HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005.01.10_Planning Commission AgendaMs. Marsha Hensley (2)
Owasso Planning Commission
GXTY OF OWq,,RSO O�(9
1'
l 1V /
\NO OFiTHE
January 10, 2005
7:00 PM
PUBLIC NOTICE OF THE MEETING OF THE
OWASSO PLANNING COMMISSION
TYPE OF MEETING:
DATE:
TIME:
PLACE:
NOTICE FILED BY:
TITLE:
Regular
January 10, 2005
7:00 PM
Old Central
109 North Birch
Eric Wiles
Community Development Director
Filed in the office of the Owasso City Clerk and posted at the north entrance to City Hall
at 5:00 PM on December 28, 2004.
Eric Wiles, Community Development Director
OWASSO PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, January 10, 2005 at 7:00 PM
Old Central
109 North Birch
AGENDA
Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes from the December 13, 2004 Regular Meeting.
4. OLS -04 -06 — A request for the review and approval of a lot split of Lot 8, Block 1
of Elm Creek Commercial Comer, to take the southern 25' and attach it to the
adjoining lot to the south, at the northeast comer of East 85a' Street North and
North 12e East Avenue.
5. Preliminaa Plat (Coffee Creek Ill — A request for the review and acceptance of a
preliminary plat for Coffee Creek 11, a proposed residential addition containing 80
lots on 26.97 acres located southwest of East 103`d Street North and North 145d'
East Avenue.
6. Final Plat (Hi-Point) — A request for the review and approval of the Hi -Point Final
Plat proposing five commercial lots on 3.38 acres located south of the southeast
corner of the interchange of the Owasso Expressway and Highway 20.
Final Plat ffyann Plaza)_— A request for the review and approval of the Tyann
Plaza Final Plat proposing one commercial lot on 6.93 acres located south of the
southeast comer of the interchange of the Owasso Expressway and East 96th
Street North.
8. Site Plan Bann Plaza) — A request from Tyann Plaza, LLC for the review of a
site plan proposing a 50,280 square feet facility on 6.93 acres located south of the
southeast comer of the interchange of the Owasso Expressway and East 96th
Street North.
9. Proposed Zoning Code Change — A staff - initiated request to amend the zoning code
to require than future apartment developments in Owasso be located within Planned
Unit Developments (PUD).
10. Report on Monthly Building Permit Activity.
11. Report on Planning Items Previously Forwarded to City Council.
12. Discussion of Development In and Near Owasso.
13. Adjournment.
OWASSO PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING
Monday, December 13, 2004
Owasso Old Central
109 North Birch, Owasso, Oklahoma
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
Ray Haynes
Marilyn Hinkle
Kevin Vanover
Duane Coppick — in @ 7:04PM
Dale Prevett
STAFF PRESENT
Eric Wiles
Marsha Hensley
Dan Salts
Rickey Hayes
Joe Nurre
The agenda for the regular meeting was posted at the north entrance to City Hall on December 8, 2004
at 12:00 PM.
1. CALL TO ORDER - Chairperson Ray Haynes called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM and
declared a quorum present.
2. ROIL CALL
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 8, 2004 REGULAR
MEETING - The Commission reviewed the minutes of November 8, 2004 Regular Meeting,
Marilyn Hinkle moved, seconded by Dale Prevett to approve the minutes. A vote on the
motion was recorded as follows:
Ray Haynes - Yes
Kevin Vanover - Yes
Marilyn Hinkle — Yes
Dale Prevett — Yes
The motion carried 4 -0.
4. OA 04-09 Coventry Gardens — A request for the review and approval of an annexation of the
Coventry Gardens subdivision containing approximately 12.84 acres located at the northwest
comer of North 102°d East Avenue and East 96's Street North.
Chairperson Haynes presented the item. Eric suggested that the above annexation request be
tabled.
Dale Prevett moved to table this item until the applicant is prepared, seconded by Marilyn
Hinkle. A vote on the motion was recorded as follows:
Ray Haynes - Yes
Kevin Vanover - Yes
Marilyn Hinkle - Yes
Duane Coppick — Yes
Dale Prevett — Yes
The motion carried 5 -0.
OWASSO PLANNING COMMISSION
December 13, 2004
Page No. 2
5. OZ 04-15 Smith Farms Marketplace — A request for review and approval of a rezoning of
1.53 acres located southeast of the intersection of East 96'" Street North and North Garnett
Road.
Eric presented the item and described the property location. The applicant is requesting to
rezone 1.353 acres of property from AG to CS (Commercial Shopping District). The
development process was described. Eric explained that the acreage is being used for
stormwater detention for the Smith Farms Marketplace. Legal notice was sent to surrounding
property owners and advertised in the Owasso Reporter. No calls have been received. Staff
recommends approval of OZ -04-15 to change the zoning designation of the subject property
from AG to CS.
Ray Haynes moved to approve the rezoning of approximately 1.353 acres of property located
on the southeast of the intersection of East 96,' Street North and North Garnett Road AG to
CS. The motion was seconded by Dale Prevett. A vote on the motion was recorded as
follows:
Ray Haynes - Yes
Kevin Vanover - Yes
Marilyn Hinkle - Yes
Duane Coppick —Yes
Dale Prevett — Yes
The motion carried 5 -0.
6. OLS 04 -05 — A request for the review and approval of a lot split at 8410 North 123`, East
Avenue, whereby the applicant wishes to take the northern 25' of one lot and attach it to the
adjacent lot.
Eric presented the item and described the location of the property. The development process
was described. The lot proposed to be split is an undeveloped residential lot in the Elm Creek
subdivision. The lot has 200 feet of frontage along N. 123 E. Ave. If approved 25' will be
taken from the residential lot and attached to the office condominium lot to the north. The
additional 25' is intended to be utilized only as a parking lot. The request was reviewed and
approved by the Technical Advisory Committee meeting on November 24,`.
Ray Haynes moved to approve the lot split. The motion was seconded by Marilyn Hinkle. A
vote on the motion was recorded as follows:
Ray Haynes - Yes
Kevin Vanover - Yes
Marilyn Hinkle — Yes
Duane Coppick —Yes
Dale Prevett - Yes
The motion carried 5 -0.
OWASSO PLANNING COMMISSION
December 13, 2004
Page No. 3
Preliminary Plat (Coffee Creek H) — A request for the review and acceptance of a
preliminary plat for Coffee Creek H, a proposed residential addition containing 80 lots on
26.97 acres located southwest of East 103` Street North and North 1456i East Avenue.
The Chair introduced the case and Eric presented the item. The development process was
described. The applicant is requesting approval so that they may plat and eventually develop
the property with single family homes. The applicant proposes a reserve area in the northeast
corner of the subdivision. Sewer will be provided by the City of Owasso. Water service will
need to be coordinated as the property straddles the line of Washington County Rural Water
district #3 and City of Owasso water service areas. The Technical Advisory Committee
reviewed the plat at their November 24, 2004 meeting and had the following comments:
1. Show the purpose of the Reserve Area of 0.05 acres in the southwest corner of the
plat.
2. Show adjacent lots in City View addition.
3. Show contours.
4. A sidewalk is required along North 14501 East Avenue and must be shown on the
construction drawings.
5. The storm siren fee is $16 per acre.
6. The Tulsa Tech interceptor payback fee is $1,000 per acre.
7. Connect Street `T)" with the stub street inside the City View addition.
8. Coordinate hydrant locations with the Fire Marshal.
9. Name the streets within the subdivision.
10. Verify what water district serves the property.
11. Change the width of the utility easement from 15' to 20'
Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat for Coffee Creek R. The Commissioners
had several questions regarding Reserve "A" drainage area. Also discussed was the connection
of Street "D" with the stub street inside the City View addition. The applicant was not present
to address the Commissioners concerns. Staff made the suggestion to table this item until the
applicant can deal with the concerns expressed.
Marilyn Hinkle moved to table the Preliminary Plat for Coffee Creek II until the drainage issues
are addressed and issues regarding the connection of the stubbed street into City View
subdivision are addressed. Ray Haynes seconded the motion. A vote on the motion was
recorded as follows:
Ray Haynes - Yes
Kevin Vanover - Yes
Marilyn Hinkle — Yes
Duane Coppick —Yes
Dale Prevett - Yes
The motion carried 5 -0.
8. Site Plan (First Baptist Church) — A request for the review and approval of a site plan for
OWASSO PLANNING COMMISSION
December 13, 2004
Page No. 4
the addition of 21,187 square feet of building space to the church campus. The property is
19.32 acres and is located at 13307 East 96'h Street North.
Chairperson Haynes introduced the item and Eric presented the staff report. The development
process was explained. The request is in anticipation of an addition to the existing First Baptist
Church site. The proposed additions are in the form of three structures; all attached to the
main building. The site will be served water and wastewater by the City of Owasso. The site
plan was reviewed at the Technical Advisory Committee meeting on November 24, 2004, the
following comments were made:
1. The applicant must provide detention for added stormwater flow that must be
approved prior to building permit issuance.
2. Coordinate fire hydrants with the Fire Marshal prior to building permit issuance.
3. Loop the waterline according to Public Works and Fire Department requirements
prior to building permit issuance.
Staff recommends approval of the site plan for the First Baptist Church subject to the above
conditions being met. Lengthy discussion was held regarding the requirements of the waterline
to be looped around the subject property. Chairperson Haynes stated that he would like to see
the parking lot islands be raised with a planting area.
Ray Haynes moved to approve the site plan subject to the above Staff and TAC
recommendations and subject to the requirement that the parking lot islands, at the end of the
parking areas, be raised with a landscape area. Kevin Vanover seconded the motion. A vote
on the motion was recorded as follows:
Ray Haynes - Yes
Kevin Vanover - Yes
Marilyn Hinkle — Yes
Duane Coppick — Yes
Dale Prevett - Yes
The motion carved 5 -0.
9. Site Plan (Owasso Family YMCAI— A request for the review and approval of a site plan
proposing a 45,800 square feet facility. The property is 5.43 acres and is located at 8300
North Owasso Expressway.
