I have submitted my letter of opposition to you guys and several others. So I don't want to take up any unnecessary time. I just wanted to reiterate my opposition to the zoning change. Well several reasons in some of the discussions I guess a really big issue is the permanency of This zoning change and what it can do for forever not just now and not just with the Jesus house I think that's a really big point. Oh Yeah Sorry As you stated, the Jesus House is a wonderful program. There should be more programs like it. People need a lot of help. But that particular area I personally don't think is suited. There's too much nightlife. Edna's being one of them. And I feel like that contradicts the goals of a sober living facility. I also think that it would disrupt the continuity of the area and what several people, us included, have in the last few years rebuilt, spent A lot of money, time, effort, energy to improve the sites there. And that's about it. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Lucas. Thank you. Robert Finley. And I'll try and give the next person a heads up. So Jim Parrick, you're next.

I'm sorry, could you repeat that?

I was just saying I'm going to try and give the next person to speak a heads up so they can prepare.

Okay. My name is Robert Finley. My address is 2524 Lancaster Lane. Good afternoon, Commissioners. I have varying concerns about this. Application my family my son and my wife and I own the three properties to the south of this proposed location and coincidentally My son We've been neighbor. We've been neighbors with the Jesus house for several years now. He owns two lots Adjoining Jesus house property which is across the street from the actual Jesus house And it's been challenging over the years for him, not confrontational, but challenging. Am I allowed to pass out some photos so I can better explain what I'm doing? I understand that the Jesus House has changed its mission as of, this may or may not be right, last year, sometime where a lot of what I'm showing you, I think, is the result of what the original mission of the Jesus House was about, and that was feeding, clothing the homeless, and providing living space. I can't speak to how long the recovery aspect of that has been, but as many of us know, recovery is essential to first primarily to leading any kind of a life where you can raise yourself up and become self-supporting through your own contributions. And I certainly understand that mission. It's heart-rendering to drive along Virginia Avenue. And as you can see from those images there, that's their home. They lived in tents. They had a burn barrel there. And then more recently, that has been cleaned up by the staff of the Jesus House. It was cleaned up. And I think those are dated. I think I dated those. And I think they had some recurrences that I don't know who to ask the questions to and I'm not going to.

Yeah, I mean you can ask any questions and then if needed we can get a response from the applicant.

Anyway, over a period of time, those are dated, over a period of time the staff cleaned that out and I think the last photographs are of when they did that their belongings were put along the side of the curb. And that's been cleaned up now. So that's where I'm coming from, is a history of being neighbors with the Jesus House. And coincidentally now, they're looking to move their location north where our properties are, along with other people who oppose this. And I'll say this. I think they have a good shot. I don't think they'll bring with them a lot of what you're seeing in those photographs. I know that recovery is exceptionally challenging, and they may respond to this. I think Dr. North said the expectation for them is that they have a 20% success rate. And in all honesty, that's not too bad. And it's a nationwide problem. I won't go off that way. But Oklahoma Boulevard is going to be developed. And they do need to be out of there. And my primary concern is that the shoe really doesn't fit. And I've been challenged to Why they chose this location now they explained to me that it was because The Western Club which is an a a 12-step facility is about three doors down and the bus routes or bus connections are really good and I don't know if that's a That's part of the reason but I just in the back of my head. I've always said he came up with the site location on this so I I also have a concern on why the applicant is not the Jesus House. I don't know what their contract says. I don't know if it's a 100% guarantee. If you pass this... It certainly makes it possible for them to acquire that property, and by sell or trade or whatever, I don't know, and that's maybe none of my business. But I'm just standing here to say I'm not comfortable with this one. I don't think the shoe fits, and that's all I've got.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Finley.

Appreciate it.

All right. So now we'll have Mr. Jim Parrick, followed by Steve Galtziner. Yes.

Good afternoon. Jim Perry, 625 Northwest 4th Street. I'm here on behalf of Class and West Properties and the Hoke family who owns property in the area. And I think it's fairly evident that this use is needed and is a good cause. I think it's also equally evident that this is the wrong location for it. The area between Western and Klassen has struggled for a number of years. And just within the last couple of years with the renovation of the Don A building, what Shellback's doing, has really turned the corner for that area. And the proposed use for this site is incompatible with both the surrounding uses and the direction of the neighborhood. And because of those reasons, I would ask that you deny the application. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Perry. Okay, Steve Gottsinger, and then Cassie Smith-Tulliver.

Steve Gettsinger. I found out about this last night after arriving from a vacation, and I felt like I needed to come down here and express my concern. As a decade-long property owner at 5617 North Klassen, I, along with other business owners and an office complex, have an investment of well over $25 million, and this is just directly north up class and Boulevard You know our vibrant class and corridor is anchored by the class and curve by Whole Foods But it's under immense strain and I don't know if you all are aware of this or not over the past five years in our complex we've had an expanding homeless encampment and what they're doing is a lot of them are camping out in the Deep Fork River, particularly under where Klassen goes over. There's a bridge. That and the old Belle Isle Lake is getting more homeless people and we've had incidents at our complex too in my building alone where we've had break-ins and tragically we had a fatality nearby in the lake which was a hundred feet from our complex. This issue is even spilled over directly to the west of what was the original Belle Isle to the Belle Isle addition to the west, directly north of Penn Square. My son and his family live there. And I just have to say, while this proposal stems from admiral intentions, it's without doubt going to attract more unhoused individuals to a vital economic hub, as the gentleman before me just mentioned. And this is hard. Charity is a virtue, but we can't elevate those in need by tearing down the foundations of our thriving business and residential districts in this area. And so with that said, I ask you to seek a wiser remedy elsewhere rather than undermining the area that we've built here in Oklahoma City. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Getzler. Cassidy Smith-Toliver and then Robert Barrow.

Hi, Planning Commission. It's been a while. My name is Cassidy Smith-Toliver and I live at 1216 Northwest 42nd. Although you generally see me here as president of the Helm Farm Neighborhood Association where this is located, our community overall felt it was best not to take a stance as a community given how polarizing this case has obviously become. So I am here as a regular everyday neighbor today to show my support. This is a matter near and dear to my heart after I lost a cousin in November to addiction after nearly a decade of struggling. And it is not lost on me that Corey would have benefited from a facility like this near family in a controlled setting without treatment costs that our family simply couldn't afford. When I first heard about Dr. North and Jesus House's plan, my husband and I were hesitant, but we knew it was important to learn more before taking any stance. So I worked with Box Law to set up a meeting for Helm Farm, Douglas Edgemere, Crown Heights, Zachary Taylor, Western Avenue on May 29th. The presentation made my household feel comfortable, especially after our feedback like an occupancy limit and increasing landscaping were incorporated into the placement and plan. I am not going to romanticize things in Western Avenue area and Helm Farm. We are an urban core neighborhood with urban core issues that come when you are near transit and public services and bridges and overpasses where the unhoused like to stay. That's the nature of the beast. But the presence of unhoused individuals in the area is not what is before you today. This is not a shelter, this is not a feeding site, and it won't be allowed to be either of those because that is not what this case is asking for. The current property owner has been a less than ideal neighbor for the last decade, as they've attracted unsavory guests, including drugs and sex trafficking. Additionally, after looking at the monthly crime statistic reports for Helm Farm over the last decade, you'll see it actually has decreased steadily. the last six years even with unhoused coming into the area, but there have consistently been DUIs and police reports filed at surrounding businesses in entertainment areas. Neighborhoods work best when they are welcoming to all, which is what our community has shown consistently since I've moved into the area in 2018. Dr. North has already graciously asked how she can collaborate with our communities in the area, including helping elderly neighbors when it snows, and potentially helping with the median landscaping on Western. Those are signs of a good neighbor. Ultimately, I think it is important, however, to remember what is here before you today. This is not a vote on homelessness, addiction, or whether even every person agrees with Jesus House's mission. It is a vote on whether this is an appropriate use of this property. After I took the time with my husband and other neighbors to learn more, we've listened to the proposal, and we saw the changes made. And seeing the changes made in response to feedback, I believe wholeheartedly that this is a smart use of an existing space, and I respectfully ask you for your support.

