HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012.09.10_Planning Commission AgendaRecord Copy
OWASSO PLANNING COMMISSION
September 10, 2012
6:00 PM
PUBLIC NOTICE OF THE MEETING OF THE
OWASSO PLANNING COMMISSION
TYPE OF MEETING:
Regular
DATE:
September 10, 2012
TIME:
6:00 PM
PLACE:
Old Central
109 North Birch
NOTICE FILED BY:
Marsha Hensley
TITLE:
Assistant City Planner
Filed in the office of the Owasso City Clerk and posted at the north entrance to City
Hall at 9:00 AM on September 6, 2012.
Marsha Hensley, Assistant City Plan r
OWASSO PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, September 10, 2012 at 6:00 PM
Old Central
109 North Birch
AGENDA
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes from, the August 13, 2012 Regular Meeting
4. Final Plat - 9inetvEight - Consideration and appropriate action related to the
request for the review and acceptance of a final plat consisting of one (1) lot,
one (1) block on 14.645 acres located south of Owasso Medical Campus and
north of Owasso Market.
5. Discussion regarding Chapter 8 of the Zoning Code - Planned United
Developments
6. Report on Items from the August 22, 2012 TAC Meeting
• Final Plat - 9inety -Eight
7. Report on Items Previously Forward to City Council
• Annexation #OA 12 -01, Powderhorn
8. Community Development Report
• Report on Monthly Building Permit Activity
• Report from Economic Development Director
9. Discussion on Planning Commission Member Training Workshop, October 5,
2012, 11:OOAM - 2:OOPM.
10. Adjournment
OWASSO PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING
Monday, August 13, 2012
The Owasso Planning Commission met in regular session on Monday, August 13, 2012 at
Old Central per the Notice of Public Meeting and Agenda posted on the City Hall bulletin
board at 4:00 p.m. on August 8, 2012.
ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER
Dr. Callery called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
ITEM 2. ROLL CALL
PRESENT ABSENT
Dr. Paul Loving
Dr. Mark Callery
David Vines
Tammy Laakso
Alex Mills (in @ 6:08 PM)
A quorum was declared present.
STAFF
Karl Fritschen
Marsha Hensley
Bronce Stephenson
Daniel Dearing
Julie Lombardi
Dan Salts
ITEM 3. Approval of Minutes from July 2, 2012 Special Meeting.
The Commission reviewed the minutes.
David Vines moved, seconded by Tammy Laakso, to approve the minutes. A vote on the
motion was recorded as follows:
YEA: Callery, Loving, Vines, Laakso
NAY: None
Motion carried 4 -0.
ITEM 4. Annexation #OA 12 -01 - Consideration and appropriate action related to a
request for the annexation of approximately 49.94 acres, located on the
west side of North Mingo Road approximately one - quarter mile north of
East 1061h Street North.
Bronce Stephenson presented a brief overview, recommending the Planning Commission
approval of the annexation. The following are concerns expressed by several Owasso
OWASSO PLANNING COMMISSION
August 13, 2012
Page No. 2
citizens that were present:
Joe Folleur -11019 North 92 East Avenue - Stormwater run off concerns. The city needs to
spent money to prevent flooding in this area prior to annexation. The homeowners of
Metro Heights have been promised detention and they didn't get what was promised to
them.
Robert Higgins -11235 North 94 East Avenue - Lives at the dead end street; adding this as
a through street is a problem. There is constant flooding in his back yard. Maybe
increase the lot sizes to prevent flooding.
Sue Piggott- 8500 East 116 Street North - Wondering if the city would be in favor of lining
the ditches with concrete. Handed out a report showing the history of water runoff in the
area (attached).
Jan Thomas - 7623 East 116 Street North - The Commissioners doesn't seem to be listening
to the citizens. Nobody is speaking back to us. It doesn't take much to flood the
entrance into Metro Heights. We are very frustrated. The Commissioners need to have
their eyes wide open.
Sandy Brown -11236 North 94 East Avenue - Spoke to the people at FEMA and they said
it will be very expensive to build on this property. Do not annex. Presented a letter of
opposition to the Commissioners (attached).
Julie Lombardi explained to the citizens that the Commissioners have to consider if the
property can be provided Owasso municipal services, such as police, fire, refuse.
collection and sanitary sewer. Alex Mills stated that he feels more comfortable with it
being annexed into the city and developed under city supervision instead of Tulsa
County.
Alex Mills moved to approve the annexation, Dr. Loving seconded. A vote on the motion
was recorded as follows:
YEA: Callery, Loving, Vines, Laakso, Mills
NAY: None
Motion carried 5 -0.
ITEM 5. Final Plat -96th Street North Center — Consideration and appropriate action
related to the request for the review and acceptance of a final plat
consisting of two (2) lots, one (1) block on 2.200 acres located
approximately 332' east of the northeast corner of East 96th Street North and
North Garnett Road.
Bronce Stephenson presented a brief overview, recommending the Planning Commission
approval of the final plat for 96th Street North Center. Ricky Jones with Tanner Consulting
answered questions regarding the storm water detention.
OWASSO PLANNING COMMISSION
August 13, 2012
Page No. 3
Tammy Laakso moved to approve the above final plat, David Vines seconded. A vote
on the motion was recorded as follows:
YEA: Callery, Loving, Vines, Laakso, Mills
NAY: None
Motion carried 5 -0.
ITEM 6. Lot Split #OLS 12 -01 - Consideration and appropriate action related to the
request for the review and acceptance of a lot split located on a tract of
land described as Lot 1, Block 23, Original Town of Owasso.
Bronce Stephenson presented a brief overview, recommending the Planning Commission
approval of the lot split. Matt Christensen with U.S. Cellular was present to answer
questions.
Alex Mills moved to approve the lot split, David Vines seconded. A vote on the motion
was recorded as follows:
YEA: Callery, Loving, Vines, Laakso, Mills
NAY: None
ITEM 7. Public Hearing - Minimum Side Yard Setbacks for Swimming Pools -
Consideration and appropriate action related to a request to review and
recommendation to the City Council of a draft for a proposed zoning code
text amendment regarding Chapter 2, Section 240.2 (F).
Bronce Stephenson presented a brief overview, recommending the Planning Commission
approval of the proposed zoning code text amendment.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED AT 7:15 PM.
There were no comments from citizens.
Alex Mills moved to close the public hearing, Dr. Loving seconded the motion. A vote on
the motion was recorded as follows:
YEA: Callery, Loving, Vines, Mills, Laakso
NAY: None
Motion carried 5 -0.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 7:16 PM.
Tammy Laakso had concerns regarding the amount of time it will take for staff to check
every pool site. She also has concerns with a pool being placed too close to a fence
OWASSO PLANNING COMMISSION
August 13, 2012
Page No. 4
and the danger of children jumping from the fence into the pool.
David Vines moved to approve the above zoning code text amendment subject to the
following changes:
• Second line should read "a minimum setback of five (5) feet ".
• Strike the words "or equipment" in the sixth line down.
• The last line should read "five (5)" feet from any side lot line is met ".
Dr. Loving seconded.
A vote on the motion was recorded as follows:
YEA: Callery, Loving, Vines, Mills
NAY: Laakso
Motion carried 4 -1.
ITEM 8. Report on Items from July 25, 2012 TAC Meeting
ITEM 9. Report on Items Previously Forwarded to City Council
ITEM 10. Community Development Report
ITEM 11. Discussion on Planning Commission Member Training Workshop, October 5,
2012, 11:00AM - 2:OOPM.
ITEM 12. ADJOURNMENT - David Vines moved, seconded by Tammy Laakso, to
adjourn the meeting. A vote on the motion was recorded as follows:
YEA: Callery, Loving, Vines, Laakso, Mills
NAY: None
Motion carried 5-0 and the meeting was adjourned at 8:15 PM.
Chairperson
Vice Chairperson
Date
August 13, 2012
Reference: Annexation of the Powderhorn Ranch
Rodney Ray
Mayor Bonebrake
Jeri Moberly
Chris Kelley
Charlie Brown
Patrick Ross
H. Dwayne Henderson P.E.
The Owasso City Planner was given several copies of our notebook and cd's to help you understand the
existing flooding problems in this area. The drainage problem has worsened since 1977 with the
building of Walmart, storage area and residential areas at German Corner. As each housing
development was built, the water flows have grown worse.
The files attached are those submitted in 2002 because of the annexation and rezoning of two sub-
divisions, both would drain into Ranch Creek and cause great harm to the residents along N. 92nd East
Ave. and 106th St. North. A 160 acre piece of land rezoned for development is on the corner of 106th
and Memorial, the other is Metro Heights at 1081h & Mingo Road.
The conditions still apply and these reports give a full history of our efforts to get the City of Owasso to
realize that a regional detention has to be constructed close to the corner of 116th St. North at Mingo
Rd. before further development can be allowed. We feel there Is full disregard for the residents down
stream of this problem, and a good question for you to answer would be .... would the City let this
happen if the downstream residents were in the city limits instead of residents of Tulsa County.
