[00:00:02]
[1. Call to Order of the Edmond Planning Commission.]
AND GENTLEMEN, AT THIS POINT IN TIME WE WILL CALL TO ORDER THE TUESDAY, OCTOBER 8TH MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.[2. Consideration of Approval of Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes: September 17, 2024.]
ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, REGULAR MINUTE MEETING MINUTES FROM SEPTEMBER 17TH.HAVE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THEM? ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS THAT NEED TO BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE OTHER MEMBERS? YEAH, I NEED TO MAKE A, UH, THE MINUTES SAY THAT I VOTED FOR, UH, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AND I ABSTAINED 'CAUSE I WASN'T HERE FOR THAT MEETING.
SO IF YOU COULD JUST CHANGE THAT.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER CHANGES THAT NEED TO BE MADE? IF NOT, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS AMENDED.
AND THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED BY VOTE OF FIVE TO ZERO.
[A. Case No. DD24-00006; Consideration for a Lot Split for West Walnut, located on the northwest corner of Walnut and Main. (Castle Custom Homes LLC; Ward 1) ]
THAT BRINGS US TO THE PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. UH, THE FIRST CASE IS DD 24 DASH 0 0 0 0 6.CONSIDERATION FOR A LOT SPLIT FOR WEST WALNUT LOCATED ON THE CORNER OF WALNUT AND MAIN.
I BELIEVE THAT WAS CARRIED OVER AND I SEE THE APPLICANT PRESENT.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING APPROVAL OF A LOT SPLIT TO CREATE FOUR SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF MAIN AND WALL WALNUT STREET.
THE SITE IS APPROXIMATELY 7,000 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE AND THEY'RE PROPOSING TO CREATE FOUR LOTS RANGING FROM 1300 SQUARE FEET TO 2200 SQUARE FEET, WHICH WILL MIRROR THE CONFIGURATION OF THE LOT ON THE EAST SIDE OF WALNUT.
ACCESS WILL BE PROVIDED OFF OF WALNUT AND A NEW SIDEWALK WILL BE CONSTRUCTED ALONG WALNUT TO CONNECT TO THE EXISTING SIDEWALK ON MAIN STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
DO ANY MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE CITY STAFF AT THIS POINT IN TIME? SEEING NONE.
WOULD THE APPLICANT CARE TO ADD ANYTHING FURTHER? YES.
ARE THERE ANY MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC THAT WISH TO SPEAK EITHER FOR OR AGAINST THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT? UH, SEEING NONE.
DO WE HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS AT THIS POINT IN TIME BY MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION? SEEING NONE.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION.
NOW THAT PROJECT IS APPROVED BY VOTE OF FIVE TO ZERO AND THAT WILL BE BEFORE CITY COUNCIL ON OCTOBER 28TH.
[B. Case No. PR21-00048; Public Hearing and Consideration of Extension of the Preliminary Plat for 33 Fields, to be located south of 33rd Street and west of I-35 (HEA Development LLC; Ward 3) ]
US TO THE NEXT ITEM, CASE NUMBER PR 21 DASH 0 0 0 4 8 PUBLIC HEARING IN CONSIDERATION OF EXTENSION OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR 33 FIELDS TO BE LOCATED SOUTH OF 33RD STREET AND WEST OF I 35 IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT AND THEY ARE.THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING AN EXTENSION OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR 33 FIELDS LOCATED SOUTH OF 33RD STREET AND WEST OF I 35 FRONTAGE ROAD.
THE PLA WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED IN 2022 MAKING IT DUE FOR EXPIRATION THIS FALL AS PLA APPROVALS ARE ONLY VALID FOR TWO YEARS.
THERE ARE NO CHANGES TO THE PLA AND THE APPLICANT IS ONLY REQUESTING AN EXTENSION.
AS A REMINDER, THE PLAT IS ZONED WITH A PUD CONTAINS 236 LOTS ON 85 ACRES.
THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE IS 4,400 SQUARE FEET.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE EXTENSION.
UH, DO MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF MS. MCCONE OR OTHER MEMBERS OF THE STAFF AT THIS POINT IN TIME? HOW LONG IS THE EXTENSION PERIOD FOR? TWO YEARS.
TWO ADDITIONAL TWO YEARS? MM-HMM,
AND WOULD THE APPLICANT CARE TO ADD ANYTHING FURTHER? NO.
DO WE HAVE ANY MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL COMMISSION OR GENERAL PUBLIC THAT WANT TO OBJECT TO THIS OR SPEAK IN FAVOR OF IT? SEEING NONE.
DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS TO BE MADE AT THIS POINT IN TIME BY MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION? IF NOT, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? MOTION? SECOND.