The Chair introduced the case and Eric gave staff review. The requested site plan review is in
anticipation of an addition to the existing YMCA site. The proposed addition is roughly
45,800 sq ft and will be constructed on the location of the existing parking lot. New parking
will be created south of the site. A walking trial has been provided on the site plan throughout
the length of this development. Drainage has been reviewed for the development and has
received approval. The YMCA site plan was reviewed at the Technical Advisory Committee
meeting and the following conditions were noted:
1. Ensure construction fences are specified to protect current customers during
OWASSO PLANNING COMMISSION
December 13, 2004
Page No. 5
construction.
2. Round all curb outside comers in parking lot, to a minimum of 3 -0" radius.
3. Extend the heavy paving area for trash enclosure approach.
4. Add landscape islands to split the three parking rows closer to the street.
5. Replace striping with curbs at the southwest comer of the existing building.
6. Add legend to landscape plan.
7. Update landscape plan to include lights.
8. Provide light pole information to ensure that the site is shielded from the property
line.
9. Storm pipes under entry drives must be RCP pipes rather than corrugated metal.
10. Add parking calculation to site plan.
The applicant has addressed each one of the conditions and revised the site plan. Staff
recommends approval. Required parking spaces were discussed along with light pole
requirements.
Ray Haynes moved to approve the Site Plan subject to the above TAC and Staff
recommendations. Duane Coppick seconded the motion. A vote on the motion was recorded
as follows:
Ray Haynes - Yes
Kevin Vanover - Yes
Marilyn Hinkle — Yes
Duane Coppick — Yes
Dale Prevett - Yes
The motion carried 5 -0.
10. Report on Monthly Building Permit Activity.
11. Report on Planning Items Previously Forwarded to City Council,
12. Discussion of Development In and Near Owasso.
13. Adjournment —Ray Haynes moved, Kevin Vanover seconded, to adjourn the meeting.
A vote on the motion was recorded as follows:
Ray Haynes - Yes
Kevin Vanover - Yes
Marilyn Hinkle - Yes
Duane Coppick — Yes
Dale Prevett - Yes
The motion carried 5 -0 and the meeting was adjourned at 8:00 PM.
OWASSO PLANNING COWMSION
December 13, 2004
Page No. 6
Chairperson
Secretary
Date
MEMORANDUM
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF OWASSO
FROM: ERIC WILES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: LOT SPLIT 04-06
DATE: December 29, 2004
BACKGROUND
The City of Owasso has received a request for the approval of a Lot Split proposing to split Lot 8
of Block 1, Elm Creek Commercial Corner, a commercial subdivision, into two parcels. The
proposal is to split the southern 25' from the lot and attach it to the adjacent parcel to the south
(Lot 9). The remaining 27.85' would then be attached to the adjacent parcel to the north (Lot 7).
The legal descriptions of the two strips of land are included with this report.
HEARING DATE:
Planning Commission: January 10, 2005
LOCATION:
The subject property is located at 8505 North 128s' East Avenue. An area map is included with
this report.
EXISTING LAND USE:
Undeveloped
SURROUNDING LAND USE:
The subject property is surrounded to the North, East, and West by commercial office buildings
and a church across E. 85h St. to the South.
PRESENT ZONING:
CG (Commercial General)
SURROUNDING ZONING:
All property surrounding this property is CG (commercial general)
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS:
The first step in the development of a piece of property in Owasso is annexation. After
annexation, the remaining steps in the development process include rezoning, platting, and site
planning.
One form of property division in addition to platting is a lot split. Lot splits are minor
subdivisions of property into three or fewer tracts, and do not provide for any new public streets.
Typically, this is an appropriate option for a land owner who wishes to take large undeveloped
parcels of land and divide it into two or three smaller tracts.
The subject property is already part of a piece of property that is annexed and platted. A site plan
for the site will not be necessary, since the 25' being split from the existing lot will be attached to
the lot immediately to the north, and that northern lot is already developed.
LOT SPLIT REVIEW PROCESS
The Lot Split review process is initiated when a property owner submits an application to the City
of Owasso requesting the review and approval of a lot split. Upon receipt of a complete
application, the staff reviews the proposal for compliance with the Owasso Zoning Code,
Subdivision Regulations and Engineering specifications.
The proposed Lot Split is then presented to the Owasso Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
for review and recommendation. At that meeting, utility providers and City staff are afforded the
opportunity to comment on the technical aspects of the development proposal. The TAC then
forwards a recommendation to the Planning Commission.
The Owasso Planning Commission conducts a public hearing to determine if the application is
compliant with the Owasso Zoning Code, Subdivision Regulations, and Engineering criteria. The
Planning Commission has the final determination on the application.
ANALYSIS:
As stated above, the request is for the approval of a Lot Split proposing to split Lot 8 of Block 1,
Elm Creek Commercial Corner, a commercial subdivision, into two parcels. The proposal is to
split the southern 25' from the lot and attach it to the adjacent parcel to the south (Lot 9). The
remaining 27.85' would then be attached to the adjacent parcel to the north (Lot 7).
The lot proposed to be split is an undeveloped commercial lot in the Elm Creek Commercial
Corner. The lot has 52.65 feet of frontage along N. 128th E. Ave. If the request is approved 25'
will be taken from the commercial lot and attached to the lot to the south (Lot 9). This will result
in lot nine acquiring 127.62 feet of frontage on N. 128 h E. Ave. The remaining 27.85 feet will be
attached to lot 7 to the north resulting in 80.3 feet of frontage on N. 128`s E. Ave.
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE:
The request was reviewed at the regularly scheduled Technical Advisory Committee meeting on
December 29s' . At that meeting, the TAC recommended approval of the lot split.
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommends approval of OLS 04 -06
ATTACHMENTS
1. Case map
2. Site drawing submitted by applicant
3. Legal descriptions of proposed tracts
E. 86th St. N.
4 3 12 I 1
Owasso community
Development Department
111 N. Main St.
Owasso, OK 74055
918.376.1500
918.376.1597
www.cityofowasso.com
6
2
3
Q
' 12
5
7
W
SU
"ect
9
Pr
z
5
Owasso community
Development Department
111 N. Main St.
Owasso, OK 74055
918.376.1500
918.376.1597
www.cityofowasso.com
E 85 ST N
OLS 04 -06
Elm Creek Commercial
Center
a�
W
N
z
d .wy 10. 20
13
2
3
4
' 12
5
6
11
10
9
E 85 ST N
OLS 04 -06
Elm Creek Commercial
Center
a�
W
N
z
d .wy 10. 20
P.O. Box 227
■ Owasso, OK 74055 -0227 I
f q
u
i
S
.. 1
1 11 MT 7417of 7 all
i
T�
]Neil CD
WITHI
TRAC
t 8 5Ms-r
SCALE: I 100'
W
aD
I
I �
J;
S9 �
I S9 % 935.0(
I .
n ,
V� IV
2009 4446.M2E 5
• . - veoAO— -210 -00
WAL
•.
r!
g2 I g l
1 •
g I '
1
II ro�
P- $5tpo5'f
r�
V
�N
T '
I
-F
wi O 0
�o V
'o
A , N
W
�rw�
rE "a:8th
i
I
7 &51.
Q
19 Iwo
I
I
10
ffiopo
W
I
.
86d3'
I
I
-
- . 10•.06_. _.
40000-
I-
OD
I
�I
�
N
� : •
/2 8`•A�
—
I
;
I
'
Q
40•Y 4f.
'� •�• �Y
Z
gib
o
_
i$
p
°
0
I
I
Z
�
W
W
_
E-- _- -•_—._ __ _ ___.17.6'
I
tOt
h
S 890492 W
_412.28'.— —
ffi3}
r---
-l6ivt- - - - - -1
��at
b533
W
aD
I
I �
J;
S9 �
I S9 % 935.0(
I .
n ,
V� IV
2009 4446.M2E 5
• . - veoAO— -210 -00
WAL
•.
r!
g2 I g l
1 •
g I '
1
II ro�
P- $5tpo5'f
r�
V
�N
T '
I
-F
wi O 0
�o V
'o
A , N
W
"O
� o
i
I
7 &51.
Q
19 Iwo
I
I
10
ffiopo
W
I
.
86d3'
I
I
/0 8506
1
� e
I-
OD
I
�I
�
N
� : •
/2 8`•A�
—
I
;
I
'
62A
co
du
Z
N
o�
i$
°
0
I
I
Z
�
W
W
_
E-- _- -•_—._ __ _ ___.17.6'
I
tOt
h
S 890492 W
_412.28'.— —
W
aD
I
I �
J;
S9 �
I S9 % 935.0(
I .
n ,
V� IV
2009 4446.M2E 5
• . - veoAO— -210 -00
WAL
•.
r!
g2 I g l
1 •
g I '
1
II ro�
P- $5tpo5'f
r�
V
�N
T '
I
-F
wi O 0
�o V
'o
A , N
W
"O
� o
i
0
ti
Q
bl:l
I
I
W
I
I
.✓1=
1
� e
I-
OD
lal'�
N
—
o
I
�-
�
Z
N
°
�
N
I
I
Proposed Tracts:
December 1, 2004
Tract 1
The South 25' of Lot 8, Block 1, Elm Creek Commercial Corner
Amended, and all of Lot 9, Block 1, Elm Creek Commercial Corner
Amended, an addition to the City of Owasso, Tulsa County, State
of Oklahoma, according to the recorded Plat thereof.
Tract 2
The North 27.65 of Lot 8, Block 1, Elm Creek Commercial Corner
Amended, an addition to the City of Owasso, Tulsa County, State
of Oklahoma, according to the recorded plat thereof.
MEMORANDUM
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF OWASSO
FROM: ERIC WILES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT — COFFEE CREEK II
DATE: December 8, 2004
BACKGROUND:
The City of Owasso has received a request for the acceptance of the Coffee Creek II preliminary
plat consisting of 80 lots in 3 blocks on 26.97 acres. The property owner seeks to subdivide and
develop the property in a residential manner consistent with the existing Coffee Creek addition
located immediately to the north.
BEARING DATE:
Planning Commission, December 13, 2004
LOCATION:
The property is located in the southwest comer of E. 103'd St. N. and N. 145th E. Ave.
immediately south of the Coffee Creek addition. A general area map has been included with this
report.