Thank you. Robert Barrow and then Thomas Bott.

Hello, my name is Robert Barrow. I have been a resident for 30 years in the area. My concerns, I live at 920 Northwest 48th Street. My concerns are decreased property values, increased crime, and I don't think it's an appropriate place for this facility. I hope it gets declined.

All right, thank you. Thomas Vaught, and then Caleb Hill.

Hey, I'm Thomas Vaught. I think we talked on the phone. I own the hard corner of Western and I-44 there, the tiny little old florist building. Can we have your address just for the record, please? 5225 Northwestern. Thank you. We have probably invested about... $800,000 or $900,000 into that property thus far. Just signed up a new tenant that's excited to be there. And I was looking at this use and the reason why I'm here is I feel like it gets to be too dense when you add in the green space. There's probably just enough parking for the amount of people that will be there now. And then you add in 20 parks of green space, which I think isn't really needed. The green space is needed for that many people to be in that facility. Um, I still think it's not, I don't think it's enough. I heard you mentioned earlier on the, um, Broadway project that green space is needed when you have people and, um, seen a couple of these over living conversions and usually it's it's a lot less dense you know on several acres three acres was the one I sent you and I think that's great I just think that this is going to be overly dense there's no street parking around and so I think it's going to create an unnecessary Over density of what's happening in the area if there was street parking, maybe that makes sense But there's not on 51st. There's not on 50th. So I'm just I'm at a loss on how to make it work So I oppose and our group opposes but appreciate the time.

All right. Thank you. Mr. Vaught Caleb Hill and then Todd riddles

My name's Caleb Hill. My address is 11300 Hillsdale Drive in Oklahoma City. I am one of the owners of the Klassen Circle Building, Klassen Grill, sometimes just referred to as Don A Building. Previous uses kind of dominated the name of the building for a long time, which was the Hi-Lo Club, the Drunken Fry, the Patio Burger. Everybody refers to it as different things, but we purchased that property in 2022, and we've invested our private dollars up to close to $8 million to reinvest in that building alone. It has been quite the task, as some of you were on the Planning Commission when that building was considered to be demolished through the rezoning process. It did survive, and the community spoke very loudly and protested against the rezoning of that building, which would have allowed for the demolition of it. and the use was going to be changed. It's currently a C4 zoning in the majority of it. It does have a spud associated with it as well. We're asking, I guess we've spent the money. We said we're gonna keep that building. We got no dollars from the tax, from the community, no TIF. no sales tax abatement, no public funding, no assistance. We stood up and stepped up and said, we're going to do this and we're going to do it right. And we've done it. We've fulfilled our obligation. We're asking for uses like this. We've got a C4 zoning right next to us. We've got the potential for continued upward trajectory. Let's keep momentum, not go the other direction or risk going the other direction. The risk versus the reward doesn't outweigh at this location. We're here. We've invested. I'm there almost every day. If you see me, I'm probably in that parking lot hoping to find tenants, hoping to complete construction. It's a task. It's been... a big task we've had other projects nearby as well this is not our first retail development and it won't be our last but we would have not invested that kind of money in a location like this if that facility would have been here that's that's a fact so appreciate your time and consideration and listening um

Given the current state, and I don't think it's changed all that much over the last few years, of the hotel, what about that did not prevent you from making this investment that you think this use would prevent you from making that investment if you had it to do over again?

I'm not sure I'm following you exactly, but if you're asking the current status of that hotel, I mean, that's been, honestly, that was when we met with the Jesus House, that is one of the arguments that they have is, this hotel could become a weekly stay and longer and drugs and we don't think that that's going to be the case. We've made an investment. We know when the private dollars get invested, the capital, and we've seen multiple other projects because of what we did start and there's others projected. I noticed on the screen some of those projected. Those are not... going to happen if this use is there. That hotel will change use, potentially, and we think that could be apartments. We think there's a lot of other uses. It's got a C4 zoning. It's got one of the most broad zoning rights, as you all well know, in our city, and they are asking you to change that. This is extremely broad. We've accepted the risk of that current zoning and what that is today, not what is being applied for. Thank you. I do want to add the density, extreme density for a facility of this size. The motel that was converted in Tulsa was five acres, 85 units, single bed per unit. Green space, they covered in a pool. There's probably close to 20,000 square feet of green space within that facility. Obviously the facility on Broadway that we did, apartments that were just talked about from a former hotel, green space. This is not even one acre with the same unit count population density as a five acre site in Tulsa. That's a pretty good comparable. That's extreme, this is extreme density relative to the site under one acre. The other site, same unit count, five acres. Okay, thank you Mr. Hill.

Todd Riddles and then Bob Sein.