Please examine these reports carefully, they only ask for "No Adverse Impact" to other land ownersl
ue Piggott
8500 E. 116th St. North
Owasso, Oklahoma 74055
September 29, 2002
The Annexation Committee
City of Owasso
Owasso, Oklahoma
Dear Members of the Annexation Committee:
We would like to request the City of Owasso evaluate the importance of the 4 to Fix the County
Bond issue, which is a tax all of us in Tulsa County are paying. The multiple purposes of this tax
are suited for different areas, the one we are' most interested is flood mitigation, current floodplain
maps and the potential of this information to the areas that already have flooding problems. Now,
this information your city has not been able to study, is affordable to all communities within
Tulsa County by purchasing GIS computer software. I have enclosed information to assist in
your understanding of this request. (Special Management Conference, Aug. 14, 2002)
Part of the reason for the 4 to Fix the County Tax was to stop flooding by having up-to -date
information since the current flood maps nationwide were made in the late 1970's. A national
program "No Adverse Impact" underwritten by FEMA, will make local governments and the
community responsible for future land uses that cause no harm, a principal which seems logical
for Owasso to readily adopt. To assist you in understanding the scope of this action, enclosed is a
presentation given by Representative Thad Balkman at a conference of the Oklahoma Floodplain
Managers Association this past spring.
The citizens who live close to the upper Ranch Creek tributaries above and below E. 106d` St. N,
between Mingo and Memorial, have talked to Tulsa County since last year about our flooding
problems. We have been assured that our information is accurate and our location will be shown
on the new flood maps. In addition to Tulsa County, the Corp of Engineers and the Oklahoma
Water Resources Board have been provided with pictures of the water problems in this area. All
agencies seem to agree that correcting our problems above 106d' St. N. would be easy to solve,
but it will take years to get the creek below 106'b Street cleared of trees to allow the faster flow of
water from our area. It seems that no county, city or state has enough funds to solve all their
flooding problems, hence the need for current flood maps, stormwater flows and a basin study to
mitigate problem areas and in tun, not create more flooding with future developments when land
use plans do not consider future water flows.
The reason we want the City of Owasso to embrace and work within the principals of No
Adverse Impact, is simply the knowledge we have gained over the past year. Detention ponds,
stormwater drainage systems, aerobic sewer systems, soil content, topography maps, designs for
housing developments, construction of a pond uphill from a detention pond to slow the flow of
water, all are dependent on current design criteria and sub- division development standards set by
the local government.
Last summer then Mr. Sokolsky applied for a residential zoning change in Tulsa County, we
wanted to know how the water runoff would be controlled. Today, we still want to know how the
water runoff will be controlled? After seeing the flooding problems at Metro I, the total disregard
for personal property at Metro II as well as Honey Creek at Bailey Ranch, can you really blame
us for wanting to know this answer? Of course, we realize it will depend on a plat submitted by
the developer, however, your local standards and the variances allowed control the outcome.
Currently the 160 acres (Tract A) above 106's St. N. drains onto 3 or 4 different properties to the
east (N. 92nd E. Ave) and south. The present storm water runoff into this same area flows from
land elevations of 720 feet to the northwest above I I St. North and N. Memorial. The homes
and property of those who live closest to the Ranch Creek tributaries on 10e St. North receive
water runoff from both directions, converging at the lowest elevation (636 ft) in this square mile.
And, there is no comprehensive stormwater drainage plan for this area, not even a basin study nor
study of water flows.
If houses are built in the floodplain just below 106d` St. N. and the land elevation is raised, how
would this impact . drainage above 106" St. North? Consequently, future developments to the
northeast of 1060' St. N., as projected on your Land Use Map, will increase the water flows and
can raise the 100 -year floodplain. By this time, the developer has sold the lots and gone, the
builder has sold his homes leaving more homeowners to become threatened with possible
flooding. Future water flows must be studied to gain this knowledge.
Hopefully, the City of Owasso as a whole will back No Adverse Impact and the public will not
be shrugged off like the Planning Commission did in August 2002, by refusing to look at our
flooding pictures —even when laid on the desk right in front of them. All committees and the City
council should be made aware of existing flooding problems that have been identified by citizens
anytime a new area is to be annexed. The Planning Commission can still vote to annex, and add
the provision it is developed in accordance with a Planned Unit Development. Our residents
showed proof of flooding problems in August and September 2001, before the development of
Metro 11. Three of the five current council members saw our photographs in addition to 4 of the
current 5 planning commission members. A notebook of those photographs was delivered and
signed for by the city planner, Donna Sorells plus a letter with photos was given to Mr. Phil
Lutz. In our opinion, there is no reason this problem was not addressed by the Planning
Commission at their annexation hearings in August and September 2002. At a meeting on July 2,
2002 with Mr. Ray, Mayor Brogdon, Mr. Helm and Mr. Lutz, we were told a regional detention
facility had been discussed with Tulsa County 10 years ago, for the mine pits area east of N.
Mingo Road because of the water problems. Yet, Country Estates was allowed to be developed
as well as Metro I & II. What did the developer's project engineer show on his hydrology study_?
What did Owasso's flood plain manager and engineering staff show for the downstream effects
from these developments? Currently all the water northeast of Mingo & 116" St. N. as well as
the new Metro I addition flow into ditches along Mingo Road and into a tributary across the
private property at 11208 N. 97" E. Ave (Powderhom Ranch). This 50+ \- acreage recently sold
to a developer, what studies or criteria does Owasso currently have in place to control how this
land is going to be developed that will cause no harm downstream, upstream or surrounding
landowners? Stormwater from 116" St. North flows behind Hillside Estates into this acreage as
well as the drainage from the east side of N. 92nd E. Ave. Stormwater from 116" St. N. and
Memorial flow on the west, side of N. 92nd E. Ave.
This neighborhood isn't trying to stop new development, we want responsible development from
the City of Owasso, Tulsa County and the developers. We are not in favor of high density
housing on Tract A that Mr. Sokolsky sought at the Tulsa Metropolitan Zoning Commission. We
just want assurances that our homes and property are important and that proper handling of all
water issues will be openly addressed with the surrounding landowners. Also, that the City of
Owasso will hold its design criteria, sub- division regulations and floodplain management at the
highest standards with all development, starting with the Annexation Committee, Planning
Commission, City Council and all City government personnel.
The 2010 Owasso Land Use Master Plan also acknowledges the need for sufficient infrastructure
when addressing Issue S: Lack of a drainage and stormwater plan. "Stave to implement a
comprehensive drainage and stormwater plan for the fenceline geography of Owasso. Inventory
and map all watersheds, identify regional detention areas that can also serve the dual use of'park
areas, especially in targeted areas of growth. Map and document all current problem areas.
Revise current Engineering Design Criteria stormwater design standards. Adopt Federal Clean
Water Act standards/best management practices as part of the subdivision regulations."
Representative Balkman also discusses all the above items in his speech, as a necessity before
allowing any development in a floodplain area.
Issue 8 covers repairs and maintenance procedures of street signs in subdivisions using the GIS
computer system. As explained by Jim Leach of the Corp of Engineers, this system can now be
used for floodplain analysis to arrive at future water flows in a given area and the base
information is supplied by the 4 to Fix bond issue which is being paid by all Tulsa County
residents.
By having a comprehensive stormwater plan, all future developments can be guided to the proper
placement of structural stormwater controls, whether above or below ground level. As
developers build according to the stormwater design criteria, all homes and properties upstream
and downstream will not be in danger of flooding nor inundated with water. The added cost to a
developer for stormwater control will result in lower per acre price being paid for development.
Please review the attached information and the CD tape of current flooding problems in the office
of the Owasso City Planner. We will continue to take photographs of our area anytime it rains
and update the CD when possible. Tulsa County has requested this information for mapping
purposes on our watershed area.
Thank You.
Sue Piggott and the Citizens for Responsible Rural Development
8500 E 116" St. N.
Owasso, Ok. 74055
371 -0143 or E -Mail Lhepiggotts@atlasok.com
Distribution of this letter:
PLANNING COMMISSION
Ray Haynes, Chairman
Charles Willey
Dewey Brown
Bill Williams
Dale Prevett
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMISSION
Dale Johnson, Superintendant of Schools
Ray Jordan, Tulsa County Engineer
Phil Lutz, Flood Plain Manager
Kris DeMauro, Fire Marshall
Robert Moore, City Planner
Jim Greene, Police Chief
Rodney Ray, City Manager
ANNEXATION COMMITTEE
Charles Warren
Robert Moore (also TAC)
Eric Wiles, Economic Development
Gary Cochran (City Council)
Bob Allen, Fire Chief
Jim Greene (also TAC)
Robert Carr, Public Works Director
Rebecca Armstrong (City Council)
Tim Rooney, Assistant City Manager
Rodney Ray, (also TAC)
Mike Ames
Ray Haynes (also Planning Comm)
Charles Willey (also Planning Comm)
CITY CLERK, Marsha Boutwell
Representative Thad Balkntan's talk at OFMA Spring Conference, 2002
Intro:
Politician and a Lawyer
When I think of floods ...
Growing up in So. Cal - lack of rain, flood control, LA River a classic example of past
floodplain management policies.
A song I used to sing as a kid at Church ...
'The Wise Man and the Foolish Man"
The wise man built his house upon the rock, The wise man built his house upon the rock,
The wise man built his house upon the rock, And .the rains came tumbling down.
The rains came down and the floods came up, The rains came down and the floods came
up, The rains came down and the floods came up, And the house on the rock stood still.
The foolish man built his house upon the sand, The foolish man built his house upon the
sand, The foolish man built his house upon the sand, And the rains came tumbling down.