EXISTING LAND USE:
Undeveloped
SURROUNDING LAND USE:
North: Coffee Creek, single family residential
South: City View, large lot residential
East: Large lot residential
West: undeveloped
PRESENT ZONING:
RS-' VOPUD-18 Coffee Creek (Residential District)
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North: RS- 3 /OPUD -18 Coffee Creek (Residential District)
South: RE (Residential Estates District) — Tulsa County
East: RE (Residential Estates District) —Rogers County
West: RS- 3 /OPUD 18 Coffee Creek (Residential District)
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS:
The three primary steps in the development of residential property in Owasso include annexation,
zoning, and platting.
The third step in the development of property is platting. A preliminary plat is required for any
development that proposes to divide land into two or more lots. Preliminary plats illustrate the
development concept for the property, and are often modified significantly after being reviewed
by the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), and the Owasso Planning Commission.
Sometimes, difficult development issues such as existing utility lines, wells, or easements are
brought to light at the preliminary plat stage and must be remedied prior to development.
After the preliminary plat has been reviewed by the City and various utility companies,
construction plans for the development's infrastructure are typically submitted. These plans
include specifications and drawings for stormwater drainage, streets and grading and erosion
control, waterlines, stormwater detention, and wastewater lines. Often, approval is required of
other agencies, such as the Department of Environmental Quality for wastewater collection and
the US Army Corps of Engineers for properties that may be development sensitive.
Once the property development proposal shows a division of lots that is acceptable to both the
developer and the City of Owasso, a final plat application is submitted. A final plat illustrates the
layout and dimension of lots included on the final plat, right -of -way widths, easements, and other
physical characteristics that must be provided for review by the City. After obtaining approval
from the TAC and Planning Commission, the final plat is considered by the City Council. If
approved, the final plat is filed with the office of the County Clerk and governs all future
development on that property.
PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW PROCESS:
Upon receipt of all appropriate materials, the staff initiates the review process that begins with a
thorough analysis of the proposal. The primary consideration is the proposed plat's compliance
with the Owasso Zoning Code and Owasso Subdivision Regulations.
The Preliminary Plat is then presented to the Owasso Technical Advisory Committee, at which
time utility providers and staff are able to review and provide input on the proposals details. The
Technical Advisory Committee, along with city staff, makes a recommendation to the Owasso
Planning Commission.
The Planning Commission, at a public hearing, can approve, approve with modifications, continue
to a date certain or disapprove the preliminary plat.
ANALYSIS:
The applicant is requesting the review and approval of the Coffee Creek II preliminary plat so that
they may plat and eventually develop the property with single family homes. The property is
zoned OPUD 18 with an underlying zoning designation of RS -3 (Residential Single Family
District). The PUD outlines the development standards for the property in a residential manner.
The proposed layout for residential uses in the plat is allowed by right according to the zoning
designation and is consistent with the approved Planned Unit Development.
According to the preliminary plat, the developer proposes to divide the property into 80 lots on 3
blocks. According to OPUD 18, the maximum number of dwelling units allowed in the entire
development area is 814. The approved PUD text allows for a minimum lot width of 60' and a
minimum lot depth of 110'. The minimum allowable lot size according to the PUD text is 7,000
ft 2.
Access into the development will be from two points in the existing Coffee Creek addition to the
north, no access to the subdivision will gained directly from the adjacent arterial N. 145`s E. Ave.
Proposed rights -of -way (R -O -W) within the development are 50' wide while the R O -W of the
adjacent arterial, N. 145a' E. Ave. is also 50'. All public roadways proposed within the
development must be constructed by the developer and constructed to City standards, to include
the provision of sidewalks.
To address utility concerns, the proposed plat illustrates utility easements along the perimeter of
the entire development site and throughout.
The applicant is proposing a reserve area in the northeast corner of the subdivision to address the
detention needs of the development. All reserve areas are to be maintained by the developer or
subsequent homeowners associations. Plans for the drainage and detention of the water from the
site must be submitted to and approved by the City of Owasso before a building permit may be
issued.
Any development that occurs on the subject property must adhere to all subdivision, zoning and
engineering requirements including but not limited to paved streets and sidewalks. Sewer will be
provided by the City of Owasso. Water service will need to be coordinated as the property
straddles the line delineating City of Owasso and Washington County Rural Water district 93
water service areas.
The property will be subject to any payback fees, including Storm Siren fees of $16 per acre and
the Tulsa Technology Center Interceptor Area fee of $1,000 per acre. The fees are payable
before the plat is filed.
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE:
The Preliminary Plat was reviewed at the regularly scheduled Owasso Technical Advisory
Committee on November 24, 2004. At that meeting, the TAC recommended acceptance of the
preliminary plat. The following conditions must to be addressed by the Coffee Creek II Final Plat:
1. Show the purpose of the Reserve Area of 0.05 acres in the southwest corner of the plat.
2. Show adjacent lots in City View addition.
3. Show contours.
4. A sidewalk is required along North 145"' East Avenue and must be shown on the
construction drawings.
5. The storm siren fee is $16 per acre.
6. The Tulsa Tech interceptor payback fee is $1,000 per acre.
7. Connect Street "D" with the stub street inside the City View addition.
8. Coordinate hydrant locations with the Fire Marshal.
9. Name the streets within the subdivision.
10. Verify what water district serves the property.
11. Change the width of the utility easement from 15' to 20'.
RECONIMENDATION:
The staff recommends acceptance of the preliminary plat for Coffee Creek II. The above
requirements will have to be met with the final plat of the subdivision.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. General Area Map
2. Coffee Creek II Preliminary Plat
_.0 w
ubj ect
Property
No 13. 2004
Preliminary Plat
Owasso Community
Development Department
111 N. Main St.
Coffee Creek II
Owasso, OK 74055
918.376.1500
918.376.1597
SW c. of 103rd St./ N. 145th E. Ave.
www.cityofowasso.com
No 13. 2004
D _ Eti ti oa7
�«aws.r y
• 'z i '''�° 3 �� ?$ =$ i Ci Q'ioacwi''�
°'� s•� w� has � s $as � ` � . �yw^a s °> oKy 3
'qqq'q��E � �s�si:'3
°iiL CE.B
d V
rig
V t1 t •NAT :� � �•} \'} °7 Aj I
4 1r�. A sb W nom+ Al ` •` .'.q 1
' u ^
n � t• J. vNf 6 1 _
tl'. •' aisaa '* =} �� I A! 1
�1 x n n e, ` , •l
flip
e •
°� E'! �5 tl9 i e:Pp°8C'iCIP gPlt rl P�K
ir
Aa I. .PPPgill r Y' �i•P E I
a i � � °�'�} �{ '�lii 4 iPq`} = r ;114 €9 l.B�gP , q • q6i a €s €�Tq' � � 'lPq;�(¢ ��' `' ^i •!
!•
e �Pp�i '�`�• {_, it�El� 9g rF�g ; y{
l 6 Tili� '�° 9i�1[ { {iiPtt '1 P ={ '; {iP
' P '
Hill g1 '(9il. q is j0 r !ii
z.- { P€: 1 { P °fi9€i49p E iC{ . 11 eke € T-z e•c € ei ftlip {i @'
P {iP
e . •.� €EigP 0;r
) e c
i !� 1Pa li +q1 E{i;PfS`9 '�Iff4P s 6 { {'P
fill } Pk � i i iiP€ ! tl{�=t { ' i � l 1 v e6 }p P�e1� ,11 • g { {i 1 � � ipEi 3 i p 6 P" g€P. @sy sg•g �p eiP ne p�} ; 0 P r � T l e { i . q E i 1111111 i lP i I
1`{;�q111
`is.l E P
ill p it
� if i! •� 1 l P: 9 �Te ! IP � � 7 {; q��p ir�s� : P avP
s A PP
� �4EP=
T PP P ?� s 1€ . 1 ei P• �i' 7 ! 7 °qq ° ! i� rp }• °. { V e 1
,Pa
W .• PP v N }`i 9= : �� Ii;9Pp P 1 Pp� !!gq l P 4 9'1 y ! �r� {! 31-A �e � �- �p � :i �p;P
d i :q ?q••� i•j q ���P Vii {�� �;q� 7e�;Pe � °FP� �i`ts� :
a ° iPEP s 5 •4 !fl i Piq°e`Pgi ! ' {k !{ " �: P }I P I €E 9 e { l a i .{.i li 9 tli i ! 1• ���..s 9 s��Pisyl9 . i m e.9 6 u it }39• l E�MIN 5 �lj9P
° . Tx P.£
v
P .
t
,sP• Mt
MEMORANDUM
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF OWASSO
FROM: ERIC WILES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: FINAL PLAT (Hi- Point)
DATE: January 3, 2005
BACKGROUND:
Hi- Point, LLC has submitted an application to the Planning Commission for approval of a final
plat for Hi- Point, located 360' south of Highway 20 on the east side of the Owasso Expressway.
The applicant wishes to create 5 lots on 3.38 acres for commercial use. A general area map is
attached.
PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS:
The property is approximately 3.38 acres in size and is zoned CS (Shopping Center District). The
subject property is undeveloped. The property to the north is zoned CS and is occupied by a QuikTrip.
Property to the east and to the south is zoned CS and is undeveloped. The Owasso Expressway runs
along the western border of the property, and Garrett Creek Commercial Center is developing on the
west side ofthe highway.
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS:
The four primary steps in the development of commercial property in Owasso include annexation,
zoning, platting, and site planning.
The third step in the development of property is platting. A preliminary plat is required for any
development that proposes to divide land into two or more lots. Preliminary plats illustrate the
development concept for the property, and are often modified significantly after being reviewed
by the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), and the Owasso Planning Commission.
Sometimes, difficult development issues such as existing utility lines, wells, or easements are
brought to light at the preliminary plat stage and must be remedied prior to development.
After the preliminary plat has been reviewed by the City and various utility companies,
construction plans for the development's infrastructure are typically submitted. These plans
include specifications and drawings for stormwater drainage, streets and grading and erosion
control, waterlines, stormwater detention, and wastewater lines. Often, approval is required of
other agencies, such as the Department of Environmental Quality for wastewater collection and
the US Army Corps of Engineers for properties that may be development sensitive.
Once the property development proposal shows a division of lots that is acceptable to both the
developer and the City of Owasso, a final plat application is submitted. A final plat illustrates the
layout and dimension of lots included on the final plat, right -of -way widths, easements, and other
physical characteristics that must be provided for review by the City. After obtaining approval
from the TAC and Planning Commission, the final plat is considered by the City Council. If
approved, the final plat is filed with the office of the County Clerk and governs all future
development on that property.