Thank You commissioners, my name is Todd riddles. I live at 1114 Northwest 55th Street the Brookhaven neighborhood also on commercial property between 48th and 47th and 48th and Western formerly the wedge pizzeria now it's I believe the Millennium uh... i've been a long time member of the uh... western club formerly served on the board of trustees there uh... i'm currently an active uh... uh... foundation member there well aware of what the the western foundation and the impact it has made to the community I will tell you, similar to my friend Mr. Hill, when I first learned of this, I had great concern of the Jesus House going in this location. And that's due in large part to my misconception of what the Jesus House was and what they do. I've since visited that facility. I attended a meeting with Commissioner Powers there, toured the facility. I mean, my original misconception was that it was a homeless camp, a lot of mental illness, homelessness, that's just, they fed the homeless, and they just, people walking around talking crazy. That's what I thought it was. And that's maybe what it was 20 years ago. But they've changed their mission back in 2014, and now it is simply a long-term sober living facility. Not only that, it's a Class III sober living facility, which is the highest sober living facility that is offered in Oklahoma. I can speak personally. I've got a brother that has died from alcoholism. I've got a brother who suffers from drug addiction. I've got a son who suffers from drug addiction. I'm sure many of you have family members or friends that suffer from alcoholism, drug addiction. It's an important issue, and the Jesus House is doing a good thing. And I haven't heard a single person get up here and say, to the contrary, everybody likes what the Jesus House is doing. Nobody wants it in their backyard. That's the problem. I have... Great respect for what they're doing there. And I was very surprised when I toured the facility. It was clean. It was well kept. The people there were very friendly, very respectful. The facility itself is older and it's not suitable for what they do. It won't accommodate the number of people that they need to serve. There's not rooms for them to meet and have classes. This new location, I believe, contrary to my good friend, Mr. Hill, I think this will be a great use for this location. It's got two bus routes right there, close to the... Western Club, it's walkable. You've got restaurants. You've got Walmart. You've got retail establishments. I think it would be suitable for this location. I've heard concerns. I've read the letters in opposition that you've got bars in this area and restaurants that serve alcohol. I understand that. I don't think that that's a problem for this location as a silver living place. The Western Club is in the same situation. You've got hundreds of people that attend meetings there every day that suffer from drug addiction and alcoholism but are maintaining sobriety despite the fact that there's a speakeasy right next door, despite the fact that Edna's is right down the street. No disrespect to Edna's. I think it's a great establishment. But recovery is not about removing the temptation. Recovery is about teaching people to overcome the temptation. And long-term sober living in this location with the Western Club, just a block away where they can attend meetings daily, I think those two really enhance each other. So from a youth standpoint, Because I live in the area, I understand the homelessness and I see that. I walk my dog every day. I see homeless people walking down the street. I think this, if anything, will help with homelessness because it helps get those people off the street and back on their feet. And so, if anything, I think it will help that situation that exists. I talked to Dr. North about, you know, they do a lot of community service.

Thirty seconds remaining.

They have partnered with the Homeless Alliance. They can help relocate some of these unhoused people, get them into housing. So if anything, I think it will help that. And I stand here today to ask for the commission to approve and support SPUD 1839. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Riddles. Now we have Bob Sine and then Steve Rowell.

My name is Bob Seil. It was 719 Northwest 45th Street in Oklahoma City. We own the three properties to the east of the proposed C4. And Ms. Spires, I never met you, but nice to see you here. We've lived on that street, I mean, we've had business on the street for over 35 years. And if you've been down that street, it's a very short street, and there's a lot of traffic. Actually, it would be nice to get a new traffic light right there so you could turn left. But originally, that motel was another motel that burned. And that was a good thing, because they built the other one, which was a lot better, because they had a lot of bad things there, you know, prostitution, drugs before. Now, Jesus House, I'm a proponent. I go to Catholic Church, and we give food, and my wife actually goes and works at the Jesus House. But this is not the plan that should be for them. It just doesn't fit. There's so much traffic going through there. The events that go on, it's just not compatible with the area that they want to put it in. So we object to the C4.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Stein. Steve Rowell and then Matt Richardson.

Good afternoon, council. My name is Steve Rowell. I live at 4009 Northwest 70th. I own a business directly across the street from this proposed location at 1123 Northwest 51st Street. We have been on 51st Street for 39 years. I have watched this location and the area go up and down over the last several years. The previous motel that was in this location, as he had mentioned, was not a very savory hotel or motel. In fact, my father was shot by one of the residents in it in an armed robbery about 20 years ago. So my point being is that I've witnessed a lot up and down this street over the last 40 years. The homelessness... is increased considerably. We're constantly seeing traffic, homeless foot traffic walking up and down the street. And I mean, we look out this window at this street all day long. I see what's going on. I just don't feel like this is a good use for this property. This area has been on the upswing for the last several years. It has been improving. Shellbeck has done a wonderful job remodeling the building that they've just done. I understand they have plans to redevelop a lot of that area into apartments, which would be fine. I'm just concerned about this being a good fit for the area. So I'm just here to voice my opposition to this change or the zoning change. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Mr. Rao. And then last, we have Matt Richardson.

Hello, I'm Matt Richardson, 7415 Northeast 116th Street. I own the properties north of the Sleep Inn from 51st all the way up Class and Circle to where it dead ends. We are putting our new office up in the northeast corner. We recently acquired 5206 and 5208 Class and Circle. based on what we learned from this decision will be what we do with those properties. They're going to be demoed regardless. They're in a very blighted state. You know, this area has been controversial for a long time. We've officed in this area for 13 years. We remember when Brahms was thinking about going in where the Dane Building is. That did not pass. Caleb made a huge lift there, and everybody was pretty happy about it. Two years ago, we bought 5224 and 5228 Class and Circle, knowing what Caleb was doing down there. That was kind of a catalyst for us right there. I remember early on texting Caleb and saying, hey, we can infill all this, and it'll be great. I don't know what Caleb was doing, if he's got his hands full with the Don A building, but We had interest in 5206 and 5208 regardless if we had involvement from Caleb or not. Anyway, if you can imagine from 50th Street all the way up Claston Circle to where it dead ends is all going to be brand new. It's all going to be redeveloped. And you have the sleep in there, which doesn't look great now. And I don't believe it's going to look great in the future. I've heard a lot of people say that this is a blighted hotel. Nobody wants it. That's not true. I have a friend that has toured it, and I've toured the property with him. He made an offer on the property, so there is demand for ownership of that property. Another offer was made. Obviously, the offer was made with Sleep Inn, so here we are. My concerns are it doesn't fit the optics. You know, Classen Boulevard is a big corridor. I talk to people all the time that love it. They drive up and down it. I don't really know that this is going to be a net benefit to Classen Circle, or to Classen Boulevard, excuse me. I know the city council, or the Oklahoma City Chamber, excuse me, funded Thrive on Classen, a study to figure out how to improve the Classen corridor. I don't see this as congruent with that. Also, I really don't like the fact that after these residents complete their initial 16-week session there, they're allowed to come and go as they please. I don't know how many people are going to be in their 16-week session. If we take half of that, we're talking 40 people just milling about in the community down there. I know the Jesus House has said that it's a non-smoking campus, which is great. We've all been to hospitals that have non-smoking campuses. We know what that means. That means they're going out right off grounds, which I mentioned this at the town hall. They said they cannot be within eyesight. So what's that mean? It means they go and hide and look for places to smoke. I don't want people milling about in the community. I'm with everybody here. I love the mission. Everybody loves the mission. I just don't think it fits the area there. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay, that's everyone I have signed up to speak. So that will conclude the public comment and we'll give Ms. Turner a chance to respond to any of the comments that she may have heard during that time.

Thank you very much. Before we do that, I'd like to ask if there's anybody else here who would like to speak on behalf of this program. I'm a little surprised. And you've read them, I'm sure, as well as I have. I've received many emails, texts, phone calls, et cetera, from people who are in support of the program. And I'm surprised that there aren't more of them here to speak today. So if you're here and you're just being quiet, I'd like to hear from you. Mr. Chairman, we're okay with that.

Go ahead and come up and we're going to ask you to fill out a form after you speak. Just give your name and address for the record, and then be sure to fill out a form after you're done speaking, please.