The rains came down and the floods came up, The rains came down and the floods came
up, The rains came down and the floods came up, And the house on the sand washed away.
I believe that this song's simple message says it all.
In addition to the symbolic meaning pertaining to Jesus, the Rock, this song has an
application useful to us here today.
Wise man builds his house on the rock (out of the floodplain)
Foolish man builds his house upon the sand (in the floodplain)
When the rains come, and we know they will, whatever is in the sand gets washed away!
So what can we do about it? Let's stop being foolish and get out of the sand. First, allow me
to define the problem.
Flood damages in the United States continue to escalate. From the early 1900's to the year
2000, flood damages in the United States have increased six fold, approaching $8 billion
annually. This occurred despite 75 years of federal flood control, 30 years of the National Flood
Insurance Program, and billions of dollars for structural flood control, and other structural and
non - structural measures. We continue to intensify development within floodplains, and do it in a
manner where flood prone or marginally protected structures are suddenly prone to damages
because of the actions of others in the floodplain.
Your tax dollars pay for the recovery from this damage. Though floods are the single most
predictable natural hazard, the cost of flood damages per capita has doubled over the past
century. The general trend is for flood losses to increase every decade.
Most current management approaches for reducing flood losses allow for construction to
occur without considering the adverse impacts on other properties within the watershed or on
future flooding potential. This has contributed to steadily rising flood losses and is increasing the
potential for future flood damage.
Page -1-
This trend is unnecessary. It is primarily due to federal policies that have encouraged at -risk
development, justified flood control projects that intensify land use within the floodplain, and
encouraged state and local governments to rely on federal resources for both flood control and
disaster recovery. While current flood control and NFIP practices have made progress in
reducing flood damages, the damages continue to rise. Recent focus on mitigation and
enhanced funding for mitigation is helping to alleviate some of the more obvious problems with
existing structures being flooded, but the nation has vet to come to grips with how to stop
creating future flood problems caused by new development. The nation's extensive current
efforts at flood control and modem floodplain regulation were intended to control flood losses, but
flood losses continue to rise. Like the LA River that I grew up next to.
Current floodplain management standards allow for
floodwater to be diverted onto others;
channel and overbank conveyance areas to be reduced;
essential valley storage to be filled;
or velocities changed with little or no regard as to how these changes impact others in the
floodplain and watershed.
The net result is that through our actions we are intensifying damage potentials in the our
floodplains. This current course is one that is not equitable to those whose property is impacted,
and is a course that may not be economically sustainable. Over the past 50 years a system has
been established that In many locations has substituted local and individual accountability with
the programs of flood control and disaster assistance of the federal government.
While funding for the Corps of Engineers, NRCS and other agencies of the federal
government will fluctuate, the pattern of the federal government responding to disasters has
become firmly entrenched and will not likely change in the foreseeable future.
However, what has changed is how disaster relief impacts other domestic programs. Ten
years ago, when Congress was faced with a large disaster, they would fund the disaster with
deficit spending. Today, each time Congress passes a bill to provide disaster supplemental
funding for disasters, offsetting cuts in domestic programs must be made. Despite investment
theories regarding benefits and costs, our problem has become one of cash flow. Each needless
incremental increase in flood damage represents a lost opportunity for support of essential
domestic programs of the United States_
Considering the recent attack on the United States and the pending programs of relief,
domestic security and military buildup, the cash flow problem is only going to get worse. At its
broadest policy level, no adverse impact floodplain management is about local government
taking steps
to reduce the drain on national resources, as well as local and state resources. These
resources can then be applied, to domestic programs enhancing the economy, environment,
education and defense. In essence, current policy is only sustainable at the expense of other
important programs.
More directly for local governments, no adverse impact floodplain management represents a
way to prevent worse flooding in your community- -right now! While some state and local
governments may have abdicated their responsibility, most local governments have simply
assumed that the federal standards are an acceptable standard of care, perhaps not realizing
these very standards could induce additional flooding and damage within their community.
Page -2-
Instead, no adverse impact offers communities an opportunity to promote responsible
floodplain development through community -based decision making. Communities will be able to
determine better use of federal and state programs to enhance their proactive initiatives and
utilize those programs to their advantage as a community.
The no adverse floodplain management initiative empowers the local community (and its
citizens) to build stakeholders at the local level. No adverse impact floodplain management is a
step towards individual accountability by not increasing flood damages to other properties. No
adverse impact floodplain management is about local communities being proactive in
understanding potential impacts and implementing programs of mitigation before the impacts
occur.
One of the "Ten Commandments of Modem Politics" is: "All Politics is Local" Tip O'Neil,
former Democratic Speaker of the House from Mass_, was famous for saying, "All politics is
local ". This quote describes the notion that campaigns are decided at the lowest, grassroots
level - in your communities and neighborhoods.
Last fall, the OFMA passed a Resolution in support of No Adverse Impact (show resolution)
No Adverse Impact Floodplain Management Defined
"No Adverse Impact Floodplain Management" is a managing principle that is easy to
communicate and from a policy perspective tough to challenge. In essence, no adverse impact
floodplain management is where the action of one property owner does not adversely
Impact the rights of other property owners, as measured by increased flood peaks, flood
stage, flood velocity, and erosion and sedimentation. No impact ftoodplains would become the
default management criteria, unless a community has developed and adopted a comprehensive
river plan that identifies acceptable levels of impact, appropriate measures to mitigate those
adverse impacts and a plan for implementation. No Adverse Impact could be extended to entire
watersheds as a means to promote the use of retention and detention technologies to mitigate
increased runoff from urban areas.
While the No Adverse Impact approach will result in reduced damages for the t% chance
flood event, its true strength is that it virtually ensures that future development actions which
impact the floodplain must be part of a locally adopted plan. This removes the mentality that
floodplain management standards are something imposed by FEMA, and promotes local
accountability for developing and implementing a comprehensive strategy and plan for the
floodplain. Giving locals the flexibility to adopt comprehensive local management plans, which
would be recognized by FEMA and other federal programs as the acceptable standard in that
community, will provide those communities with control and support for innovative approaches.
Again, remember Tip O'Neil's quote ... All Politics is local. Effective Floodplain
management is local-
1 believe that effective floodplain management is much like politics, the most successful
management is done at the local level.
No Adverse Impact is an approach that makes sense and is the right thing to do. Too often
our discussions on development approaches turn into arguments over the range of application
and the impact these approaches might have on those who are choosing to encroach into the
floodplain. It is time to change and begin managing from the perspective of not inducing
additional flood impacts on other properties, giving local communities the ability to manage flood
losses through comprehensive local plans.
No Adverse Impact: A Do No Harm Policy
Page -3-
The No Adverse Impact approach strives to ensure that the actions of one property owner do
not increase the flood risk of other property owners. This approach will especially benefit those
property owners that are not currently in regulated flood areas, but who would be in the future.
In law school, law students learn that a basic principle of real property rights law is do no
harm to your neighbor. The No Adverse impact implements this legal principle. This new
approach would require those who alter flooding conditions to mitigate the impact of their actions
on property owners and adjacent communities. The No Adverse Impact approach focuses on
planning for and lessening flood impacts resulting from land use changes. It is essentially a "do
no harm policy that will significantly decrease the creation of new flood damages. A citizen
would never allow a neighbor to use her yard as a dumping ground for garbage_ No Adverse
Impact suggests that we hold our neighbors to the same standard when flooding is concerned.
In essence, No Adverse Impact means that your neighbor should build in such a way that does
not increase the risk of flooding to your property or others. Examples of this "wise use" or the
"most beneficial use" would be using the floodplain as dedicated open space for flood storage
and low impact uses such as recreation.
The No Adverse Impact approach promotes fairness, responsibility, community involvement,
pre -flood planning, sustainable development, and local land use management. It gives local
governments the responsibility to manage floodplain risks. Individual communities will determine
the specific details appropriate for land use in that community. It also supports private property
rights because property owners will have input on management strategies that impact their
property. NAI protects the property rights of those that would be adversely impacted by the
actions of others.
This approach must become the default management criterion throughout Oklahoma and the
United States. When local comprehensive watershed management plans incorporate the NAI
approach, impacts will be allowed only to the extent that they are offset by mitigation. When no
local plan exists, all federal and state actions in the floodplain would strive to achieve no adverse
changes in hydrology, stream depths, velocities, and sediment transport functions. Having these
local comprehensive watershed management plans on file with state agencies would qualify
individual community for certain types of funding to implement mitigation techniques.
Many communities are taking action nowt
There are many examples of communities around the country that are striving for a No
Adverse Impact approach. These communities have recognized that development activity
anywhere in the watershed can adversely impact properties elsewhere in the watershed, not just
in the floodplain.
For example, DuPage County, Illinois chose to strengthen comprehensive regulations in their
approach to managing flood problems.
The Comprehensive Stormwater Management Objectives for DuPage County, Illinois include:
Reduce the existing potential for stormwater damage to public health, safety, life and
property.
Control future increases in stormwater damage within DuPage County and in areas of
adjacent counties affected by DuPage drainage.
Protect and enhance the quality, quantity, and availability of surface and groundwater
resources.
Preserve and enhance existing aquatic and riparian environments and encourage restoration
of degraded areas.
Page -4-
Control sediment and erosion in and from drainageways, development, and construction
sites.
Promote equitable, acceptable, and legal measures for stormwater management
No Adverse Impact promotes preserving, not controlling, the natural floodplain. Why keep a
Natural Floodplain?