ANALYSIS:
The applicant is requesting this review in order to facilitate commercial development on the five
lots. The subject property is zoned CS Commercial Shopping Center District. According to the
City of Owasso Zoning Code, uses allowed in CS districts include offices, studios, restaurants,
convenience stores, shopping centers, service stations, etc. The preliminary plat for the project
was accepted in June, 2003.
Regional stormwater detention has not been provided for this development — as the five lots
develop, the uses that locate on the lots will be required to provide individual detention facilities.
Bulk and area requirements have been met as have access requirements. Water will be provided
by Washington County Rural Water District #3.
The Technical Advisory Committee reviewed the Final Plat at their December 29h regular meeting. At
that meeting, utility providers and city staff are afforded the opportunity to comment on the application
and request any changes or modifications. The Technical Advisory Committee recommended approval
of the Hi -Point Final Plat with the following conditions:
1. Include in the deed of dedication that on -site detention will be required of each lot.
2. A turn- around will be required at the end of the service road.
3. The west perimeter easement must be 17.5'.
4. Include utilities language in the plat's covenants.
5. Note the actual book and page for each easement shown on the plat.
The staff recommends approval of the IE -Point final plat subject to appropriate actions taken to satisfy
the TAC concerns.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Case Map
2. Final Plat
' Subject
Property
Owasso Community
Development Department
Final Plat
N
1 I I N. Main 0
Owaa ssoo, , OK 740 55
n
Hi -Point
W E
918.376.1500
918.376.1597
S
www.cityofowasso.com
,bnua.y io, zoos
Final Plat
" `
s+Arc" way.: ro
N
Hi -Point "
Y
• PARi OF R S W1
T
µMS tO � xCP CI OYMSS611i15� N,." OWLw ,IR
11
' � d
$ySkETQB: dNNEA^_'R2lOPBl
gench=k Sdrveying 8 Hi-0 n4 LLC.
^�
Land $av , lnL P.O. BOX A59
=us
P ew tore o,csze. 0.... 11055
,osw sx[[* rn,xz
6.avo. p.n— P055 POOnc (918) 213 -5330
vna.c (OIO) ¢14-90ei
Local'an Moo
O.ddUdap:
vmrniu: �i�v $.�n. r, xummna. w..ar.wr�:" _mna
m... a....vv OptNRSfHRI51Gh
k rrmm v x`y:
0.0.1gIGR CiSURVET
vwi� Tnnonnnn m.smnnnrn. ay.eaxv avvu
QABIGTE Of {YLSL MTMiOVN
K'NLc
Nme vIS. iW:
MEMORANDUM
TO: PLANNING CON AUSSION
CITY OF OWASSO
FROM: CHIP MCCULLEY
CITY PLANNER
SUBJECT: FINAL PLAT ( Tyann Plaza)
DATE: January 3, 2005
Tyann Plaza, LLC has submitted an application to the Planning Commission for approval of a final
plat for Tyann Plaza, located south of E. 966' St. N. on the east side of the Owasso Expressway.
The applicant wishes to create one lot on 6.93 acres for commercial use. A general area map is
attached.
PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS:
The property is approximately 6.93 acres in size and is zoned CS (Shopping Center District). The
subject property is undeveloped. The property to the north is zoned CS and is undeveloped. Property
to the east and to the south is zoned OM (Medium Intensity Office) and is also undeveloped. The
Owasso Expressway runs along the western border of the property. Waterford Plaza, Walgreen Drug
Store, and Home Depot border the development to the Northeast. An off site stormwater detention
center is adjacent to the southeast.
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS:
The four primary steps in the development of commercial property in Owasso include annexation,
zoning, platting, and site planning.
The third step in the development of property is platting. A preliminary plat is required for any
development that proposes to divide land into two or more lots. Preliminary plats illustrate the
development concept for the property, and are often modified significantly after being reviewed
by the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), and the Owasso Planning Commission.
Sometimes, difficult development issues such as existing utility lines, wells, or easements are
brought to light at the preliminary plat stage and must be remedied prior to development.
After the preliminary plat has been reviewed by the City and various utility companies,
construction plans for the development's infrastructure are typically submitted. These plans
include specifications and drawings for stormwater drainage, streets and grading and erosion
control, waterlines, stormwater detention, and wastewater lines. Often, approval is required of
other agencies, such as the Department of Environmental Quality for wastewater collection and
the US Army Corps of Engineers for properties that may be development sensitive.
Once the property development proposal shows a division of lots that is acceptable to both the
developer and the City of Owasso, a final plat application is submitted. A final plat illustrates the
layout and dimension of lots included on the final plat, right -of -way widths, easements, and other
physical characteristics that must be provided for review by the City. After obtaining approval
from the TAC and Planning Commission, the final plat is considered by the City Council. If
approved, the final plat is filed with the office of the County Clerk and governs all future
development on that property.
ANALYSIS:
The applicant is requesting this review in order to facilitate commercial development on one 6.93
acre tract. The subject property is zoned CS Commercial Shopping Center District. According to
the City of Owasso Zoning Code, uses allowed in CS districts include offices, studios, restaurants,
convenience stores, shopping centers, service stations, etc. Since this is a one lot development
there is no preliminary plat required.
Off site stormwater detention has been provided for this development to the southeast in the
stormwater detention center behind Home Depot. Water will be provided by the city of Owasso.
The Technical Advisory Committee reviewed the Final Plat at their December 29's regular meeting. At
that meeting, utility providers and city staff are afforded the opportunity to comment on the application
and request any changes or modifications. The Technical Advisory Committee recommended approval
of the Tyann Plaza Final Plat with the following condition:
1. All separate instruments shown on plat must be noted by book and page.
RECOIV 3MNDATION:
The staff recommends approval of the Tyann Plaza final plat subject to appropriate actions taken to
satisfy the TAC concerns.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Case Map
2, Final Plat
U
Owasso Community
Development Department
111 N. Main St.
Owasso, OK 74055
918.376.1500
918.376.1597
www.cityofowasso.com
Subject
Property
Ee 96th Ste is
Waterford
Plaza
Home
Depot
,4
M�
1. I,. IIS 1,.�
TYANN PLAZA
Southeast corner of Owasso Expressway
and N. 96th St. E
d u.ry 10, 20%
tlY
°
fr
e
a Es ?E
I
4�
N
[w
b`Llg
d^5 r�m�gNS�
diboo..aQ
x
z
Y4
iY S iEREi €Se j � �
Ail
E! Y
R
I gY a
a °o
tl €Y
€4
9Z
9�
ya°a
�6
e�
€Y
YB
�Y
9tl
Yy
R�
F�
i�
8p �d
5
atl:
z "g
$
�g
W3
xe x
a
Y
°
O
Z
M
3 N
�a
a 3
i
tlY
°
fr
e
a Es ?E
I
4�
N
[w
b`Llg
d^5 r�m�gNS�
diboo..aQ
x
z
Y4
iY S iEREi €Se j � �
Ail
E! Y
R
I gY a
a °o
tl €Y
€4
9Z
9�
ya°a
�6
e�
€Y
YB
�Y
9tl
Yy
R�
F�
i�
8p �d
5
atl:
z "g
Q
�g
a
CL
Z
M
3 N
�a
a 3
i
tlY
°
fr
e
a Es ?E
I
4�
N
[w
b`Llg
d^5 r�m�gNS�
diboo..aQ
x
z
Y4
iY S iEREi €Se j � �
Ail
E! Y
R
I gY a
a °o
tl €Y
€4
9Z
9�
ya°a
�6
e�
€Y
YB
�Y
9tl
Yy
R�
F�
i�
8p �d
5
atl:
z "g
NIEMORANDUM
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF OWASSO
FROM: CHIP MCCULLEY
CITY PLANNER
SUBJECT: SITE PLAN (TYANN PLAZA)
DATE: JANUARY 4, 2005
BACKGROUND:
The City of Owasso has received a request for the review of the Tyann Plaza site plan, proposing
a 50,280 ft' facility on a 6.93 acre parcel of property located south of E. 96,h St. N. on the east
side of the Owasso Expressway. A general area map has been included with this report.
HEARING DATE:
Planning Commission, January 10, 2005
EXISTING LAND USE:
The existing 6.93 acre subject property is undeveloped.
SURROUNDING LAND USE:
The property to the north is zoned CS (Shopping Center District) and is undeveloped. Property to
the south and to the east is zoned OM (Medium Intensity Office) and is also undeveloped. The
Owasso Expressway runs along the western border of the property.
PRESENT ZONING:
The subject property is zoned CS (Shopping Center District).
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS:
The primary steps in the development of property in Owasso include annexation, zoning, platting,
and site planning.
The subject property is now at the site planning stage of development. Site plans are reviewed by
the TAC and Planning Commission. Issues such as building setbacks, parking, detention, access,
landscaping, and building footprint are presented in the site plan. Once a site plan is approved,
the development is clear to apply for a building permit and to submit construction plans for the
building's foundation, plumbing, electrical system, and HVAC.
SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS:
The Site Plan review process is initiated when a developer or builder of a particular project
submits an application for a site plan review to the City of Owasso. The application typically
includes a site plan, grading and drainage plan, erosion control plan, utility plan, and landscape
plan.
The review of the site plan begins with a thorough analysis by the City Planner and City Engineer
for compliance with the Owasso Zoning Code, Subdivision Regulations, and Engineering Design
Criteria.
The Site Plan is then presented to the Owasso Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for review.
The TAC review board provides comments on the technical aspects of the plan and presents a
recommendation along with the City staff to the Owasso Planning Commission.
The Owasso Planning Commission holds a public hearing to determine if the site plan is compliant
with city standards. The Planning Commission may grant approval of the plan as presented or
with conditions. If the Planning Commission grants approval, the applicant then makes any and
all prescribed changes and submits a final copy to the City Planner. Once the final site plan is
received and reviewed for compliance with the conditions of approval, the applicant may proceed
with the development process.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW:
During the review of a site plan elements for consideration include specific site details such as
street details, parking lots, building size and placement, sidewalks, and drainage details. The
Owasso Zoning Code, Subdivision Regulations, and Owasso Engineering specifications provide
appropriate guidelines for the review of all site plans conducted by city staff, the Technical
Advisory Committee and the Planning Commission.