Definitely. I'm Michael Grewal. I live 1509 Northwest 42nd in Oklahoma City. I'm currently a member of the Western Foundation. I'm the chairman of the board of trustees. The foundation has been part of my life since the day it opened. My father was a founding member and has been an integral part of me and my recovery and families and other families in the area. We have done great things in improving the facility and the area, and we work with all the businesses use all the businesses in the area. And homeless does tend to be a problem. And we do our effort to move them on or find them someplace else to go so they don't hang around in our area. We're very strict with all the people that attend our meeting, which are hundreds every day. We think this will be a great facility for us in talking with Dr. Norse in a meeting that we had at the foundation, answered all of our questions and concerns. We have always been a good neighbor and done our best to work with everyone in the area. And we've been there for 52 years without issues. And the place has grown from one-third of the building to the entire building. And we continue to improve the look of the facility and work with everybody. And the place is integral because it's saved numerous lives and continues to do it every day. And if our facility can help the Jesus House with meetings and stuff like that, that's even better for them. But the way their system is set up in their facility, from talking with Dr. North, the idea that there's going to be people wandering around that are part of that facility is not reality. We have more issues with the clubs in the area that use our parking lots in the evening that leave beer bottles and cans and liquor bottles and stuff that we pick up from the local beer joints or clubs and stuff in the area. We just clean up after ourselves and move on. And hopefully, well, one day they may be members in our club. So we're there, and the whole purpose and our mission is to help people in recovery. Thank you. All right. Thank you.

Can I ask you? Yes, ma'am. Do you have any concerns at all about the Western Club's ability to absorb whatever influx there may or may not be from this facility if it should be approved? None whatsoever.

We have plenty of room and plenty of space. And a lot of our people help bring people to and from the meetings. They're within walking distance if they walk to a meeting and walk back. I mean, people with alcohol and drug addiction are not bad people. They're just in a bad time in their lives. And having recovery there and have an established program that works and has for 90 years, And it's probably one of the only ones that really does work. So I think it's a win. And a lot of those folks, I don't know of any business in the area that doesn't have someone that is affected by drug and alcohol abuse. And all of them are looking for a place for recovery. And it's been doing it for 52 years. And it saved my life, and it saved other members of my family. throughout the community. And the Western Club and the Western Foundations is known all over the country. And we have visitors from all over the world that come just because of the Western Club, because it's so well known.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Appreciate it. Anyone else?

My name is Lacey Williams, and I actually work for a facility who is OCAR Level 3 certified. And a lot of people ask, well, what is that? They foresee the area. It's a higher level of care, which has case management and things like that. So I have wrote this in hopes to support and advocate for the Jesus House. I would like to speak in support of the Sober Living Home and share my perspective as someone who has worked for OCARTA, and we have also partnership with Jesus House in the past. I've seen firsthand how recovery housing changed lives. It provides people with a safe, structured, and accountable environment where they can rebuild their lives, maintain sobriety, find employment, reconnect with their families, and become productive members of the community. This place will be overseen by OCAR level three certification. which means it must meet high standards for quality, accountability, ethics, residence care. And these homes are not simply places for people to stay. They are a recovery-focused environment with rules, expectations, and oversight designed to support long-term success. Some people have expressed concerns that this location will attract more unsheltered individuals. In reality, recovery facilities provide stability for people who are already part of the community and are actively working to improve their lives. It gives them the opportunity to move away from being unsheltered, the addiction and instability, not to contribute to it. This location is also idle because it helps eliminate transportation barriers that some may have, and with us being in a sober living, transportation is a huge barrier. We have to have extra funds available to provide bus passes and things like that, staff members' times to transport these individuals to different meetings and locations. It makes it much easier for residents to continuously attend support groups, stay connected in their recovery community, and remain accountable. Access to these resources is one of the strongest predictors of long-term recovery. Ocarta, where I now work, changed my life, and every day I have the privilege of watching it change lives of others. I am now their housing ambassador, and the same program I started with, I now run. Recovery works when people have the right support and a safe recovery housing or facility, and it's very crucial to a part of their success. I encourage everyone to look beyond the stigma surrounding addiction and recognize the positive impact recovery housing has on individuals, families, and neighborhoods. Supporting recovery is an investment in a stronger, safer, and healthy community for us all.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is April Kinney. I am currently a resident in a sober living at Ocarta. I got a visit from my children this weekend. Sober living gave my kids their mom back. That's all I have to say.

Thank you, Ms. Kinney.

All right, anyone else?

Okay, Commissioner Powers.

Go ahead, Caitlin. Thank you. Okay, so a lot to unpack there. I want to just kind of go through and address some of the comments that we received more frequently. And if there's anything at the end that I missed, I'll answer questions. So first and foremost, I think, The problems that are referenced, that exist here now, exist here now. There's an open parking lot here on this site with the current sleep-in. I know there was conversation about who can check in and out of there now. There's more of an opportunity for loitering and that kind of activity with the current state of this site. Again, we have our requirement to screen. We have our requirement to landscape. What we're wanting to do is utilize an existing structure that likely would otherwise be demoed, which we do not want to do. We want to improve. We want to enhance. We want to utilize something that's there. There was also a reference to the density piece of it. So right now there's about 55 rooms in the hotel currently. If you have two to four people in each of those rooms, even just two, well over 100 people. We've also capped the number of residents that can stay on the site at any given time, ultimately reducing the density that is there currently today. What is that cap, Caitlin? 85 residents. There is a reference to people being able to walk around. This is not a prison. Although this is somewhere that people can go and it will be gated and there's that access. This is more analogous to an apartment type living situation, but you also have these other services on the first floor. That we referenced earlier there was even a comment made that an apartment would be a better fit for this area So my question is why would a standard multifamily be okay? And not a multifamily for a protected class under the Fair Housing Act people that are simply seeking to be sober and get help and a supportive environment that can handle these types of cases There was a concern with parking in green space. A lot of the folks that will utilize this property either won't have vehicles, but also vehicles aren't gonna be permitted, at least until a certain amount of time that is spent there, and they may have already graduated at that point. Regarding the green space, I did reference that we will be committing to 1,000 square feet. We also have our parking reduction baked into our master design statement to allow for room for that green space, or open space, excuse me. It will likely be screened. Of course, there's a level of anonymity with uses like this that will be respected. There's also, oh gosh, oh God.

Are you okay?

Okay, okay, okay. And we're back. Level of anonymity also... You know, there's not gonna be children living here as you would see with a typical multi-family, so we're just not really needing the typical rec space that we discussed earlier with the different application. So, with that being said, we're really wanting to utilize and invest in this area, just as all the other commercial developers have. We are using private, or Jesus House uses private donations. It's not something that's publicly funded, so very in line with MAPS 4, but again, using private money to accomplish this. So cleaning up the area, again, this is ultimately a down zone from what's currently allowed to operate there by right. With the current C4, you can have outdoor storage, you can have some heavier industrial uses, but it's also again, tucked away. So we just, given the site, given the surrounding area, given the restrictions we've imposed, we believe this is very compatible and in line with what's existing. Jesus House is eager to be a good neighbor.

I'm happy to answer any outstanding questions you all have Questions I want to ask oh, I mean I'll start with a few in Just as far as the signage goes and it says just per code, but what's what's the plan I?

The plan is obviously to modify the existing signage. There's a pole sign out there now, which I believe we're OK with doing away with. So I think we're just going to be using attached signage on the building.