Here are some reasons why:
Flood water storage
Enhanced stormwater management
Reduced flood damages
Improved water quality
Recreational opportunities
Preservation of wildlife and natural habitats
Enhanced erosion control
Increased property values
Conclusion
This central message— that we are inducing flood damages— has not been communicated
effectively, in part due to the floodplain management community as a whole spending too much
time debating issues of individual standards while not stepping back and evaluating the broad
impact of these approaches_
Current management systems within the floodplain are costly and often allow development
that fails to evaluate or mitigate adverse impacts on other properties, both now and in the future.
No Adverse Impact is an approach that will lead to reduced flood losses throughout the nation
while promoting and rewarding strong management and mitigation actions at the local level.
Let me conclude this part of my speech with a quote, from Shakespeare's.°AII's Well that
Ends Well"
"Great floods have flown from simple sources"
We know floods will come, we know the damage they cause, so I encourage you to take pro-
active steps like No Adverse Impact. Doing so will make you like the wise man whose house
stood still when the rains came.
And now, for a brief Legislative Update
House Bill 1969 - In 1999, Legislature passed HB1841 which created a state hazard
mitigation fund and account not dependant on a presidential declaration that could provide
monies for individual assistance projects as well as match money for FEMA's mitigation grant
programs.
The fund has a balance of zero
WHAT DOES HB1969 DO?
Establishes a mechanism to buy out and remove repetitively damaged
structures from the floodplain, thereby interrupting the costly cycle of rebuilding and /or repair.
Page -5-
DEFINE PROBLEM
Quick Statistics
There are 644 flood insured structures that have received flood damage at least twice in the
last ten (10) years.
If these properties were removed, $332.00.00 in flood insurance dollars could be saved.
Less than 2% of the properties in the floodplain are insured.
One structure in Ottawa County valued at $20,000.00 has flooded 5 times. Owner has
collected over $100,000.00 in flood insurance claims for this one structure_
Costs of not having this account funded affect everyone. Local and state government are
burdened with costs for emergency response and recovery; the community suffers losses in
lives, personal property and wages; employers sacrifice production and revenues due to
employee absences; local tax bases decline.
MONETARY SAVINGS
Costs
If it floods, local community still has the responsibility for providing
evacuation services, emergency services, special care needs, temporary shelters, food
services, animal care and other individual assistance services — these services all cost money.
Benefits
Because this legislation would result in fewer rescue events and other
direct flood response activities, it would also serve to protect both prospective flood victims
and emergency personnel who put their lives in jeopardy when responding to flood problems.
If these properties were removed, $332,000.00 in flood insurance dollars could be saved.
This can significantly reduce future losses of life, property and tax dollars.
Encourages communities to develop comprehensive hazard mitigation plans by requiring
such plans to establish eligibility for the grant program.
Allows and assists local governments to purchase flood prone properties and forever remove
them from harm's way.
Keep property owners from building in the floodplain.
Encourage purchase of flood insurance
Reduce the costs of disaster response and recovery operations to localities
Mitigation
Encourage localities to develop and publish a comprehensive hazard mitigation plan
The best example of mitigating a flood susceptible home is to move it, acquire it, move it to
higher ground or demolish it and then keep the property open.
Removal of this structure once and for all where no tax dollars or other funds are used to
repair it so it can be damaged again. Break the cycle of flood damage, repair - flood damage,
repair, etc.
Acquisition and relocation of ftoodprone buildings is a very effective tool for reducing
Page -6-
flood losses. In just three years, the cost of relocating buildings out of the floodplain was
saved in damages avoided
House Bill 2228 - this bill, which has already passed the House, pertains primarily to annual
training, but also changes the purpose of the Oklahoma Floodplain Management Act, to include
physical and emotional impact of flooding on individuals and communities, increased costs
of disaster relief and restoration of natural resources and functions of floodplains. The
bill's primary function is to encourage counties and municipalities that choose to participate in the
program to attend floodplain development management classes.
OFMA Resolution in support of Mandatory Training for Floodplain Managers
"Annual training is an absolute necessity if community officials are going to reduce property
from. floods and loss of life and protect the natural & beneficial uses of the floodplain."
SB 972 - This bill sets up a process to address impaired scenic river watersheds. The bill
states that all "scenic river areas" shall be returned to their original pristine condition. The DEQ,
Dept. of Agriculture, and the Oklahoma Conservation Commission are charged with producing an
annual report identifying all agency actions taken to reduce pollutant levels in scenic river
watershed and to outline future reductions in pollution.
SB 1352 - This bill expands the authority of the Department of Environmental Quality to
establish statewide land protection standards for the release of non - hazardous materials,
products or wastes into the environment.
HB 2349 - Prohibits new poultry operations from construction in a hundred -year floodplain or
within buffer zones for surface public water supplies, scenic rivers, public drinking water wells,
and outstanding resource waters. The bill also limits the location of poultry waste within buffer
zones for scenic rivers, public wells and nutrient - limited water bodies.
Page -7-
TYPED LETTER FROM: ALBERTA HILLARD
9009 E. 106m St. North
Owasso, Okla.
08 -21 -01
To whom it may concem
I am writing this letter in reference to the flooding of my property at 9009 E. 106 St. No., Owasso. We built our
house in Jan 1969 — at that time we had some water, as we are on Ranch Creek. They started building at German
Comer in 1977, Super H Grocery & Walmart stores, of course all of it is paved with concrete, leaving no way for the
water to seep in the ground, throwing more water on us, also water was washing out the road in front of our house so
the comity put around culvert in one side of the Bridge to help the situation The water gets deeper each year, it
hasn't got into our house yet, but if they keep bldg houses & don't build enough detention ponds to hold the water,
we are in trouble. I'm not against progress, I would like to be considered on flooding my house.
We are 80 & 83 yrs old. We need no more problems, I have presented pictures ofmy front yard taken in May, 1986
to prove how hi the water gets, therefore proving the runoff from the north is or causing the flooding.
This properly wasn't in the Flood Zone when we purchased it therefore it is proven the runoff from the north has
caused it to be put in the flood zone when you were joined with N.F.1_P, in 1982 —also again in Sept. 22, 1999. Sure
appreciate if you would consider stopping this overflow. .
Thanks,
Alberta Hillard
9009 E. 100" St. No.
Owasso, Ok
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCH,
CITY OF OWASSO
FROM: ERIC WILES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIREfTOR
SUBJECT: REPORT FROM MEETING wrm CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBLE
RURAL DEVELOPMENT
DATE: October 8, 2002
On Tuesday, October a representatives from the City of Owasso met with representatives from the
group of Citizens for Responsible Rural Development. The meeting centered on drainage conditions in
the Ranch Creek basin generally from the intersection of Memorial and 1160' Street to the intersection
ofMmgo and 106" Street.
HISTORY:
At the meeting, the citizen representatives displayed maps and photographs showing the drainage
conditions of several low-lying homes in the area_ The citizens recounted how past developments near
their properties in Tulsa County had increased the amount of drainage onto their land. In some
instances, ponds had been filled in to make way for the new housing developments. In other instances,
levees had been cut to increase the flow of water offthe new developments.
4 TO FIX THE COUNTY
One issue discussed at the meeting was the current 4 To Fir The County program. This program is an
effort to develop a drainage study for all basins within Tulsa County located outside municipal limits.
The Corps of Engineers has been contracted to prepare the study and the study's development is in its
second year (out of three years).
The citizen representatives reported that one product of the 4 To Fix The County program is recently
produced aerial photography that the City can obtain and use Also, new floodplain information will be
published by the Corps of Engineers showing updated floodplain boundaries. A geographic
information systems (GIS) database is being built in conjunction with the new floodplain information
that the Corps of Engineers hopes to use to track conditions within the county drainage basins.
The staff informed the citizen representatives that the City is attempting to coordinate with the county
and other municipalities in an effort to ensure that the drainage study is comprehensive in scope and
does not include "gaps of study" where municipal drainage basins are not studied while adjacent county
drainage basins are studied. The City intends to work with the Corps of Engineers during the next
budget year to include the municipal drainage basins in their study
The citizens also stressed the need for the City of Owasso to develop a drainage and storm water plan.
The staff noted that the City should enter into a joint effort with Tulsa County to take the data
gathered from the 4 To Fix The County Study and then inventory and map all watersheds in the area.
Such an effort would allow the staff to identify all current problem areas and develop strategies to
improve the problem areas.
NO ADVERSE IMPACT:
During the meeting, the staff discussed the concept of No Adverse Impact with the citizen
representatives. No Adverse Impact pertains to developments that occur in the floodplain. It is a
strategy being promoted by FEMA, the Corps of Engineers, and the Oklahoma Floodplain Managers
Association as the proper approach to floodplain management. The concept of No Adverse Impact is
that floodplain developments should not adversely impact other property by increasing flood depths or
velocities. The City will examine existing floodplain development regulations to determine whether
changes might be advisable that could better protect existing properties within the floodplain.
POTT.1 TIAL AREA DEVELOPMENTS:
The staff also talked with the citizen representatives about drainage issues that could arise from fixture
subdivisions in the area. The City should require that any new development should not cause water to
back up onto adjacent properties upstream Further, the City should require that the rate of drainage
runoff from any new development should be no greater after development than before development.