ANALYSIS:
The applicant is requesting this review in order to facilitate a 50,280 ft commercial development
on one 6.93 acre tract. The subject property is zoned CS (Shopping Center District). According
to the City of Owasso Zoning Code, uses allowed in CS districts include offices, studios,
restaurants, convenience stores, shopping centers, service stations, etc.
The proposed development is consistent with the Owasso 2015 Land Use Master Plan as it calls
for Commercial/Office zoning in the area. It is also complimentary with the current development
in the area. The site is situated adjacent to Waterford Plaza, Walgreen Drug Store, and Home
Depot.
The proposed site plan is situated on a highly visible and accessible segment of the Owasso
Expressway (U.S. Hwy 169) south of E. 96`h St N. Access to and from the site will be gained via
the service road.
Off site stormwater detention has been provided for this development to the southeast in the
stormwater detention center behind Home Depot. The site will be served sewer and water by the
City of Owasso.
The development has met all bulk and area requirements with 695.2 feet of frontage (150' is
required), and a floor area ratio of 0.17 (0.50 is required). The property has met the setback
requirements as well, with 50 feet from the center of the street in the front (50' is required) and
25 feet of set back on the side and rear of the building (none is required).
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE:
The Tyann Plaza site plan was reviewed at the regularly scheduled Owasso Technical Advisory
Committee on December 29, 2004. At the meeting, the committee unanimously recommended
approval of the site plan with the following conditions:
I. Additional detention calculations must be submitted prior to building permit issuance.
2. Public works must decide ownership of storm drainage system prior to building permit
issuance.
3. Public works must approve sanitary sewer plans prior to building permit issuance.
4. AEP -PSO must approve transmission easement clearance prior to building permit
issuance.
The committee also made the following suggestions:
1. Landscape islands in parking lot raised instead of striping.
2. Trash enclosures angled.
The applicant will be required to address each one of the TAC conditions in an acceptable manner
and revise the site plan to reflect such changes.
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommends approval of the site plan for the Tyann Plaza contingent upon the Technical
Advisory Committee's requirements being met.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. General Area Map
2. Tyann Plaza site plan
P•
Owasso Community
Development Department
111 N. Main St.
Owasso, OK 74055
918.376.1500
918.376.1597
www.cityofowasso.com
Subject
Property
E. 96th St.
Waterford
Plaza
Home
Depot
i
►��o
►� 4
IN
011h a
TYANN PLAZA
Southeast corner of Owasso Expressway
and N. 96th St. E
I
,U
°
�s
���
n 1 1.
9 ST
s
s rAa, su
+s �
N
W E
S
�+ 10, zoos
& g ƒ _-
/»� 2 &§
J .
. §!
• � § �� � ;� .|§|
! | §| / / §.
.� .�
�
1\
�x
.�
%(
�
2
! %
|\
a A
Rill s
� ! � YyF¢gfiiy]y 'i �yy 1�y �t w xP�81 a °9d7 iiiiiiiii iii
�� ��� ��€ X�� tl!!§171I�wa � ��Yi yGl f7 Illtll 111111
/ Ill
��\ e
ulu nnunnlnnunuuu ®I
IIIIIIIIIII�tl 111 lllllllllll It tlll
111111111111 IIII11111111111111111
11111111111111 1111111111111111111
Ililllp 1111111, IIIIIItIllllllll ll
o
e
0
\' 1 �i 1 0 3xK b \� as a \ ice\. �1 ♦ \`♦
\ 9 ��;�w. ..�
1 3 1 1�RK bc�_ � \ a�eQ �a, \\ ♦,
i T /y \`vIJA \fib �.� `V ♦� ♦•
MEMORANDUM
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF OWASSO
FROM: JOINT CITY, SCHOOL, AND PLANNING COMMISSION
COMMITTEE
SUBJECT: FINDINGS REGARDING APPROPRIATE FORMS OF
REGULATION FOR APARTMENTS — PROPOSED
ORDINANCE 9808
DATE: December 29, 2004
BACKGROUND:
This joint committee of City, School, and Planning Commission officials was formed to
evaluate the current criteria and processes used by the City of Owasso to regulate
apartment developments, and to consider any changes to those criteria and processes that
might ensure the compatibility of future multi - family developments with adjoining
neighborhoods. The committee is comprised of ten members, six citizen members and
four staff members. The committee began meeting in August 2004 with the goal of
recommending an update of the apartment regulations to the City Council by January
2005.
Susan Kimball, Mayor
Brent Colgan, Councilor
Dr. Clark Ogilvie, School Superintendent
Ken Fisher, School Board
Frosty Turpen, School Board
Marilyn Hinkle, Planning Commission
Kevin Vanover, Planning Commission
ISSUES EXAMINED BY THE COMMITTEE:
Staff Members
Rodney Ray, City Manager
Eric Wiles, Community Dev. Director
Dan Yancey, Police Chief
Over a series of meetings, the committee examined a progression of topics relating to the
development of apartments in Owasso. First, the committee considered what existing
schools are situated adjacent to multi - family zoning districts, what current zoning
restrictions exist that regulate development around schools, and what traditional planning
rationale suggests for locating apartments around schools. Next, the committee evaluated
concerns including traffic, screening, and fencing.
The committee then analyzed different planning alternatives that could be used to address
the concerns. After analyzing the alternatives, the committee examined apartment
location standards from seven cities with similar situations to Owasso. The cities that
were studied include:
1.
Broken Arrow, OK
2.
Edmond, OK
3.
Mustang, OK
4.
Norman, OK
5.
Shawnee, OK
6.
Plano, TX
7.
South Lake, TX
Once these regulations were studied and compared with Owasso's regulations, two
hypothetical examples of apartment developments in Owasso were evaluated. One of the
development examples was for a piece of property in Coffee Creek, while the other
example was for a piece of property south of 76a' Street North and east of Mingo Road.
After looking at these hypothetical case studies, the committee researched the
development options that would be provided via planned unit developments. Finally, the
committee examined the legal considerations of planned unit developments.
SELECTED ALTERNATIVE — PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD):
Of the alternatives examined, the one that allowed the most flexibility to the City to deal
with issues of uniqueness was the alternative offered by Planned Unit Developments
(PUD). A PUD is a supplemental zoning district overlaid onto an existing zoning
classification (such as RS -3) and provides an alternative to conventional development.
The outline development plan and accompanying development standards applicable to a
particular tract in the PUD require the approval of the Owasso Planning Commission and
City Council.
BENEFITS OF A PUD - There are several benefits to the City and the developer that are
provided by a PUD. First, it encourages innovative land development while maintaining
appropriate limitations on the character and intensity of use and helps assure
compatibility with nearby properties. Second, a PUD allows greater flexibility within the
development so that unique physical features of the particular site can be utilized. Third,
a PUD allows smaller lots and setback requirements while limiting the overall number of
dwelling units, thus encouraging the provision and preservation of meaningful open
space. Fourth, a PUD allows various uses within the same development — uses that are
not allowed within the same district under conventional zoning rules. Finally, a PUD
encourages a more productive use of land, while allowing the development to remain
consistent with the public objectives and standards of accessibility, safety, infrastructure,
and land use compatibility.
PUD REGULATIONS — Under current Owasso regulations, a PUD may be submitted for
land located within any general zoning district. In every instance, the PUD is to be
reviewed as to the proposed location and character of the uses and the unified treatment
of the development of the tract. Each PUD is assigned a maximum permitted number of
dwelling units, this is obtained by dividing the total area of the development by the
minimum land area per dwelling unit permitted in the applicable use district; in the case
of the RM -2 Multi- family district, the minimum area per dwelling is 3,100 square feet.
In order to encourage the use of open space, PUD lot area minimums are only 800 square
feet and PUD lot width minimums are only 20 linear feet, though these allowances are
unlikely to come into play within an apartment development. Issues such as landscaping,
greenbelts, screening, access management, outdoor lighting, and building height are not
prescribed by the zoning code, but the Planning Commission and City Council can set
forth standards for these issues within the approved PUD and require that the standards
be incorporated into the development's subdivision plat. Code requirements that pertain
to infrastructure standards, drainage, and floodplain management remain just as they
would if the development occurred conventionally instead of within a PUD.
By applying apartment developments to a requirement that they be located within a PUD,
the City would be better able to evaluate site - specific concerns.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE #808:
Included with this memorandum is ordinance #808, an ordinance that is proposed for
adoption by the City. The ordinance would require that any future apartment
developments within the city limits be located within a PUD.
RECOMMENDATION:
The committee finds that high - density residential developments bring with them unique
issues that must be addressed with unique solutions. Therefore, the committee
recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of ordinance #808,
whereby the City Council would amend the zoning code to require that any future
apartment development be located within a planned unit development.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Proposed ordinance #808
2. Committee memorandum dated November 4, 2004
3. Committee memorandum dated September 2, 2004
4. Committee memorandum dated August 2, 2004
ORDINANCE No. 808
An ordinance amending Section 1008 of the Zoning Code of the City of Owasso,
Oklahoma, by creating Section 1008.3(d), requiring that new multi - family dwellings
in Owasso be located within Planned Unit Developments (PUD).
WHEREAS, high- density residential developments bring with them unique issues that
must be addressed with unique solutions, and
WHEREAS, Planned Unit Development is an alternative to conventional development
where the particular tract is under common ownership or control, and a detailed plan
(outline development plan) for the development of the tract as a unit is proposed and
submitted for public review, and
WHEREAS, the purposes of the Planned Unit Development are to:
(a) Permit innovative land development while maintaining appropriate
limitation on the character and intensity of use and assuring compatibility
with adjoining and proximate properties;
(b) Permit flexibility within the development to best utilize the unique
physical features of the particular site;
(c) Provide and preserve meaningful open space; and
(d) Achieve a continuity of function and design within the development,
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF TBE CITY OF
OWASSO THAT
SECTION I. Owasso Zoning Code Section 1008 is hereby amended by adding a new
section to be codified as Section 1008.3(d), which Section and subsections to read as
follows:
SECTION 1008 USE UNIT 8 MULTI -FAMMY DWELLING AND SE%MAR
USES
1008.3 Use Conditions
d. Multi - family dwelling:
Multi- family dwellings must be located within a Planned Unit Development.
APPROVED this 1 1th day of January, 2005.