Let me just say, there are several things about the master design statement that I think given the enormous amount of information and effort that's been put into this process, there are just some basic things about the master design statement that aren't there. One of them is the signage. And I think another one is about the sidewalks. There's some comment about it, about sidewalks being required on the arterials. I'm not sure that any of these streets is an arterial, but it needs sidewalks all the way around it, other than on the far east side. um there are various points of access there's only going to be one point of access as i understand it so i think those need to be narrowed i have asked caitlin whether they would be willing to do a specific plan for this site i know that's not something that we typically do on spuds but i think rather than uh The options are to continue this case, to do those things and have it baked into the SPD or to revisit them at a point in the future if this is approved. And I would want to see a landscaping plan. I want to see a site plan that shows what that recreational space is going to look like and so on and so forth. I'd like to see and have the... details of the screening all baked into the master design statement and the SPUD itself. So I think either there needs to be a continuance for that to happen, or we need to have some mechanism to do it after the fact if it's approved. And they have apparently agreed that they would do it by a specific plan if we are comfortable with that.

I do like the idea of a specific plan. I do like the idea that it comes back before us rather than go in between the time between now and council. I want to say I am in support of the land use for this location. I'm in support of the special use Also, I don't think it's that far of a stretch from what it is currently. The down zone helps me get to where I need to be on the property, and a better, more detailed master design statement, specific plan will help also, I think, alleviate some of the other questions that maybe some of the people have.

Understood. And yeah, we are agreeable to doing that specific plan. If there's any revisions, we can add them as TEs now for this master design statement. I will note that obviously a lot of our restrictions come from our program description. With the building being there, there wasn't too much that we did. However, I will say that we have our site-proof screening that if used for this use unit, a minimum of six foot wrought iron fence will be required along the SPUD boundary. And then we have our landscaping consisting of trees and shrubs around that And then we do have our sidewalk comment. If we're needing to look at that, that's something we can discuss. But I believe everything else has been addressed. Also in the parking, we included the verbiage to be able to reduce the parking by 20 spaces to accommodate for that open space that was referenced. Again, we agree to the two TEs. We can add an additional to require the specific plan so you all can see that.

But also if we need to limit signage, we're more than happy to do so as well to limit it to the attached signage and you said there was I was just gonna say something maybe about the site for fencing and the screening and that maybe With some of the concern of the neighborhood there's there's some portions of this property that probably need a more solid opaque fence than just that the iron fence. I see it more like an apartment complex would be where you'd have a solid opaque fence around some of the areas that are abutting other property and then through the front more of an open and iron fence. I see that too, but

What is it on that east side?

There's an elevation change and a lot there. The hotel side for sure.

Yeah. The east side's kind of rough because of that and it also, the parking spaces go right to the building line.

You mentioned, did you say 1,000 square feet of open space? Yes.

That would be a minimum.

Well, because that works out to 12 square feet per person. I mean, that is not very much space at all when you have 85 people in a facility, up to 85 people in the facility. I just feel like there is a density aspect to this that I have concerns about. Is there a way to get to... I mean, is 85 the fixed number that you have to have? And is there a way to get to more open space or green space? Because I feel like this facility needs that.

We could potentially discuss the density. I will note that in terms of the outdoor space, again, because of the level of anonymity that people typically seek whenever they are utilizing these services, but also there's significant lounge areas in what will be the renovated interior here where people will be able to hang out, relax, not only on their floors, but also the first floor is kind of dedicated to multi uses, but there will be lounge area on the first floor as well. So I think the open space, although I understand your comment, I just don't know if with this type of use it will necessarily be needed. But again, we set that as a minimum, and I'm sure if that is a hang up we can discuss it, I think that this is just a peculiar type of use where we just wouldn't necessarily need a ton of outdoor space.

And your plan is to reduce the number of parking lots and use additional green space?

Yes, reducing it by 20 parking spaces is what we have included in our master design statement.

And I also agree with Commissioner Newman. find more green space and outdoor space for them would help a lot.

I have a few comments I'd like to share with you. When I started this process, my initial reaction to the calls and concerns, and that was how it came to me. I did not attend the neighborhood meeting I wasn't aware of the neighborhood meeting when it occurred at the end of May, but I started getting phone calls from the commercial property owners who were very concerned about this application. And my just initial response to, not necessarily them, but just to the idea of this facility at this location were twofold. One was... about whether this kind of facility would dampen or cause a decrease in the ability to leverage private development in the area. Because yes, this is an area that sort of needs redevelopment, at least in places. And that's kind of been happening slowly, but certainly wouldn't want to see anything that would cause it to go backwards. So that was on the one hand. And on the other hand, sort of just the idea of a sober living facility at this scale, at this level. Like most people who know anything at all about sober living facilities, my idea of them was like a few people living in a house in a neighborhood somewhere. And they may have problems and issues and so on, but 85 people under one roof, I just couldn't wrap my head around that. I think the latter of those concerns, I have been able to find my way out of both by touring the existing facility at the Jesus House and seeing how it operates, sort of what it does, and also what it needs to do what it does better because it's sorely lacking i will say to be as kind about it as i possibly can just the facility itself it's so old and it's it's um you know falling down around their ears so um I understand why this is a good location for them, for this facility, the bus routes alone, with huge existence of the supportive services, the Western Club and NorthCare and other nearby kinds of supportive agencies. This is not exactly a sober living center, not just in its scale, but in the fact that it's not just a place where people live. It is a place where they have a program where they're teaching people to kind of reintegrate with society and manage their own affairs and keep a job and do all of that. And participation in that process is part of what they are doing there. And they need a space to do that. They need classrooms and offices and a a kitchen and so on. One thing that I know that the way that the application is set up, it is asking for a single use that they feel answers the question of why this is not a homeless shelter or a soup kitchen at this location. I would like for the SQD specify per TE that it will not include the use unit 82 50.7 for emergency shelter and feeding size. I want that to be very, very clear. I don't want there to be some question in the future about an administrative amendment or something that it's like, well, what's really the difference? It's not that big a deal. And why can't they do that here? I want it to be very clear. Um, You know, when I think about the way they intend to operate this facility, that it is a very limited access facility, and it is something that will sort of keep a low profile by its very nature. I think about, I don't know whether you all are familiar with, on Mosteller Drive, I think is still the name of it, that leads to what I still think of as the Founders Tower. There's a facility there that I drove by for years and years and had no idea what it was. It's got kind of iron gates and a lot of landscaping, and you never see anybody going in or out of it. And a few years ago, I was called there to a meeting, and it's a sort of library of sorts, I guess, and offices and so on. I think of the potential for this site to be that. I have not had the concerns reinforced about the idea of people milling around and so forth that are associated with the currently existing Jesus House facility. The fact that people gather there and for food, for shelter, and so on, and then create the issues that they create in terms of trash and so on. I don't think that I'm overly concerned about any of that happening here. I also don't dismiss the arguments on either side. I've heard some people tell me this thing's wired and the fix is in and it's going to get approved no matter what. I've also had people tell me that everybody thinks it's a great idea, but it's just nimbyism. Nobody wants it in their backyard. I don't think either one of those things is anywhere close to the truth. I think the people who have concerns have valid concerns. Whether they prove to be accurate over time, I guess time will tell. But I think the concerns are that there is such a strong association of Jesus House and its 50 years worth of experience with homeless shelter and soup kitchen, that the concern is that people will come to this site expecting to find that. And then when they don't find that, their next question is, well, where are we going to camp tonight? I think the concern is that homelessness will be increased in the area just as a result of misguided or incorrect information. And I have suggested to them a few things that are within their power to do. They have not been able to do all of those things yet. And there will be some time, if this is proved, between that approval and the time that anybody moves in here, for some of those things to happen. If they do, I think that'll be all for the good. I have struggled with this application more than any application that I have dealt with literally in years. I don't discount or dismiss either the concerns or the support for it. I think both are genuine. I think people are passionate about it. I wish there were a way to work through more of that so that it doesn't land at city council as a, you know, how I am. I'd like tied up with a bow before we send it on. But I don't know whether that's really possible with this case. I am not strongly urging anybody around the horseshoe to vote one way or another on this. I think everybody has to vote their conscience. This really does come down to whether this location is an appropriate site for this use. And that's kind of our job, so I think we're just gonna have to do it today.