The staff recommends that the Council consider the topics raised at the meeting and adopt a statement
of policy that affirms the city's desire to control drainage in a responsible manner and that directs the
staff to focus on issues of drainage for all new developments.
ATTACHMENT:
Statement of policy
OWASSO CITY COUNCIL
POLICY STATEMENT RELATING TO DRAINAGE OF WATER
THROUGH THE BASINS IN AND AROUND THE CITY
October 15, 2002
In its desire to pursue the highest quality of life for citizens ofthe Owasso community, the City Council
recognizes the importance of promoting developments of high caliber as Owasso continues to grow.
Further, the City Council has heard the input of area residents and concurs with the residents that the
City of Owasso should closely examine the conditions of the community that are affected by new
developments. One of the affected community conditions that is of prime emphasis is the drainage of
water through the basins in and around the city.
Therefore, the City Council declares the following statement of policy and directs the municipal staff to
endeavor to implement the policy as a priority in the administration ofthe staffs duties:
L New development should not have a water - drainage impact on other property.
II. The staff is directed to provide detailed review of all submitted drainage plans for any
development.
111. The staff is directed to initiate the development of a master drainage plan subsequent to the
receipt of data from the current study being accomplished by the Corps of Engineers and funded
by T ilsa County.
ADOPTED by the Owasso City Council this 15d day of October, 2002.
11Tchael Helm, Vice Mayor
Susan Kimball, Councilor
Randall C_ Brogdon, Mayor
Rebecca Armstrong, Councilor
Gary Cochran, Councilor
August 13, 2012
To the Owasso City Council:
In considering the annexation of the propertyjust south of Hillside Estates, please consider
the following information.
That land is in a flood zone. To prepare that land so it would not be in a flood zone, you would
be putting Hillside Estates in jeopardy. Hillside Estates was built in 1978. In all of those years,
none of the houses on the south side of that neighborhood has EVER flooded. During that
34 years, there have been some serious floods in our county, BUT NOT on the south side of
Hillside Estates.
When the city of Owasso annexed Hillside Estates, they built a mote around the neighborhood
to prevent high water from reaching the houses on the west side.
My neighbour has proof that developing that land would put our houses at risk with a video
of a huge rain we had this year.
If this property IS developed, knowing this, not only will the developer be legally responsible
for any damages that occur due to flooding, but the City of Owasso would be legally responsible,
AND each one of the Council Members that voted to do this in spite of the knowledge that it
would put our houses at risk would be legally responsible. There are federal laws that address
moving landscape that will flood another area.
Please look after the interests of the people you are supposed to represent, and not the interests
of a few people who only see the dollar signs.
A developer might look at paying for our homes as part of the cost of doing business, but I seriously
doubt that the City of Owasso has so much disposable income to do that. And, do you seriously
want to play Russian Roulette with your OWN finances?
Respectfully,
R.L. and Sandy Brown
11236 N. 94th E. Ave.
Hillside Estates
Owasso, OK 74055
Jarrett and Kathleen Short
14127 E. 88" St. N.
Owasso, OK 74055
June 30, 2012
To Whom It May Concern:
I am writing to ask your support and vote to revise Owasso Zoning Code section 240.2 . This code
requires a 1 Oft setback from all property lines for structures such as pools and patios.
We recently tried to apply for a variance to this zoning code to put a pool in our small backyard. We
were denied the variance by the board of adjustment. They suggested that we try to get the outdated
ordinance changed. No one on the board could determine a valid reason for such a large setback
when surrounding communities setbacks are 5ft, and our house is actually sitting on 5 of the 1Oft
setback. We have looked up surrounding community zoning codes, and the standard is 5ft. Just a
few of the surrounding communities with 5ft setbacks are Jenks, Collinsville, Bixby, Broken Arrow,
and Tulsa. According to our pool builder the national standard for setbacks is 5ft as well.
The board directed us to be in contact with the city to review this zoning code. We have since talked
to several city officials, the city planner and the assistant city manager. These individuals were very
kind, and the city planner actually offered to take this to the city council for consideration of revision.
Vith Owasso's smaller lot sizes, the 1Oft setbacks, as well as, the utility easements it makes it almost
. npossible to add a structure such as a pool or outdoor living area to backyards. Changing the
setbacks to five feet would make backyard improvements possible along with keeping our community
competitive with surrounding areas. We have been residences of the City of Owasso for the past 11
years. We have seen this city grow and develop into a city that competes for residences from other
popular areas such as Bixby and Jenks. We think the revision of this zoning code will allow
residences with a medium socioeconomic status to be able to improve their properties. Thank you for
your thoughtful consideration.
Sincerely,
Jarrett and Kathleen Short
TO: The Owasso Planning Commission
FROM: Bronce L. Stephenson
Juri'sdiciion
City Planner
SUBJECT: Final Plat- 91netyEight
PARCEL SIZE: 14.645 Acres
ZONING: RM (Multi - Family Residential)
DATE: September 7, 2012
BACKGROUND:
The City of Owasso received a final plat for review and approval of the 9inetyEight Final Plat.
The subject property is 14.645 acres In size and Is comprised of one (1) lot on one (1) block. The
site will be developed as the 91netyEight Apartments.
This property was annexed into the City of Owasso by Ordinance No. 559 and the properly was
rezoned to RM (Multi - Family Residential) by Ordinance No. 1007. A Planned Unit Development
(PUD- 12 -01) was approved for the development of the 91netyEight apartment complex on the
property.
SURROUNDING ZONING:
Direction
Zonin
Use
Land Use Pl6n
Juri'sdiciion
North
Office Medium
Medical /Office
Transitional
City of
OM
Owasso
South
Commercial
Commercial
Commercial
City of
Shopping CS
Owasso
East
Commercial
Commercial
Commercial
City of
Shopping CS
Owasso
West
Office Medium
Vacant
Commercial
City of
ANALYSIS:
The final plat for the 91netyEight development consists of one ('1) lot on one (1) block on
approximately 14.645 acres. The applicant is platting the property for the purposes of
developing an apartment complex. The subject property is located along E 98th St N and E 99th
St N immediately north of the Owasso Market development and to the south of the St. Johns
Owasso medical campus.
The plat identifies two access points, one connecting to E 98th St N and the other to E 100th St N.
All roadways within the development will be private. Perimeter and interior utility easements will
provide utility companies adequate access to provide service and maintain service to the
proposed development. Any development that occurs on the subject property must adhere to
all subdivision, zoning, and engineering requirements including but not limited to paved streets,
landscaping, and sidewalks. The City of Owasso will provide sanitary sewer service, with water
provided by Washington County Rural Water District # 3.
Technical Advisory Commiffee (TAC):
The Technical Advisory Committee reviewed the preliminary plat for the 9inetyEight Final Plat at
their regularly scheduled meeting on August 22, 2012. The TAC comments are attached.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Planning Commission approval of the final plat.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Area Map
B. Aerial Map
C. Final Plat 91netyElght
D. TAC Comments
Is map represents a visual display of related geographic information. Data provided hereon is not a guarantee of actual field conditions. To be sure Dfcomplete accuracy,
please contact Owasso staff for the most up- to-date Information.
This map represents a visual display of related geographic information. Data provided hereon is not a guarantee of actual field conditions. To be sure of complete accuracy,
please contact Owasso staff forthe most up -to -date Information.
Final Subdivision Plat
9inetyEight
3. FINAL PLAT — 9inetvEieht
David Vines-
• Insert the language regarding maintenance of the common, open
areas.
• Reference easements on plat. If by separate instrument show book
and page or leave bank to be filled in at a later date.
Public Works-
• Reference easements, if by separate instrument show book and
page.
• Show limits of no access and limits of access.
• Be aware of roof drain requirements.
AT &T- Tim Maxey
• Need a letter of permission from the developer to bring cable fiber
in to apartments.
• May have additional easements upon site plan review.
Community Development-
• Misspelled word "easeement" should be "easement" on the front
page.
• Correct the Certification of City Clerk language. Strike all wording
after "State of Oklahoma ".
• Double check the language in the Duration section.
Jerry Gammill — Rural Water
■ Need to review water line plans.
■ Spoke with Malek, may need a 20' easement.
■ Change to Rural Water District #3 regarding the water service in
the 2nd column of the Deeds of Dedication.
AEP/PSO
• Might need more easements upon site plan review.
Mike Barnes-
0 No comments
ONG -Rick Shoemaker
• No comments
Chelsea Harkins
• No comments
CHAPTER 8
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS
8.1 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
A Planned Unit Development (PUD) is a special zoning overlay that provides
alternatives to conventional land development. Upon approval, it becomes a
supplement to the existing zoning of the subject property. A PUD is also a
means of encouraging creative development of land and promotes project
design that is often unseen in conventional devel
seen as a tool to circumvent the zoning and subdiv
of Owasso, but rather as a tool for intelligent,
developments that fit within Owasso's existingqnE
the surrounding area. A PUD provides flexibilitk',!
on properties with unique physical chard if 4ssstu
design and providing guidelines which ensure that
the City of Owasso's future growth line great fl
yid ....
special restrictions which will allow dbv�topme�,
procedures are established herein to ensare'lad"
flexibility.