ATTEST:
Sherry Bishop, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Ronald D. Cates, City Attorney
City of Owasso, Oklahoma
Susan Kimball, Mayor
MEMORANDUM
TO: MEMBERS OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON APARTMENT
LOCATION REGULATIONS
FROM: ERIC WILES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: ISSUES CONCERNING SCHOOLS AND APARTMENTS
DATE: November 4, 2004
BACKGROUND:
On September 20, the committee continued a dialogue about the issues and concerns
surrounding policy of locating apartments near public schools in Owasso. Two of the
directives that came out of that meeting: 1) derive a proposed list of standards that could
be required of all future apartment developments in Owasso, so that negative impacts on
existing, nearby developments could be mitigated, and 2) examine two hypothetical
situations in Owasso that show different types of apartment location concerns.
POTENTIAL LIST OF APARTMENT STANDARDS:
Many cities that are similar to Owasso in size and situation have developed standards that
are used in regulating the development of apartments. The municipal codes of five cities
in Oklahoma and two cities in Texas were examined in order to derive regulatory
benchmarks for apartment development standards. Those cities that were studied
include: Norman, OK; Shawnee, OK; Mustang, OK; Broken Arrow, OK; Edmond, OK;
South Lake, TX; and Plano, TX. The staff desired to determine standards for apartments
in these cities for five different development aspects: 1) Bulk and area regulations, 2)
Screening, 3) Landscaping and green belts, 4) Access management, and 5) Outdoor
lighting requirements.
BULK AND AREA REGULATIONS — Bulk and area regulations provide standards for
lot size and structure placement on the lot. Below are lists that illustrate the average
benchmark standards of bulk and area from the seven cities studied by the staff. To the
right of the average benchmarks, Owasso's current standards are shown in parentheses.
Minimum Lot Area:
Minimum Lot Area per Dwelling Unit:
Minimum Frontage:
Maximum building coverage of lot:
Front yard setback:
Side yard setback:
Rear yard setback:
Maximum building height:
Low - density High- density
Zoning district Zoning ig strict
22,000' (10,000)
8,400'(6,000')
3,000' (4,300')
2,400'(3,100')
200' (100)
150'(100')
50% (NA)
50% (NA)
75' (35')
75' (35')
75' (10')
75' (10)
75' (20')
75' (10)
35' (30)
NA (NA)
SCREENING — Each of the codes of the cities that were examined require that
apartments be screened from less intense, adjoining residential uses. The codes do not
mandate what material must be used to provide the screening, but in all cases it must be
at least six feet in height, opaque, not made of vegetation, and must provide a visual
separation of uses. The Owasso code currently provides these same requirements.
LANDSCAPING AND GREENBELTS — Greenbelts are strips of land designed to put a
particular width of grass and other vegetation between a parking lot and the adjacent
roadway. Four of the seven benchmark communities require greenbelts around the
perimeter of lots occupied by apartments. For three of these four communities, the
required greenbelt width is 35'. Currently, Owasso does not require a greenbelt around
the perimeter of an apartment development.
Apart from regular landscape requirements imposed on all developments, none of the
cities that were studied require special landscaping standards just for apartments.
ACCESS MANAGEMENT — Access management standards deal with the way that
developments impact transportation and how they integrate into the surrounding road
system. Some aspects of access management specify separation standards between curb
cuts and intersections, while others state what types of roadways must be used for access.
Four of the seven communities studied require that, for the higher- density multi - family
zoning districts, apartments must be located along collector roads or arterial roads. None
of the communities required special standards for uses located within lesser - density
multi - family zoning districts. None of the codes include provisions for curb cut
separation distances particular to apartment developments. Owasso's code does not
currently provide access management standards particular to apartment developments.
OUTDOOR LIGHTING REQUIREMENTS — Only three of the cities studied have
outdoor lighting ordinances. The other four have adopted codes that simply include a
provision that lights from commercial developments not be allowed to shine directly into
2
single- family residential subdivisions. The three cities that do have lighting ordinances
provide requirements that include apartments with commercial developments within the
regulations. These regulations provide that all outdoor lights with apartment
developments be pointed downward, be restricted in height and light intensity, and, in
one instance, state the maximum number of foot - candles that are allow to result from the
lights at the development's property line.
HYPOTHETICAL EXAMPLES OF APARTMENT DEVELOPMENTS:
Having examined real codes for the development of apartments in communities similar to
Owasso, the staff desired to explore the different types of considerations that might
appear in potential apartment developments here in Owasso.
HYPOTHETICAL EXAMPLE #1— Attached is a staff report of a hypothetical apartment
development in Coffee Creek, specifically, 46 units on 3.28 acres at the intersection of
East 103`a Street North and North 138"` East Avenue (immediately east of Northeast
Elementary School).
The area in which these apartments would be constructed is newly developing, with a
mixture of uses designed to attract new residents to Owasso. The character of the
neighborhood is oriented to residents, and a variety of uses are provided within the
neighborhood to serve as many residential needs as possible, such as dwellings,
education, offices, and recreation. The structures are of a generally unified style, and the
investment into the area by property owners is significant.
Because of the nature of the surrounding area, much consideration must be given to any
new development at the proposed location, in order to achieve a level of compatibility
with properties that have already been built upon. Such compatibility could be increased
by proper landscaping, screening, lighting, access, setbacks, and other considerations.
HYPOTHETICAL EXAMPLE #2 — Also attached is a staff report of a hypothetical
apartment development south of 76`b Street, specifically, 140 units on ten acres 560'
south of 76"' Street and immediately behind Fin -X, Inc.
The area in which these apartments would be constructed is largely undeveloped, with
only two businesses, one manufacturing facility and one tobacco retail store, in the area.
The area is low -lying and largely in the floodplain. It is currently being filled and used as
a vehicle and equipment storage site. There are no residences in the area, and the site is
not easily visible from 76"' Street North.
Because of the lack of development that has occurred in the vicinity of the site, much
consideration must be given to servicing the property with utilities and roads. Also,
caution must be taken with the development because of the floodplain and fill.
3
Compatibility with adjacent residential developments is not an acute concern because
there are no adjacent residential developments.
OBSERVATIONS GATHERED FROM HYPOTHETICAL EXAMPLES — It is easy to
see that the two hypothetical apartment development examples are very different from
each other. The Coffee Creek development is well served by transportation and utilities
and would be easy to physically develop, but compatibility must be ensured between the
proposed development and existing land uses that surround the site. The 7e Street site
is out of the way and largely hidden, but much investment is required to physically
develop the property according to municipal codes.
Different apartment developments require different approaches. Code requirements that
should be applied in certain cases appear unnecessary in other cases. What is needed is
the flexibility to provide for development in these very different conditions in a
responsible manner that allows a reasonable return on the developer's investment while
protecting the existing investments of any nearby property owners.
THE OPTIONS PROVIDED VIA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS:
One mechanism that can be used to address developments of such different character is
the Planned Unit Development (PUD). A PUD is a supplemental zoning district overlaid
onto an existing zoning classification (such as RS -3) and provides an alternative to
conventional development. The outline development plan and accompanying
development standards applicable to a particular tract in the PUD require the approval of
the Owasso Planning Commission and City Council.
BENEFITS OF A PUD - There are several benefits to the City and the developer that are
provided by a PUD. First, it encourages innovative land development while maintaining
appropriate limitations on the character and intensity of use and helps assure
compatibility with nearby properties. Second, a PUD allows greater flexibility within the
development so that unique physical features of the particular site can be utilized. Third,
a PUD allows smaller lots and setback requirements while limiting the overall number of
dwelling units, thus encouraging the provision and preservation of meaningful open
space. Fourth, a PUD allows various uses within the same development — uses that are
not allowed within the same district under conventional zoning rules. Finally, a PUD
encourages a more productive use of land, while allowing the development to remain
consistent with the public objectives and standards of accessibility, safety, infrastructure,
and land use compatibility.
PUD REGULATIONS — Under current Owasso regulations, a PUD may be submitted for
land located within any general zoning district. In every instance, the PUD is to be
reviewed as to the proposed location and character of the uses and the unified treatment
of the development of the tract. Each PUD is assigned a maximum permitted number of
dwelling units, this is obtained by dividing the total area of the development by the
minimum land area per dwelling unit permitted in the applicable use district; in the case
13
of the RM -2 Multi- family district, the minimum area per dwelling is 3,100 square feet.
In order to encourage the use of open space, PUD lot area minimums are only 800 square
feet and PUD lot width minimums are only 20 linear feet, though these allowances are
unlikely to come into play within an apartment development. Issues such as landscaping,
greenbelts, screening, access management, outdoor lighting, and building height are not
prescribed by the zoning code, but the Planning Commission and City Council can set
forth standards for these issues within the approved PUD and require that the standards
be incorporated into the development's subdivision plat. Code requirements that pertain
to infrastructure standards, drainage, and floodplain management remain just as they
would if the development occurred conventionally instead of within a PUD.
By applying apartment developments to a requirement that they be located within a PUD,
the City would be better able to evaluate site - specific concerns.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS OF PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS:
At the previous discussion, the group articulated five questions relating to the legality of
regulating apartments that the staff researched with the City Attorney. Attached with this
report is a memorandum of answers to these questions from the City Attorney. The five
questions that were posed by this group at the previous discussion were:
1) May we require apartments in an RM district to develop within a PUD, while
other uses allowed within an RM district do not have to develop within a
PUD?
2) May we require only apartments to develop within a PUD, while not
extending the requirement to other uses exclusive to use unit 8?
3) What are the legal considerations for developing spacing requirements for
apartments and schools?
4) May the City of Owasso legally require spacing between apartments and
schools by ordinance?
5) Assuming we adopted an ordinance, could the City of Owasso require PUD
for apartment developments on land already zoned for multi- family use?
QUESTIONS #1 AND 42 - The City may require apartment to develop within a PUD,
and may restrict this requirement to apartments alone. It has already been established
that a PUD requirement would allow the City to be better able to evaluate site - specific
concerns. Therefore, a PUD requirement would in fact be a furtherance of an authorized
purpose of the City, and the law would not be unreasonable, arbitrary, or constitute an
unequal exercise of police power.
QUESTIONS #3 AND #4 — The City may require spacing between apartments and
schools, as long as the City finds some purpose to do so. In similar ordinances requiring
certain spacing between schools and alcoholic beverage sales establishments, and
between schools and sexually oriented businesses, the purpose of the regulation is to
prevent the exposure of students to the products being offered for sale. In order to
E
separate schools from apartments, a similar purpose would have to be found that would
create a need for students to remain separate from apartments or from the effects of
apartments.