Okay.

I would like to add to thank you to Commissioner Powers. She has spent a lot of time and effort bringing people to the table to have those conversations and so we could hear those concerns and again, draft this program description to try and address them. So thank you for your time.

I really do want to see a specific plan if we're going to vote to approve this. I want those things to come back to us. I want to be able to nail down those details as we go forward here. And I would really like to hear from the other commissioners if you want to share about your thoughts on this.

Anyone else want to go?

I agree with the specific plan because I understand a lot of times you don't want to put the effort into it without the entitlement being approved. But and I just had one last Commission meeting that we did the exact same thing. We approved it, but we required a specific plan because if it comes back and it doesn't match what we're expecting, then we don't approve the specific plan. You have to keep doing it until we do. I'm not sober living, but I've had a couple of hotels convert in my ward on the Meridian Corridor to affordable housing. I understand the stigma with the Jesus House. And I think the problem with it is they were known for so long for feeding the homeless. And with the program change, and it's been that way for a while, I believe the homeless already understand that that's not available here. And I don't believe it's gonna bring in any more unhoused people then they're there right now. I don't think that's gonna be an issue. With that being said, I agree with a specific plan requirement and in the things that we've requested to be in that.

I'm not as concerned with the specific plan, but I'm not gonna vote no because it's in there. As a person that has more than a few family members and friends that have struggled with addiction, these type of places are essential for their recovery and I'm all for it. With the things that we put in and that's been discussed and meeting, I'm comfortable with it, so that's it.

Thank you. And I can also segue into the TEs that I have added now for this conversation, unless anyone else would like to speak.

I was just going to add. I've thought about this a lot. I thought, would this be different if this were predominantly residential surrounding this? I might be looking at it a little bit different. It's not lost on me that these businesses are people's livelihoods. I do think that there is an opportunity. I think there's probably some fear out there of not fully understanding what this facility does and how it operates. I think there's a huge opportunity for the facility to integrate itself into the neighborhood, into the business association, and really be able to keep area businesses informed and communicate and become a valued member of this business community and I hope that will be the case because that's just going to open lines of communication and I just think there's a lot of potential for that and for this to have a really positive outcome on the area.

I do want to ask, if this gets approved and it comes back to the specific plan, are we going to see a little bit more hard details as far as renderings of what this site is going to look like? Yes. I think that would be very helpful. Yeah, absolutely. Are you going to do exterior work to this building? What does the landscaping look like? How is this going to fit in? I just think, really, the microscope is on this one. I'm very much in favor of it coming back with a specific plan so we can see that.

You took the words right out of my mouth. I really echo that. I'd love to see the plan fleshed out and I think that could mitigate some of the comments we heard as well as eliminate some zoning uses and I think that would be very helpful.

Well, are we ready for a motion?

Yep. I can rate some TEs that if you all are ready for that, just so I can make sure that everything that we've discussed gets addressed in our master design statement. So for TE number one, although, I mean, we had the minimum 1,000 square foot usable open space. If that is a concern, then we can just commit the 20 parking spaces that we already allow for that reduction. for open space, just commit all of those to open space. I'm not a math person, I'm not an engineer, I don't know what that square footage looks like, but I'm very confident it's greater than 1,000 square feet. So we can commit to... Yeah, utilizing all 20 parking spaces for open space, which I believe we already have some verbiage in our master design statement to that effect, but we can just require that it be used for the open space. Is that in addition to the 1,000 or to replace the 1,000? To replace the 1,000.

TE2, we agree to. And we'll say as to be shown in the specific plan. We'll include that because I think we'll want to see what that looks like, where it is, and how much of it and all of that. Yeah, absolutely. So a minimum of 20 parking spaces.

Yeah, just for reference. So your average parking space is?

It's 3240 is the square footage.

Yeah. Yes. I was going to show my math. Okay. We did it.

I had already done it, too. We are all doing math. We can see.

Yeah, 9 by 20 by 18.

Okay, so number one TE maybe is the specific plan. Should we go with that?

Yeah, I was just, there's two on here right now, so I was going to make the next one TE3, that a specific plan shall be required. Oh, I lost my, okay. Specific plan shall be required would be TE number three. TE number four is to correct my typo to the program description. So that it states that the fourth floor will consist of second-year residents Te5 would require site proof screening along the south and east spud boundary lines Te7 will be to include that use unit 82 50.7 shall be prohibited and Let's see. And then what TE was that? Did I say six? Are we on seven? Five. Okay, we're on six.

No, you're on seven.

I'm on seven. There we go. TE7, signage shall be limited to attached signage only. No, you don't like that?

Let's do that per specific plan. Whether we want it to be monument or attached, we can talk about later.

Per specific plan? Okay. So I guess modifying that section, that signage shall be, well, what were you going to say, Sarah?

It just says per code right now.

Right now it says per code, and I think from when we bring a specific plan back, we'll need something to measure it against. And I guess the question for staff would be, do you mean for that sign regulation to be only for this use? So in the future, should it be developed under C3 if this doesn't work and they do C3? Do we want just the sign code? Do we want other commercial retail restaurant uses to be able to have freestanding signs? Because if not, they would have to rezone.

Well, so you're opening a different can of worms. The fact that this is not a single use SPUD, that they're retaining the C3 uses, has that potential for other uses in the future. If it were going to be another use, I would like to know what that was going to be and what kind of signage we would find appropriate for that use and so on. Yeah.

So the specific plan just required across the board and then signage to be determined with the specific plan.

I think so.

Got it. Agreed.

That is all I have right now. I think so, so TE3 required in the specific plan would be for all uses within the SPUD, correct?

I believe that is the request, yes, and we're fine with that.

I'm not trying to drag this out, but did we ever decide what, on the sidewalk requirement, what streets are arterial?

We're going to have sidewalks on the north, the west, and the south, up to, along Military, Classen, and 51st Street. We're going to have so many sidewalks, you won't believe it.

Three-sided.