8.2 GOALS
Preserve J
A PUD shall not be
blations of the City
coned, and quality
As and context of
the development
innovative
beneficial to
is g14"6 provide
of the increased
r flexibly than othe se would be allowed with the
ific goats..* need to be accomplished with each
be evaluat §,d on their ability to accomplish the
Eb1jan6e1-he Qialit `of Life in Owasso
rtdmties for Urban Infill
, a Seise of Community
'That Otherwise Could Not Occur on the Site
rovide.),A'eaningful Open Space
icYivity and Compatibility with Surrounding Development
e and Thoughtful Development
of Strong Neighborhoods
Ries Beyond Conventional Development
Physical Characteristics of the Land
8.3 APPLICABILITY
A PUD may be submitted for any parcel of land located within any general
zoning district or combination of general zoning districts within the Owasso
City Limits. In all cases, the PUD will be reviewed as to the proposed
Location and character of the uses and the unified treatment of the
development of the tract. The regulations of the general zoning district or
districts remain applicable except as specifically modified pursuant to the
provisions of this chapter.
2. Approval of a Conceptual Development Plan is required prior to
development of a PUD district. Comprehensive Development Plans are
subject to recommendation by the Planning Commission and approval by
the City Council.
This PUD chapter shall complement the other sections of the Owasso
Zoning Code. In instances where the requirements are conflicting, the
Community Development Administrator shall determine the correct action.
4. A Conceptual Development Plan shall be
request for rezoning.
8.4 MINIMUM STANDARDS
A. DENSITY
By their very nature, PUD's are de
unique or unusual, natural or man -
development that makes use of and
be necessary to cluster `density v
density is proposed,
promote and maintain useabI open
that complements the existing
overall gross densij far the pro7ee
acre. -.. The gross density`= 2alcul ic
concurrently with a
y,tc develop parcelsW land with
;conditions. In order to promote
�rve3 such unique features, it may
deQe pmpts. If clustering of
shall b`e` provided; the design shall
e,_ and ' layout shall be provided
ofAfte site.
A upon the gross area of the tract,
of way, or easements to provide an
that shall be expressed in units per
s shall be provided within the PUD
Single - Family Reside - A residential PUD shall not
exceed five (5) dwelling units per acre for single-
C. PRESERVATION OF TREES AND OTHER NATURAL FEATURES
PUD's shall be designed to preserve and enhance the existing physical
characteristics of the land and the natural vegetation that exists on the
land. Projects that require clear cutting or denuding of large tracts of
land for development are discouraged. Trees in excess of eight (8) inches
in caliper shall be preserved and worked into the overall design of the
project, unless the applicant can provide substantial justification to
remove said trees. Tree preservation credits shall be applied to all
landscaping plans and additional landscaping shall be required for projects
that remove excessive healthy vegetation.
D. SCREENING AND BUFFERING
Screening is an important part of any PUD prgposal� especially when
incompatible uses are proposed within the PD, or extstin adjoining
developments. Screening may be emplo�_&d,iriZthe form o� ,
1. Fencing - Natural materials are,gncouraged-
2. Walls - Stone, brick, split facdd'14tock, or! ecorative mateRals shall be
used. ...;
3. Berms - Berms may be used in combn4t on with vegetation or fencing to
achieve the desired result.
4. Vegetation - Vegetation rbvides a screening mecanism that can be
efficient and , leaving the natural
vegetation as a means oflscreenipg atheves the desired results.
5. New vegetation may be the intent of this
F. CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIRED
Each PUD shall require a landscape concept plan at the time of submittal.
The landscape plan shall depict general locations for landscaping, but shall
not be required to go into great detail on the conceptual plan. Trees,
however, shall be shown on the conceptual landscape plan. More detailed
landscape plans may be required in the later stages of the development
process in conformance with the City's adopted landscape requirements, or
if the Administrator or Planning Commission deems it necessary during at
the conceptual landscape phase.
G. ADHERENCE TO CITY LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS' "tea
All adopted landscape requirements shall PUD. A PUD shall
provide landscaping that exceeds the City's rriemmum. requirements in order
to meet the goals, purpose, and criteria . -PUD ordinance.
H. SITE DEVELOPMENT
Low - Impact Design (LID) Crieer
J. OPEN SPACE
At least 25% of the provided open space shall be developed and maintained
for active or passive recreational activities. The remainder should be kept
as marshland, wildlife areas, woodlands, creeks, etc. At least 10% of the
above reference area shall be out of the floodplain (100 Year) and
floodway.
K. COMMON AREAS
Common areas shall be provided throughout the development for the use
and enjoyment of the residents of the surrounding area. Common areas
promote social interaction and help to create a sense -of community.
a
L. AMENITIES REQUIRED
Any residential PUD development shall provide G aut least one (1) amenity
from each of the categories from the Table` "PI
1) For any residential development ,t'(at proposes a gross density of more
than four (4) units per acre, `one an eadditional amenity.,;from any
category shall be required fof ea�hV0 5 units�,pper acre over C-
T.:.,
2) A developer may propose any amenity not provided on the list and an
explanation of what` �22,ategory it shout" ,VJ U under. The Community
Development Administr tor, the P[anmrig - orrlmission, or the City
Council shall determine ii 1. a(ranienity is accelStable.
3) Amenities may be combined .into one,,oy:'more park /recreation areas.
(i.e. Poor,,, w ish a, club house,, or a park area with a basketball court,
4) Park an'd r;ecrentlon, areas shhlP be placed in a centralized location
uyjLhtn theile�(opmeiit s31it -fs convenient and accessible.
5) Any standing waeYs:f ture or pond shall be re- circulated through a
fountatn,v4Wterfa(1;.,brother aeration device. This requirement applies
to any stornretention pond that is maintains a pool elevation of water.
TABLE 8 -1, REQUIRED AMENITIES
CATEGORY
AMENITY FEATURE
SPORTS FIELDS, TENNIS COURTS, BASKETBALL COURTS,
ACTIVE RECREATION
VOLLEYBALL COURT, DISC GOLF COURSE, SKATE FACILITIES,
BIKE PATHS, HIKING TRAILS, GOLF FACILITIES
STOCKED FISHING POND, NAr URE PRESERVE AREAS OF AT
LEAST 2 ACRES, HORSE SHQ€ PST, WILDLIFE VIEWING AREA (IF
PASSIVE RECREATION
ADJACENT TO PRESERVED HABITAT), CAMP GROUNDS,
EQUESTRIAN FACIL1TlE�MEDITATfON AREA, WALKING PATHS
OR TRAILS v r
DOG PAWS, PICNIC ARE PAVILLIONS,IUUTDOOR
PUBLIC GATHERING AREAS
AMPHITHEATRE, °4 UBflOUS�, GAZEBO,VBQAREA, DOCK
AREAS, COMMUNITY<G'ARDEN, PARK AREA
FAMILY RECREATIONAL AREAS
SPLASH PAD, SN(IMMING POOL, PLAYGROUND
LAND;USE'PaN
Anyhall be developed in accordance with the adopted
. The PUD shall meet the Goals, Objectives
and Action Strq giested within the plan.
N . ITH SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT
designed in a manner that is compatible with the
surroi5idr)g development in the area. If the proposed development is not
in charger with the surrounding area, the PUD shall show how the
develo e screened or employs techniques that will mitigate the
8.5 PROCEDURE
A. PRE - APPLICATION MEETING
A pre- application meeting is required prior to submitting a formal
application for the proposed PUD project. This step offers the developer a
chance to meet with City staff to discuss ideas related to the development
of a PUD on a piece of property. City staff from different departments
shall be available to discuss the project, answer questions and provide
information to the developer.
B. SUBMITTAL OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
1. After submittal of a completed PUD application packet with all required
information, the Administrator shall provide a professional review of the
project and shall assist the developer in understanding the PUD process.
2. The Administrator shall require sufficient detail in the Conceptual
Development Plan to provide an opportunity for the, reviewing bodies to
make informed decisions and evaluate compli..ajce frith the applicable
approval criteria.
3. The Administrator shall provide recom tions ;regarding changes or
additions to the PUD that would make the project a consistent with
the goals, purpose and standards'.6 the PUD outline this chapter.
Upon completion of a success fulrapp tic atioyt the PUD shall bg_.placed on
the next available Planning Agerlda.
C. TECHNICAL ADVIOSRY COMMITTEE (TAC)
1. Prior to the Planning Commission, the City;of,Owasso's Technical Advisory
Committee (TAC) shall `review the PUD proposal and all supporting
documentation.
2. The TAC shall provide commepks to the developer regarding utilities,
engineer } ariCiIng, and project designs
3. All %C� ment9hall be addNssed by the developer prior to the PUD
being reviewed, by the Planning Commission or City Council.
At least seven ( catbridar days prior to the project being heard by the
i :Rnnmg Com rssion, a he applicant shall hold a neighborhood meeting to
rrlt gduce the ;abject to neighboring property owners and receive input
ab ikpotentiaf Issues with the development. The applicant shall provide
writtdgnotice about the meeting to all property owners within three
of the subject property. The meeting shall give the
developed %an opportunity to address potential issues, answer development -
related questions, and bring forward a project that is consistent with the
surrounding development of the area. City Staff will be present to answer
procedural and City- related questions, but will otherwise observe and
report on the discussions held at the meeting.
E. PLANNING COMMISSION
It shall be the duty of the Planning Commission to review each PUD prior to
consideration of the City Council.
1. The Planning Commission shall perform detailed analysis of the project
and make recommendations to the applicant and the City Council.