QUESTION #5 — The City may require PUD for apartment developments on land already
zoned for multi - family use. Since the property owner, who currently has an expectation
that the property can be used for apartments, would still be able to use the property for
apartments after the regulation goes into effect, the PUD requirement may be extended to
land already zoned for multi - family use. The City Attorney's memo clearly states,
"Admittedly, the technical requirements for the implementation and enjoyment of such
use would change; however, the permitted use would otherwise remain unchanged."
FINDING:
The staff finds that the most appropriate way to mitigate any issues that cause apartments
to be incompatible with their neighboring land uses is to require that apartment
developments be located within a PUD.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Staff report for Apartments Example #1
2. Staff report for Apartments Example #2
3. Memorandum from City Attorney dated November 8, 2004
R
MEMORANDUM
TO: RODNEY RAY
CITY MANAGER
FROM: ERIC WILES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: ISSUES CONCERNING SCHOOLS AND MULTI- FAMILY
ZONING REGULATIONS
DATE: September 2, 2004
BACKGROUND:
In June of this year, the staff was directed to evaluate the various issues concerning
schools and multi - family zoning regulations. This directive stemmed from an action to
rezone a tract of land adjacent to an Owasso school for RM -2 Apartment use. The action
drew significant attention from area property owners, and the City Council expressed a
desire to conduct a dialogue on the issue with Planning Commission and School District
officials.
CURRENT ZONING REGULATIONS FOR APARTMENTS -
The Owasso Zoning Code currently provides for apartments to be located on any
property zoned for multi - family use. If that property lies adjacent to RS single - family,
RE estate, or RD duplex districts, then the apartments must be screened from those
districts by a screening wall or fence.
EXISTING SCHOOLS ADJACENT TO MULTI - FAMILY ZONING DISTRICTS -
Five schools within the Owasso Public School District are currently situated adjacent to
multi - family zoning districts. These include Ator, Barnes, Hodson, Northeast, and Smith.
ZONING RESTRICTIONS AROUND SCHOOLS -
According to Owasso's codes, there are two land uses that must exhibit spatial separation
from schools. Establishments that sell alcoholic beverages must be located at least 300'
away from a school. Sexually oriented businesses must be located at least 1,000' away
from a school.
TRADITIONAL PLANNING RATIONALE —
Traditionally, it is considered appropriate to locate schools within the interior of
neighborhoods, as a focal point for those areas surrounding the school. Alternately,
commercial/retail uses are suggested for placement along heavily- traveled arterials, away
from the interior of neighborhoods. Between the schools on the interior and the
commercial uses on the arterials, it is suggested in planning practice to place residential
uses, with single - family uses buffered from the schools on the interior and from the
commercial on the arterials by multi - family uses. Apartments and other forms of multi-
family uses provide not only the density to support the schools and areas of commerce,
but their placement near schools provides a relatively high concentration of students easy
access to the school, reducing traffic congestion and increasing pedestrian safety.
PREVIOUS MEETING BETWEEN CITY AND SCHOOL OFFICIALS:
The staff arranged for the dialogue of schools and apartments to begin with a discussion
between eleven city and school officials. The purpose of this dialogue is to determine
whether it is appropriate to locate multi - family uses (chiefly apartments) near schools.
The first discussion was held on August 9, 2004. During this meeting, specific issues that
had been expressed by the property owners during the rezoning process were talked
about. The ten specific issues that were noted by the staff are:
1. Crime
2. Traffic
3. Property Values
4. Income Levels of Multi- family Housing Residents
5. Loss of the Sense of Neighborhood in Nearby Subdivisions
6. Burden on School System
7. Screening
8. Fencing
9. Playground
10. Distance Between Apartments and School
The issues were combined into general alternatives, and these alternatives are 1) Creating
distance requirements in the zoning code to require a certain spacing between school
buildings and apartment buildings, 2) Prohibiting the rezoning of land near schools for
multi - family use, 3) Leaving the regulations as they currently stand, and 4) Requiring that
apartments be developed within Planned Unit Developments (PUD's) so that specific
restrictions could be placed upon them in a case by case basis.
TEN CONCERNS EXPRESSED ABOUT APARTMENTS:
In order to be able to accurately evaluate these four alternatives, the staff first examined
the ten specific concerns from which the four alternatives stemmed.
2
CRIME —
Discussions of apartments commonly include concerns that the development of
apartments will result in an increase in the crime rate in their neighborhood that is higher
than it would be if the neighborhood consisted solely of single - family uses. But much of
that belief may be based on incorrect perceptions. People may tend to think of apartment
properties as a single "house". But an apartment property with 250 units is more
accurately defined as 250 houses. A resident may mentally record every police visit to an
apartment development as happening at a single house, but to truly compare crime rates
between apartments and single - family houses, the person would have to count each
household in the apartment development as the equivalent of a separate single - family
house. When we do that, we might find that crime rates between the different housing
types are comparable.
During the August 9a' discussion, Police Chief Yancey reported that Owasso's records
indicate no discernable correlation between apartments and crime rates in Owasso.
Subsequent to this report, the staff researched the influence of multi - family housing upon
crime rates from a national perspective.
A recent study relating crime rates and apartments cited a 1996 analysis in Arizona that
found that when police data are analyzed on a per -unit basis, apartments actually create
less demand for police services than a comparable number of single family houses.' In
Tempe, AZ a random sample of 1,000 calls for service showed that 21 percent came from
apartments, while over 30 percent of Tempe's population lived in apartments in 1996.
Similarly that same year, a random sample of 600 calls for service in Phoenix, AZ found
that an apartment unit's demand for police services was 42 percent of the demand created
by single - family houses, when the number of apartment households equaled the number
of single- family households.
The study found that some apartment residents choose to live in apartments because they
feel more secure in apartments than in single - family housing; they perceive that because
there are so many people coming and going that it is more difficult for criminals to act
without being discovered. Some recent apartment developments have strengthened that
perception by including built -in alarms and controlled access systems into their buildings.
Based on the above information provided by the Owasso Police Department and
researched by the staff, the staff finds that the presence of apartments is not a reason to
expect an increase in a neighborhood's rate of crime.
TRAFFIC —
An additional concern that is often raised when a property is considered for multi - family
use is that a new apartment development will result in an unreasonable increase in traffic
levels.
An example of the traffic concern can be recalled in the case of the rezoning around
Smith Elementary School. At that time, the issue was addressed by explaining that any
development located on the property considered for the multi - family zoning would have
to include a street connection to East 9e Street North. The street connection would be
made via the construction of a service road along the east side of the Owasso
Expressway. If apartments were to develop on the subject property, the staff would
require that the access into the site be from the north, not from the west or south — the
directions leading toward the existing residential neighborhoods. The new access to the
north might also decrease traffic commuting to the school, as some parents taking their
children to the elementary school would likely choose to access the school from 9e
Street instead of 86'h Street, thereby lessening the volume of traffic on 123`d East Avenue
connecting the school to 86'h Street. It might also be practical for some school bus routes
to be adjusted to access 9e Street rather than 80h Street.
For a national perspective, the staff examined the 1999 American Housing Surveyz,
prepared by the U.S. Census Bureau. The report stated in part that apartments can help
improve traffic congestion for two reasons. One reason for this finding listed by the
survey is that apartment residents average one motor vehicle per household, while owner-
occupied houses average two vehicles. Further, data from the Institute of Transportation
Engineers indicates that apartment households generate 30 to 40 percent fewer vehicle
trips than single - family units 3 Of course, since apartment developments result in a more
densely arranged population than single - family developments, there could be more
vehicle trips per acre with apartments, even though there are fewer vehicle trips per
dwelling unit with apartments.
Based on the local and national information described above, the staff finds that concerns
about increased levels of traffic can been adequately addressed. There is a need to be
able to study the impact that apartment developments have on traffic flows. If this need
could be addressed early in the planning process, citizens and city officials alike could be
better informed, and thereby use that information to make decisions that could transform
an entire area of the community.
PROPERTY VALUES —
Another concern presented by concerned owners of property in the vicinity of the
property considered for multi - family zoning was that the development of apartments
would lower their property values.
It is reasonable to speculate that if not properly designed, apartments might detract from a
neighborhood's value. Conversely, if a reasonable investment is made in the design of
apartment developments, it is likely that a neighborhood's value would be enhanced.
The Urban Land Institute reports that between 1987 and 1995, the average annual
appreciation rate for single - family houses within 300 feet of an apartment building was
3.12 percent, compared to 3.19 percent for single - family houses not near an apartment
property4.
The staff finds that, through environmental planning and exterior landscaping, apartments
can be made fully compatible with surrounding single - family neighborhoods in Owasso,
in a manner that does not threaten the neighborhoods' property values.
INCOME LEVELS OF MULTI - FAMILY RESIDENTS —
Another concern that has been brought forward during the discussion of the relationship
between apartments and schools is that apartment households have income levels less
than that of single - family households. This concern stems from a belief that an increase
in the number of lower- income households could lead to corresponding increases in poor
test results in school and higher crime rates.
The staff has not researched the relationship between income levels and test results or
crime rates. However, there exists a variety of housing options among apartment choices.
Some apartments offer housing opportunities to low- income households, while other
apartments are too expensive for low - income households. On one hand, the Owasso
Master Plan does recommend that the community should have as many types of housing
options as possible. On the other hand, it may be less than desirable to locate low- income
housing within established neighborhoods near existing elementary schools.
Contributing factors to the feasibility of constructing low- income apartments could
include landscaping requirements and architectural requirements, which may require
investments too great for the development of low- income apartments.
The staff finds that there may be some instances in Owasso where the location of low -
income apartments might be inappropriate, while realizing that not all apartment
developments offer housing opportunities to low- income households.
LOSS OF THE SENSE OF NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
IN NEARBY SUBDIVISIONS —
Another concern typically expressed by citizens during rezoning processes is that new
developments will cause existing neighborhoods to lose some of their sense of
community. The concern includes assumptions that apartment dwellers would not
become participatory citizens of the community, and would not contribute to the area's
sense of identity.