I guess that's TE number eight. Sidewalk shall be required along... Will you please repeat TE7 regarding the signs? TE7 is just signage to be determined with the specific plan. Since this specific plan encompasses everything, or all the uses, we don't specify it to just... Or to be shown on the specific plan?

Well, signage is required for any specific plan. They have to give you a sign package. So I'm just trying to think through in the future how that would work for...

Rezoning. If they rezoned it, they'd just rezone it.

Well, the thing of it is they're trying to retain all the C3 uses, so they wouldn't have to rezone it. That's the problem.

They'd have a specific plan assigned then.

Yeah, they would, wouldn't they? If they want something other than what we approve, yeah.

Let's rezone.

No administrative amendments, how about that?

I feel like everything is very specifically negotiated with this one. I don't know if we're eligible for any administrative amendments here.

Oh, you know better than that, Caitlin. Oh, and we included, you did include somewhere in there that we're going to actually specify that the homeless shelter and the emergency, okay.

Yep, that was TE. Six. For six, yeah. That use unit 8250.7 shall be prohibited.

PE 1, I have as the parking lots, and it will be the 20 dedicated. 3 is the requirement for the specific plan. 4 is to correct the program description to fourth floor, second year. 5 is to site-proof shrubs around the south and the east. 6 is to... Remove use of the 82 50.7 I believe I caught that correctly 7 is signage to be shown on the specific plan 8 as the sidewalks General concept not word for word.

So the screening and fencing also is per specific plan I want to see all that so yeah, that would be required a specific plan Already required. I was looking at you Sarah specifically you look a little not quite sure

I'm just trying to think it through live, and it's the signs. I think if you're just gonna say signs to be shown, I think from staff, we'll just bring you the signs, but we would not allow them to submit any signs that would exceed C3. Right. Okay. We just wanna make sure we're all on the same page.

Okay.

Okay, so. Yep, I have a question. So if you eliminate one specific zoning use, do you need to go through and make sure you wanna eliminate others?

I would love to eliminate others.

Per the base zoning, yeah.

I mean, we're currently zoned C4, though, is the thing. So we are down zoning. But everything plus much more higher intensity uses are permitted by right today. That's why we would see. I mean, it's still a down zone.

So just real quick, so the use unit that you are prohibiting would typically require a special permit. So I think that anyone down the line can make the interpretation that they would be eligible to apply for a special permit for any use like the feeding shelter or feeding... Emergency filter and feeding site, thank you. And there's a handful of those. So I think if you want those specifically prohibited, you'd put that in the SPUD. Otherwise, we have a public process for that, that it comes to this commission for recommendation, you go to city council for final approval, and there's public notice provided just like an SPUD would do.

So my thinking about this is that this particular use is of such a sensitive nature based on the experience of the operator, 50 years worth, that I want it specified. I don't mean that it does or does not include other things that will or won't come to us if they change their minds about it, but that one I want to be very clear about.

So it's more enforceable.

Yes.

Yep, no problem there.

Are we there? Okay, well, we'll see how this goes. I will make a motion to approve item number 30, SPD 1839, subject to the technical evaluations that have been read into the record and subject to the specific plan that we will see in the future.

All right, we have a motion from Commissioner Powers to recommend the item to City Council subject to the technical evaluations as read-in. That has been seconded by Commissioner Privett. Please cast your votes. While we do that, I'll just reiterate, this is a recommendation to City Council, so you'll have the opportunity when it goes before them in 68 weeks to share your concerns with them as well. Okay, and that is recommended for approval to city council. Okay, we are now ready for item 31.

Okay.

Can we take just like a two-minute break?

We will. Let's take a five-minute break.

Thank you so much.

Here.

Yeah.

All right, we'll resume with item 31.

Okay, last time, Caitlin Turner. Let me call, let me call.

Oh, sorry. It's okay. Item 31 is PUD 2142, an application to rezone 3430 Oak Cliff Drive from the R1 district to PUD 2142.

Okay, Caitlin Turner, 525 Northwest 11th Street, here on behalf of the applicant. So this is a very unique infill development that we are proposing for this property. We've got about 16 1⁄2 acres. Our PUD is... breaks it out into tracts, so tract one would be for a senior living facility, tract two would be for general multi-family development. We do have our density limited, so tract one at 221 dwelling units, and then tract two at 255 dwelling units. We did have a neighborhood meeting and we had a few people attend for be able to discuss what it is that we were proposing hear their concerns and then walk through our master design statement including some of the buffers and restrictions that we've placed upon ourselves Namely we have a 20-foot landscape buffer with around the entirety of the PUD boundary and Te that I'll bring up here momentarily though is we'll also be doing a 20-foot landscape buffer on either side of Oak Cliff Drive So if you go back to the aerial you see where Oak Cliff is kind of on two separate sides there It looks like a puzzle piece just kind of got taken out so we will Improve that connect Oak Cliff and there will be landscaping on either sides of that public street as well We're also going to be limiting our access to our site from Oak Cliff Drive only so there's some other stubs going out into the neighborhood those would be gated and then utilized for emergency services as needed and I have a tea that I'll read in and here momentarily. We do conform with the step downs for the maximum height, so it's, I believe, Sarah probably knows more than I do, the separation, or the height for the setback, I think it's, if you're within 35 feet, you're at one story, and then between 35 and 60 feet, it's two story, and then you can go up from there. We have not only committed ourselves to that step down, but also capped our maximum height at three stories. for the structures that are interior to the site. So we are in the urban low intensity comprehensive plan designation. We are in line with our density and with the comp plan. Staff does recommend approval subject to three TEs. We agree to TE number one, which is that usable open space or amenities shall be located within 1,320 feet walkable distance. Along sidewalks are trails from every lot or multifamily slash senior independent living building within the PUD. So additional amenity there. And then the 20-foot landscape buffer with medium or large trees spaced at 20-foot centers. So also applied to both sides of Oak Cliff Drive. that I referenced, and we agree to that. TE number two, I think the first half is wanting us to specify the access, which would read that access shall be limited to Oak Cliff Drive only. Oak Cliff Drive shall be connected to the east and west as a public street. All their subs shall be gated, subject to emergency access requirements. So that we also agree to. So with that, I'd be happy to answer any questions that you all have.

Thank you. Commissioner Privett, this is your ward. I do not have anyone signed up to speak.

Okay. Yeah, that's kind of amazing. Although this is probably less than ideal, ideally we would want it to develop the same as the single family around it, but being the situation as it may with the oil wells and everything else that has gone on over the years, this is probably the best we're gonna get. So unless anybody has anything else, I'm ready to move.

I'm just going to say again that I still have a mild concern for the traffic that this is going to put off. This is such a high density, and I just feel like it's a little unusual, the high density, and it's not going on, spilling directly onto like South Bryant. You're going to be, all that traffic is going to be going down Oak Cliff Drive, and really it's going to be all to the west Because again, as we spoke the other day, when you look back to the east, there's no clear out on Oak Cliff. So I don't have a solution for that. But I think that is going to put a lot of traffic to the west on Oak Cliff Drive going out there.

I have the same concerns, and I wonder if there's speed mitigation efforts you could...