2. The Planning Commission shall receive staff's input, hear from the
general public, and engage the developer in discussion of the project.
3. The Planning Commission shall address any potential issues that they feel
the project has and suggest design alternatives to create a project that
meets the goals, purpose, and criteria identified in this chapter.
4. The Planning Commission shall make
recommendations to the City Council.
a) Move to recommend denial of th
b) Move to recommend approval of
c) Move to recommend approval,*
5. Should the Planning Commiss
tabled until the next meeting
6. No proposal may continue to the
Commission has made aarecommendat
of the following
as presented
with conditions
can be
Council until the Planning
he City Council.
7. If any major changes are r a e Lo Sloe plans of', information is brought
forward after review by tlh� Plaifffi)j ommiss'ibn, the City Council may
ask that the project ret lann Gm
m mission for review.
The shall make the fire l.gecision on any PUD application. A
final PUD play shallkbe approved aing with an Ordinance. The approved
ordnance
City Countilishall rise the information provided by City staff, the
the Planning Commission, and the input from the
wand the `roject developer to approve or deny and proposed PUD.
P.
1. The C *tya,Council may add conditions to the project that they feel are
to meet the intent of the PUD Ordinance.
2. Should the City Council require more information; the item can be tabled
to a future meeting.
3. All conditions imposed by the Council shall become binding and shall be
met before the project may proceed.
PUD PROCESS FLOW CHART
Pre Application meeting
with planning staff.
Sumittal of Application
Packet and Applicable
Fees
Application reviewed and
public hearing scheduled.
Notification prepared for view
newspaperand mailing
list. Sign posted on the
subject property.
meeting
approved
Final
Action and
Ordinance
prepared
8.6 TIMELINE AND EXPIRATION
A. VALIDATION
A PUD shall be validated once any portion of the property has been platted and
recorded or a building permit is approved.
B. ZONING ORDINANCE
Because a PUD is a zoning action approved through City.Council by Ordinance,
the City shalt file the ordinance approving the designatiomof a PUD on a tract
of land, with the County Clerk's Office upon plattirlg.dnd recording any portion
of the PUD. _
C. EXPIRATION
For any PUD in which there has been no,t
of the property platted after five (5) ,ea
the PUD shall be considered null and vql a
Planning Commission and City Council for°
on the property. Upon approval of
Administrator shall transmit 1n,writing the
Commentary: PUD's are c
zoning of the site shall not
D. EXTENSIONS.
An extension ma
the 5 year /xpir'a
of two (2) additil
asking for the ex
expiration ,date.
by
'Lion dale. PUD's
permit issUedt;nor any portion
approval by ,City, Council,
brought.efore the
.Drior to anvrdevelooment
by the City Council, the
hich the PUD will expire.
fining. The underlining
shall expire.
inistrator for PUD's that are nearing
!xtended one (1) time for a maximum
ter is submitted to the Administrator
(2) months prior to the five (5) year
the following:
1. Reason for the extension
Z, That there, are noichanges to the original PUD approved by the City
_U Cnunril_
3. date by which a portion of the PUD will be platted
It shall party's responsibly to ask for and sign the letter of
extension. IMdo extension has been sought and granted, said PUD shall be
considered expired and must be re- approved by the Planning Commission and
City Council following the process prescribed in this Chapter. If no portion of
the property has been platted nor any building permit received by the
Community Development Department, within the two (2) year extension
period, said PUD shall expire and a new PUD application must be submitted.
8.7 AMENDMENTS
There may be instances when a change or amendment to the original PUD is
necessary or desired. In these situations, the magnitude of these amendments
is considered. There are two types of amendments that can occur with a valid
PUD, a major amendment and a minor amendment.
A. MAJOR AMENDMENT
A major amendment is described as a significant changtlatincreases the
density, intensifies the use, or creates inconsistencjefd(With the character of the
PUD that was initially approved shall proceed thro(ih''the entire PUD process as
outlined in this chapter.
1. The Administrator shall determine changes to the, PUD meet the
criteria for a major amendments; is an appropriate chtiange,,and will
maintain the spirit of what wavipp?oved inNbe original PUD, ;>
2. An appeal from the Administrators decision that the changes to the PUD
construe a major amendment shall be made`in writing by filing a notice of
appeal to the Plarim" Gommission w"Min ten (10) days of the
Administrators decision. Said appeal shall be Ceard a regular meeting of
the Planning Commission,. at applicant defend his
proposal. Appeals shall
B. MINOR A4, 'NDMENTF.:
Small chageltat meethe intent othe ordinance, do not increase the
density, are coNistentWwjth,surroundma evelopment, and do not pose a threat
to the health,
lend' #nts "hall be approved administratively and may only be
to g4l' efore the Technical Advisory Committee(TAC).
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
A. CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
The required conceptual plan shall be a rendered plan that clearly articulates
the overall concept of the PUD. Figure 8.1 illustrates an acceptable conceptual
site plan rendering. The site plan shall include the entire PUD area, and may
include site plans of smaller areas to provide more specificity if the
development is large.
1. The site plan shall include, at a minimum, the following:
a) Name of the proposed development.
b)
C)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
i)
D
))
M)
n)
Name and address of the property owner and developer.
Name of the preparer of the document.
Graphic scale drawn at a scale no smaller than 1:100, a north arrow,
date of preparation, and a legend. Vicinity map outlining the
location of the development in relation to major streets within 1000
feet, schools, and other landmarks. The County where the
development lies shall be depicted.
Legal description of the property shall be provided. Total acreage
of the tract, total acreage of the proposed area to be improved, and
acreage of open space. Location and name of abutting subdivisions
and City Limit Lines.
Wooded areas, wetlands, waterways, flpr6dplain and floodway,
ponds and other natural features shall be`depicted.
Location of all proposed streets.
Location of each proposed buildings (single family residences or
duplexes not required)
Proposed density of the deveto nt depicted 'ih, gross density
figures (gross units per acre6f the en e development)'
Location and identificatidrof ;all land 'uses within the :P,UD shall be
depicted. Identification of a(6',' arneni>yalD.cations, detention areas,
open space areas, etc shall be cl Orly depicted.
Location of parkin,areas.
Depiction of any proposed walking grails, pathways, and buffer
yards, including fenas`
Notation on the plaWbf hoW�vk„ide, the byffer yards will be and how
they will be landscaped
Aype of amenities provided
Figure 8.7 -1
B. COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AS THE PRELIMINARY PLAT
Should a conceptual site plan be provided that goes into sufficient detail
necessary for submittal of a preliminary plat, the plan may be used as the
preliminary plat for the PUD project. If the site plan is to be used as the
preliminary plat, it must contain all of the required elements for preliminary
plat approval outlined in the subdivision regulations of the City of Owasso. If
the PUD is approved with a site plan that is sufficient to be used as a
preliminary plat, the applicant may proceed to the final plat stage.
Commentary: It is not required that the entire development be platted,
only the portion the applicant intends to develop;;'initfally.
8.9 DESIGN AND INTENT STATMENT
A. REQUIREMENTS
The design and intent statement shall clearly articulate the vision for the
proposed development and shall identify key;;etiftents of the project that
justify using a PUD approach over conventio '6�t zoning.
1. At a minimum, the design and intent statgfnent shall include some basic
elements, listed below.
a. Overall project statement of usvand intent.
b. List of the proposed larld uses includirig'residential densities
c. List j al:p°arties involve owner, agent, plan preparer)
d. why the development is appropriate,
3h it comties with ordinance. The applicant should
exp arh ;how .the, PUD is consistent with the goals, purposes, and .11
e A regarding the compatibility of the proposed
eyettrpment YWith the surrounding area. The statement should
transition, screening, types of materials to be
used, s it re fopYage of structures, .
f. A table how the proposed PUD will differ from current bulk
e;
standards; with an outline of what sections of the zoning ordinance
br subcjiyision regulations that the PUD seeks relief from.
of the covenants that will govern the property and
about the development of a Homeowners Association
how they will govern the common areas.
h. An anticipated timeline for development, which may include a
phasing plan.
i. The PUD's consistency with the Owasso Land Use Master Plan.
Sections 8.90 -8.99 Reserved
RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY NEW CONSTRUCTION MONTH END REPORT AUGUST 2012
Month
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2006
2009
2010
2011
2012
1 January
54
30
31
22
13
25
15
17
1B
19
3 March
38
75
65
50
25
35
30
46
14
27
26,269,824
5 May
29
31
43
36
60
23
27
30
20
23
32
34
27.