First, the staff finds that with proper site planning, with proper attention to landscaping
and architectural design, there is no reason why apartments should be separated
physically from the neighborhood around them. Indeed, if multi - family housing can be
designed to be compatible with existing neighborhoods, then apartments could become an
indispensable enhancement to a neighborhood.
5
To answer the second part of the concern, an issue more social in nature than physical,
the staff researched the findings of the University of Chicago's National Opinion
Research Center, who conducted a 10 -year study of 8,958 respondents5, some of whom
resided in apartments and some of whom resided in single - family houses. The results of
the study are reflected in the chart shown below.
An immediate and personal form of community involvement could be considered to be
socializing with one's neighbors, captured on the left side of the chart above. The data
suggests that apartment residents interact with their neighbors significantly more than do
house owners.
Religious institutions may be important focal points for social and charitable activities.
The results of the study indicate that nearly half of all apartment residents attend religious
services at least once a month, while slightly more than half of all house owners do so.
The majority of apartment residents (60.3 %) identify closely with their town or city of
residence, and four percent more of house owners do the same.
Two - thirds of apartment residents are found to be at least somewhat interested in local
politics, about 5% less than the house owners.
Based on the above data, the staff finds that there is insufficient evidence to believe that
apartment residents would not contribute to their neighborhood and community.
BURDEN ON THE SCHOOL SYSTEM —
Another observation commonly expressed by property owners is that new developments
of apartments would unduly over - burden the local school system, in many cases
. perceived to already be overcrowded.
®Apartment Residents
80.0%
■ House Owners
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Percent Percent Who
Percent Who
Percent
Interacting Wth Attend Church
Identify with
Somewhat to
Neighbors
Town
Very Interested
in Local Politics
An immediate and personal form of community involvement could be considered to be
socializing with one's neighbors, captured on the left side of the chart above. The data
suggests that apartment residents interact with their neighbors significantly more than do
house owners.
Religious institutions may be important focal points for social and charitable activities.
The results of the study indicate that nearly half of all apartment residents attend religious
services at least once a month, while slightly more than half of all house owners do so.
The majority of apartment residents (60.3 %) identify closely with their town or city of
residence, and four percent more of house owners do the same.
Two - thirds of apartment residents are found to be at least somewhat interested in local
politics, about 5% less than the house owners.
Based on the above data, the staff finds that there is insufficient evidence to believe that
apartment residents would not contribute to their neighborhood and community.
BURDEN ON THE SCHOOL SYSTEM —
Another observation commonly expressed by property owners is that new developments
of apartments would unduly over - burden the local school system, in many cases
. perceived to already be overcrowded.
To analyze this concern, the staff again researched the 1999 American Housing Survey
by the Census Bureau2. According to the AHS, single - family owners are significantly
more likely to have school -age children than apartment renters. There are, on average, 64
school -age children for every 100 owner - occupied single - family houses, while there are
21 children for every 100 apartments. From the data, it appears that, on a unit -by -unit
comparison, single - family houses are home to more school children than apartments.
Nationally, 70 percent of school children live in owner- occupied housing (though this
figure does include more housing types than just owner- occupied single - family houses).
The staff finds that the data suggests that apartments do not place an added burden on
school districts. In fact, the higher percentage of child -less households in apartment
developments may actually help fund the school system by paying their developments'
property taxes through their monthly rent.
Another common concern of property owners during the rezoning process is about how a
new development would be screened from adjacent property, a concern that stems from a
need that adjacent land uses be compatible with each other. During the rezoning, the
staff s typical response to this concern is that screening is a facet of development that is
reviewed during the site planning stage of development, not during the zoning stage of
development.
Landscaping always plays a primary role in any development's compatibility with its
environment and surrounding land uses. Landscaping is used to soften the transition
between uses, and can also enhance the appearance and perception of a development.
The staff finds that it would be reasonable to desire to know how a multi - family
development would be landscaped and screened from adjacent properties during the land
use (zoning) part of the planning process, and earlier than the site planning part of the
process, as is currently the case in Owasso. Similarly to the benefits that a detailed, early
review of a specific development's design would provide for evaluating traffic and
property value issues, such review could prove invaluable to determine what type of
screening would be necessary for a new development.
FENCING—
Fencing is a type of screening and visual separation different from traditional landscaping
types of screening. Fencing can provide a measure of security for a development, and
often makes a new development more acceptable for users of adjacent land. Fencing is
almost always a primary issue for property owners who live adjacent to land being
considered for development.
Similarly to the staffs finding regarding landscaping screening above, the staff finds that
it would be preferable to examine the fencing requirements for a multi - family
development during the land use part of the process, prior to the site planning part of the
development process.
I' • • 1UO
Another concern that has been expressed in the past is that apartment residents located
near schools would use the facilities at the schools, such as playgrounds, after hours when
classes are not being held.
The staff finds that it is reasonable to expect a school to be the focal point of a
neighborhood, similarly to a park or perhaps a church. The outdoor areas of a school,
such as soccer fields and playgrounds, could provide much - needed recreational resources
for area residents, whether those residents happen to live in single - family houses or
multi - family apartments.
SEPARATION—
Another topic of consideration that surfaces during the discussion of apartments is that of
requiring a certain amount of separation between multi - family uses and schools.
There appear to be some possible benefits of locating apartments near schools. Students
of the school could walk to school if the apartments were near the school, while they
might have to take the bus to school if the apartments were located farther away. Traffic
levels around the school might be less in the morning and afternoon if a portion of the
school's students lived within walking distance. The level of safety to pedestrians
(namely the students) might increase if the students had a relatively short walk to school
and if the traffic levels around the school were decreased.
Another issue involving separation between schools and apartments is "how far is far
enough ?" It is very difficult to determine by what means one should determine how far
apart to space apartments from schools. Additionally, does the municipal government
have the right to require that these types of land uses be separated? Thus far, the staff has
found no empirical evidence to indicate that the city has any legitimate authority to
forward a regulation that mandates the separation of schools and multi - family uses.
FOUR PLANNING ALTERNATIVES TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS:
As mentioned earlier in the memorandum, the ten concerns have been discussed and
combined into general alternatives, and these alternatives are 1) Creating distance
requirements in the zoning code to require a certain spacing between school buildings
and apartment buildings, 2) Prohibiting the rezoning of land near schools for multi - family
use, 3) Leaving the regulations as they currently stand, and 4) Requiring that apartments
be developed within Planned Unit Developments (PUD's) so that specific restrictions
could be placed upon them in a case by case basis.
ANALYSIS:
The staff does recognize, with the research above, that several significant planning
factors must be accounted for when considering whether to approve the development of
apartments near schools. Many of the items, such as traffic, maintaining adjacent land
values, compatibility with adjoining land uses, screening, and fencing should be
considered individually, since all properties and their situations are unique. The one
alternative that truly allows the city to review these concerns individually is the
requirement that apartments be developed within Planned Unit Developments (PUD's).
BENEFITS OF REQUIRING PLANED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS —
PUD's are allowed by the Owasso zoning code to any type of development. By placing a
development within a PUD, a developer may have some options that are not available by
placing the property within a conventional zoning district. One of these options is the
ability to have multiple land uses within the same development, while other options
include relaxed bulk and area requirements and setback requirements. PUD's have
advantages for the city, as well as the developer. When reviewing an application for a
PUD, the Planning Commission has broad authority to recommend specific standards for
screening, landscaping, access management (such as driveways), architectural features
such as masonry facades, and other features that are specific to that certain site under
review.
By applying apartment developments to a requirement that they be located within a PUD,
the city would be better able to evaluate site - specific concerns. In the case of the
property near Smith Elementary that was the catalyst for this discussion, a PUD
application would have allowed the Planning Commission and City Council to consider
the effects that the project would have on traffic and on the existing development near
the site. Currently, the city must wait until the project is proposed via a site plan to make
such considerations.
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommends that the city and school officials involved in this discussion of the
relationship between schools and apartments find that the most reasonable option to use
in the effort to make apartment developments compatible with schools is to require that
apartments be located within Planned Unit Developments.
REFERENCES
1. Elliot D. Pollack and Company. 1996. Economic and Fiscal Impact of Multi -
Family Housing. Arizona: Arizona MultihousingAssociation.
2. National Housing Survey, 1999. Washington D.C.: U.S. Census Bureau.
3. Data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers as reported by Niles
Bolton Architect. 2002: Washington D.C.
4. The Case for Multifamily Housing. 1991. Washington D.C.: The Urban Land
Institute. Study conducted between 1987 and 1995.
5. General Social Survey. 1996. Chicago: National Opinion Research Center, the
University of Chicago.
10
MEMORANDUM
TO: RODNEY RAY
CITY MANAGER
FROM: ERIC WILES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: ISSUES CONCERNING SCHOOLS AND MULTI- FAMILY
ZONING REGULATIONS
DATE: August 2, 2004
CURRENT ZONING REGULATIONS FOR APARTMENTS:
The Owasso Zoning Code currently provides for apartments to located on any property
zoned for multi - family use. If that property lies adjacent to RS single - family, RE estate,
or RD duplex districts, then the apartments must be screened from those districts by a
screening wall or fence.
EXISTING SCHOOLS ADJACENT TO MULTI- FAMILY ZONING DISTRICTS:
Five schools within the Owasso Public School District are currently situated adjacent to
multi - family zoning districts. These include Ator, Barnes, Hodson, Northeast, and Smith.
ZONING RESTRICTIONS AROUND SCHOOLS:
According to Owasso's codes, there are two land uses that must exhibit spatial separation
from schools. Establishments that sell alcoholic beverages must be located at least 300'
away from a school. Sexually oriented businesses must be located at least 1,000' away
from a school.
TRADITIONAL PLANNING RATIONALE:
Traditionally, it is considered appropriate to locate schools within the interior of
neighborhoods, as a focal point for those areas surrounding the school. Alternately,
commercialhetail uses are suggested for placement along heavily - traveled arterials, away
from the interior of neighborhoods. Between the schools on the interior and the
commercial uses on the arterials, it is suggested in planning practice to place residential
uses, with single - family uses buffered from the schools on the interior and from the
commercial on the arterials by multi - family uses. Apartments and other forms of multi-
family uses provide not only the density to support the schools and areas of commerce,
but their placement near schools provides a relatively high concentration of students easy
access to the school, reducing traffic congestion and increasing pedestrian safety.