I was going to say, the speed humps... I know David and I talked about speed humps. That's in there, right?

It is not. We are fully committed to working with the, well, I think traffic would have to approve any speed mitigation. So we can commit to working with Stuart Chai, working with traffic to see what speed mitigation that they would approve of. No issue there. If we need to add it as a TE, more than happy to do so.

Okay. Yeah, the speed dumps, I think, have to go through a petition process and all that good stuff. Every 300 foot being noticed and the same thing we do here. But yeah, I'd like something in there in the TEs on that probably.

So perhaps we add a TE4 to require speed mitigation as approved by Oklahoma City traffic.

That works for me if that works for legal.

Does that work, Sarah?

I'm sorry, can we please see the site plan again? I'm worried about your ability to meet the fire requirements once you go over 200 units.

Without the additional connections, yeah.

So I'm so sorry, Commissioner Miller, how would your TE read?

Do what?

How would the TE read? For the speed mitigation piece?

Right. It would read speed mitigation shall be required subject to approval by OKC traffic. And that would be on Oak Cliff?

Yes.

Yes. Okay. We can specify speed mitigation on Oak Cliff Drive shall be required.

Can you go to the southern track, Karen? So that tract has 255 units, is that correct? That's track two?

Okay.

So I'm just, I'm a little bit worried about their ability to meet without a stub. That may have to become at least an urgency access. Oh, and yeah, all of the streets, everything will be gated.

I missed that. So that was a question you read in, as you addressed TE2, you read in some all other stuff. So that language is not in the version that we have.

Not in the verbiage right now, no.

So we want to make sure that that is. TE2.

Yes, and that would be TE2, a part of TE2, and I'm more than happy to reread that if that's helpful.

These two.

Would read, access to this parcel shall be from Oak Cliff Drive only. Oak Cliff Drive shall be connected to the east and west as a public street. All other steps shall be gated, subject to emergency access and fire requirements. Okay, thank you so much. There we go. Yeah, that's not a problem whatsoever. And then TE4 being the speed mitigation on Oak Cliff Drive shall be required subject to approval by Oklahoma City traffic.

Okay.

Awesome. I'm about to make a move.

Kaitlin, I had a question on the facade regulations. They added in vinyl in the 70%? Yes. You know why they did that? I mean, is it a specific plan? I know this will have a specific plan, but just don't, what this will, what that is.

You will more than likely see a specific plan, because it'll require commercial building permits.

Yeah.

You'll just need to decide now if you're okay with the vinyl? Okay.

I want to know, right, like it moved out of the 70%, whatever it might be.

Um, okay. So, uh, typically they would utilize about 60% of vinyl product. Um, but if you would like to see something else, we're happy to take suggestions there. Uh, but yeah, because of the immense amount of cleanup that the site is going to require and the developer that that was a product that is utilized.

I think I'd rather see cement siding than vinyl.

Yeah, this is rare for us to leave the cement siding in the 70, but I would rather see the vinyl disappear into the 30 or move into the 30 because it's not very weatherproof in Oklahoma.

We can go ahead and move the vinyl to the 30%.

TE number?

So that would be TE number five.

Okay.

Good. Take the Ephus out.

Ephus? Gone. Gone? Yeah. Is Ephus in there?

Yeah, it's in the 30. I'd like to see it gone. Huh? Ephus. Probably not using the product anyway.

Okay, so TE, I wonder if we can do both of these with TE5 to move, modify facade regulations to move vinyl to 30% and strike EFIS.

And remove EFIS? Yep. Yeah, okay. Is EFIS even used anywhere? Yeah. Really? Yeah. Okay. All right. Is that it?

I have a question on the amenities. I'm assuming this is probably all fenced in and only for the is there is could you guys consider some sort of shared amenities with the neighborhood? I mean, I want to address the fact that they came together and signed a petition, even though they maybe couldn't come today. Is there any chance of shared amenities, at least a portion of it, so that

you're giving the neighbors something for the disruption so the shared amenity piece is difficult because of liability reasons so that's why these are usually gated off especially for like the senior living and things like that and there's you know potentially kids that will live here and play and so it's screened for that reason But again with the 20-foot landscape buffer we have around the entire side as well as the landscaping on Oak Cliff We believe that we've you know buffered it and kind of brought everything as close to the middle as possible There's also like kind of a natural buffer there. There's a portion of the property that's next to the neighborhood. That's not even included here so we were hoping that would kind of take place of the amenity piece just because of the liability reasons yeah, that's referenced I There will be amenities for the people staying there, of course, but yeah, just children and elderly people. We just want to keep it safe.

And a couple blocks away, there is a community park or community center.

Yep. You'll be hard-pressed to keep them out of there because I deal with it all the time with my neighborhood pool that gets used by anybody that can get in there.

I don't know.

And it's still a liability for the HOA. Yeah, absolutely. It's a constant battle.

Okay. Anything else?

Ready for a motion? All right. I'll move to approve PUD 2094. 2142. With the TE's as read into the record.

A motion from Commissioner Privett to recommend the item to City Council for approval subject to the technical evaluations is read in. It's been seconded by Commissioner Powers. Please cast your votes. That item's recommended for approval.

Thank you.

Thank you and good luck.

I will not be here at the next Planning Commission hearing. Well, I'll probably be here, but you'll get to hear from David.

Please tell David I expect him to see him in a beret and a mustache.

Absolutely. I will convey that message.

All right, that was the last item of the agenda, so we'll move to item five, additional items. No additional items. Communications and reports, planning commission committees. I believe there are any active committees. Planning commission members.

I'm excited to welcome our new commissioner. She's going to be such a great addition to the group.

Agreed.

Don't miss any meetings and we'll sign you up for staff.

Another lawyer. We sign them up for stuff even if you're here. We're glad you're here.

Also, between now and our next meeting, there is a... working group on the plat restrictions, the discriminatory plat restrictions. Down at the public library, anybody who just doesn't have anything to do between 10 and noon on

first saturday in august there's there's also on august 4th the planning policy yeah that's right code update uh it's yeah cohort meeting so mostly for commissioners that can attend can we have more than four probably not

If it's public, I guess we could.

You could, and I can't attend that one, and I'm on the committee, so there could be another person to show up.

Okay. Welcome, Lindsay.

Welcome, Lindsay. Usually it's not this long. But sometimes it's longer.

We've had it much longer.

It could have been worse.

Commissioner Miller?

I have nothing. I don't even know how the mic works. And I also feel like you kind of came here your first day and you got a promotion on your first day too. Get to be on a TIF committee.

Mr. Harrison? Mr. Noble? Mr. Peavy?

Thank you all. I guess I want to thank Mayor Holt for the opportunity to serve and for Commissioner Rusty LaForge for his counsel before I decided and to all of you and the planning staff for helping me find my sea legs and for the warm welcome. I really appreciate it and I'm excited to serve.

Planning Department.

No, just I'll echo warm welcome to Commissioner Peaver and I'm glad that we could get that spot appointed so quickly.

Municipal Counselor's Office.

Welcome to the crazy.

Any citizens be heard? I see none and even Barry left, man. All right. No other business.