12
23
24
28
17
20
15
9 September ber
52
64
35
12
17
40
20
1 I
12
11 November
35
31
32
13
26
516 336 301 267 303 246 179
YTD Lea 356 366 270 219 196 221 212 139 164
AUGUST YEAR -TO -DATE COUNT
AUGUST
AUGUST YIAR-TO-DATE DOLLARS
35,000,000
30,000,000
25,000,000
20,000,000
15,000,000
10,000,000
2008 2009 201 2011 12
AUGUST
TOTAL DOLLARS
45,000,000
30,000,000
15,000,000
COMMERCIAL NEW CONSTRUCTION MONTH END REPORT AUGUST 2012
Month 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
1 January 0 0 1 2 9 4 4 1 1 3 1
CITY OF OWASSO
RESIDENTIAL LOT INVENTORY STATUS
August 31, 2012
SUBDIVISION
# OF LOTS
# DEVELOPED
# AVAILABLE
Burberry Place (6/09)
89
50
39
Camelot Estates (4/07)
139
51
88
Carrington Pointe 1(1111)
171
55
116
Champions East (05/08)
66
6
60
Champions West (5/08)
45
2
43
Country Estates III (3/99)
61
58
3
Country Estates VI (11/03)
37
36
1
Crescent Ridge (02/08)
101
93
8
Fairways V (8/99)
71
57
14
Fairways VI (12100)
42
40
2
Falls at Garrett Creek (12/05)
85
84
1
Falls at Garrett Creek Amended (12/05)
24
22
2
Honey Creek (4/02)
202
198
4
Keys Landing (3/08)
131
99
32
Lake Valley IV (5/2010)
114
84
30
Lakes at Bailey Ranch (10/07)
235
190
45
Maple Glen (12/08)
98
95
3
Maple Glen II (1/11)
93
76
17
Nottingham Estates IV (8/01)
20
17
3
Nottingham Estates V (3/01)
44
43
1
Nottingham Hill (6/09)
58
9
49
Preston Lakes (12/00)
272
243
29
Preston Lakes III (10104)
147
144
3
Remington Park II (11104)
84
82
2
Sawgrass Park II (04/05)
96
94
2
The Summit at Southern Links (6/97)
31
26
5
Watercolours (12/02)
40
31
9
TOTALS
2596
1985
611
Watercolours(12 /0
The Summit at Southern Links (6/9'
Sawgrass Park II (04/0:
Remington Park II (11/0,
Preston Lakes III (10 10r
Preston Lakes (12/0(
Nottingham Hill (6 /OE
Nottingham Estates V (3101
Nottingham Estates IV (8/01
Maple Glen II (1/11
Maple Glen (12108
Lakes at Salley Ranch (10/07
Lake Valley IV (512010'
Keys Landing (3/06;
Honey Creek (4102;
Falls at Garrett Creek Amended (12105)
Falls at Garrett Creek (12J05)
Fairways VI (12100)
Fairways V (8199)
Crescent Ridge (02/08)
Country Estates VI (11/03)
Country Estates III (3/99)
Champions West(5108)
Champions East (05108)
Carrington Pointe 1(1111)
Camelot Estates (4107)
Burberry Place (6/09)
CITY OF OWASSO
0 50 100 150 200 250
0 Lots Developed OTotal Lots
300
PERMITS APPLIED FOR IN AUGUST 2012
ADDRESS
I BUILDER
ADD /ZONE
I VALUE
A.S.F.
I PERMIT #
DATE
)10 E 102 St N
Blue Haven Pools
SG /RS -3
$ 40,000
426
12- 0801 -P
8/2/2012
9500 N 129 E Ave
I Sign World
CC /CS
$ 5,000
1 48
12- 0802 -S
8/2/2012
9053 N 121 E Ave
I WK Construction
ISM/CS
1 $ 500,000
1 3010
12- 0803 -C
8/6/2012
11007 N 117 E Ave
lCapital Homes
MGII/RS -3
$ 87,476
1809
12- 0804 -X
8/7/2012
11006 N 118 E Ave
I Simmons Homes
1MG11/RS-3
$ 85,980
1833
12- 0805 -X
8/9/2012
8415 N 125 E Ave
1Boyd Family Dentistry
OSP /01,
$ 1,500
16
1 12- 0806 -5
8/9/2012
15301 E 110 PI N
I Simmons Homes
LVIV/RS -3
$ 100,815
1833
1 12- 0807 -X
8/9/2012
7606 E 83 PI N
101d School Construction
CP/RS -3
$ 153,120
2784
1 12- 0808 -X
8/14/2012
9021 N 121 E Ave
Superior Graphic
SF /CS
$ 9,000
96
12- 0809 -5
8/14/2012
9045 N 121 E Ave #100
Crown Neon
ISTICS
$ 4,000
24
12- 0810 -5
8/15/2012
9508 N 96 E P1
Shaw Homes
LBR/RS -3
$ 186,230
3386
12- 0811 -X
8/20/2012
9404 E 92 PI N
Shaw Homes
LBR/RS -3
$ 228,965
4163
12- 0812 -X
8/20/2012
9402 E 91 St N
Landmark Homes
LBR/RS -3
$ 163,652
2975
12- 0813 -X
8/21/2012
9455 Owasso Expressway
Claude Neon
TP /CS
$ 7,200
78
12- 0814 -5
8/21/2012
12334 E 86 St N
Rainbow Signs
EC /CS
$ 4,000
45
12- 0815 -5
8/21/2012
10541 N 121 E Ave I
Simmons Homes
BBP/RS-3
$ 146,960
2672
12- 0816 -X
8/21/2012
12905 E 96 St N I
Sam's Club
WFA /CS
$ 7,500,000
139365
12- 0817 -C
8/22/2012
12349 E 86 St N JCBCI
ILRS/CG
$ 145,000
2400
12- 0818 -C
8/22/2012
10849 E 109 PI N lRob
Smith
CR/RE
$ 25,000
1680
12- 0819 -X
8/22/2012
8501 Owasso Expressway I
Keith Haney
UP /CG
$ 450,000
10609
12- 0820 -C
8/26/2012
7770 N Owasso Expressway JKRB
FC/CG
$ 8,5001
1500
12- 0821 -C
8/27/2012
^' 03 E 70 St N
Strategic Builders
KL/RS-3
$ 163,350
2970
12- 0822 -X
8/27/2012
J5 E 70 St N
Strategic Builders
KL✓RS -3
$ 138,600
2520
12- 0823 -X
8/27/2012
12112 E 69 St N
Strategic Builders
KL/RS -3
$ 143,000
2600
12- 0824 -X
8/27/2012
15009 E 110 St N
Simmons Homes
LVIV/RS -3
$ 139,120
1939
12- 0825 -X
8/27/2012
15104 E 1I0 St N
Simmons Homes
LVIV/RS -3
$ 164,080
2251
12- 0826 -X
8/27/2012
11000 N 118 E Ave
Simmons Homes
MGII /RS -3
$ 85,980
1833
12- 0827 -X
8/27/2012
10914 N 117 E PI
Capital Homes
MGII/RS -3
$ 77,632
1351
12- 0828 -X 1
8/28/2012
15 Single Family
$ 2,064,960
1 36,919 SgFt
1 Residential Remodel
$ 25,000
1 1680 SgFt
2 New Commercial
$ 8,000,000
142,375 SgFt
3 Commercial Remodel
$ 603,500
14,509 SgFt
6 Signs
$ 30,700
307 SgFt
1 Pool
$ 40,000
426 SgFt
28 Building Permits
$ 10,764,160 1196,216
SgFt
OCCUPANCY PERMITS
NAME ADDRESS APPLICATION OPENING COMPLETE
DATE DATE
AUGUST 2012
JULY 2012
AT &T 7707 N Owasso Exp #7 7/112012 7/3/2012 Yes
Boyd Dentistry 8415 N 125 E Ave 11/15/2011 7/20/2012 Yes
JUNE 2012
The Copper Kiln 122 S Main St 611/2012 6/29/2012 Yes
MAY 2012
APRIL 2012
Luna De Noche
9500 N 129 E Ave #130
4/5/2012
4/12/2012
Yes
Golden Dragon Taekwondo
13720 E 86 St N
4/5/2012
4/9/2012
Yes
Blue Phoenix
9500 N 129 E Ave #
4/10/2012
4/26/2012
Yes
MARCH 2012
Duffy's
11610 E 86 St N
3/5/2012
3/10/2012
Yes
Life Church
14008 E 96 St N
5/2/2011
3/3/2012
Yes
Edward Jones
9540 N Garnett
1/22/2012
3/22/2012
Yes
Dayana's Hair Salon
11622 E 86 St N
3/2/2012
3/20/2012
Yes
-' -,ia Pentecostal
12111 N Garnett
3/22/2012
3/22/2012
Yes
I .Jails & Spa
12412 E 86 St N
3/14/2012
3/17/2012
Yes
FEBRUARY 2012
Pet Hotel
8355 N. Owasso Exp.
2/1/2012
2/3/2012
Yes
Green Hill Funeral Home
9901 N. Owasso Exp.
2/6/2012
2/16/2012
Yes
Akira Sushi Bar
9455 N Owasso Exp. #E
1/15/2012
2/10/2012
Yes
Family Animal Medicine
9200 N. Garnett
2/22/2012
2/22/2012
Yes
Owasso Medical Campus
12455 N. 100 E. Ave. #300
2129/2012
2/29/2012
Yes
JANUARY 2012
DECEMBER 2011
Dog Daycare & Kennel 8355 N. Owasso Expy 1211/2011 12/1/2011 Yes
NOVEMBER 2011
Ma's Caf6
11691 N. Garnett Rd.
11/14/2011
11/14/2011
Yes
Boomerang Diner
13720 E. 86 St. N. #190
11/16/2011
11/16/2011
Yes
Creative Clips
12711 E. 86 PI. N. #108
11/15/2011
11130/2011
Yes
OCTOBER 2011
O'Reilly Auto Parts
13318 E. 116th St. N.
10/3112011
10/31/2011
Yes
Top Cut
12409 E. 96th E. Ave.
10131/2011
10/3112011
Yes
SEPTEMBER 2011
F `n The Hole
126 S. Main St.
9/1/2011
9/23/2011
Yes