UH, THAT PROJECT IS APPROVED BY VOTE OF FIVE TO ZERO.
IT WILL BE BEFORE CITY COUNCIL ON OCTOBER 28.
[C. Case No. Z24-00001; Public Hearing and Consideration for a Rezoning from “A” Single Family Dwelling District to “PUD Z24-00001” Planned Unit Development, located on the south side of Willowood Road, east of Coltrane Road. (Marsal Developments, LLC; Ward 2) ]
TO NEXT ITEM, UH, CASE NUMBER Z 24 DASH 0 0 0 0 1.PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERATION FOR REZONING FROM A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING DISTRICT TO PUDZ 24 DASH 0 0 0 0 1 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF WILLOW WOOD ROAD, EAST COLTRANE ROAD.
MARAL DEVELOPMENT IS THE APPLICANT AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REZONE THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF WILLOW WILLOW WOOD ROAD, EAST OF COLTRANE ROAD, EAST OF THE EXISTING ASTORIA OFFICE PARK FROM A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING DISTRICT TO PUD PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT.
WHEN ASTORIA EXECUTIVE PARK WAS ORIGINALLY DEVELOPED, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WAS PLACED IN A COMMON AREA DUE TO THE SITE BEING LOCATED IN THE FLOODPLAIN AND NOT BUILDABLE.
WITH THE RECENT STORMWATER PROJECTS PERFORMED BY THE CITY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA, THE PROPERTY NO LONGER LIES IN THE RECORDED 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN AND CAN BE USED FOR DEVELOPMENT.
[00:05:01]
THE AREA SURROUNDING THE SITE IS CURRENTLY ZONED D TWO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TO THE WEST, A PUD, SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING DISTRICT PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO THE SOUTH AND EAST AND C TWO PUD MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO THE NORTH.THE PUD DESIGN STATEMENT DIVIDES THE PROPERTIES INTO TWO TRACKS.
TRACT ONE CONTAINS 1.25 ACRES OF LAND AND WILL ALLOW UP TO 15,682 SQUARE FEET OF BUILDING AREA.
A VARIETY OF USES ARE ALLOWED THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE D TWO ZONING TO THE WEST, INCLUDING OFFICE MEDICAL FACILITIES, CHILDCARE CENTER, COMMUNITY SERVICE VETERINARIAN WITH NO OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES.
THE PUD PROHIBITS RESTAURANTS AND MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES.
NO DRIVE-THROUGH WINDOWS OUTDOOR SPEAKERS OR 24 HOUR OPERATIONS WILL BE ALLOWED WITH ANY USE.
SETBACKS WILL BE 25 FEET FOR THE FRONT YARD AND ZERO FOR THE REAR AND INSIDE YARDS EXCEPT WHERE THERE IS A SENSITIVE BORDER.
THE SENSITIVE BORDER SETBACK WILL BE 30 FEET FOR THE REAR YARD AND 20 FEET FOR THE SIDE YARD WITH A MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT OF 35 FEET.
TRACK TWO WILL CONTAIN 0.67 ACRES OF LAND AND WILL CONSIST OF DRAINAGE, STORMWATER DETENTION AND OPEN SPACE.
NO STRUCTURES WILL BE ALLOWED IN TRACK TWO.
THE EDMOND PLAN 2018 DESIGNATES THE SITE IS S ONE SUBURBAN NEIGHBORHOOD AND OPEN SPACE.
BOTH PLAN CATEGORIES SHOW THE PUD IN THE YELLOW CATEGORY AS A USE THAT MAY BE APPROPRIATE IN SOME CASES FOR THE SITE.
THE SMALL SCALE OFFICE AND LIGHT COMMERCIAL USE THAT IS PROPOSED WITHIN THE PUD ALONG WITH THE REMAINING DETENTION POND AND OPEN SPACE BLENDS THE EXISTING AREA AND MEETS THE INTENT OF THE PLAN.
DO ANY MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS OF, UH, MS. MCCONE AT THIS POINT IN TIME? SO JUST TO CLARIFY, YOU DID SAY THAT NO STRUCTURES ARE ALLOWED IN TRACK TWO? CORRECT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE, BY THE COMMISSION? IF NOT, WOULD THE APPLICANT CARE TO ADD ANYTHING FURTHER? DOUG CLAWSON, MKEC FOR THE APPLICANT? UH, AND I'D BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
I DON'T KNOW THAT I HAVE ANYTHING FURTHER.
I, THE INTENT OF THIS IS JUST SIMPLY TO ADD THIS IN TO THE ASTORIA EXECUTIVE PARK.
UM, AS CHRISTIE MENTIONED ORIGINALLY THIS WAS IN FLOODPLAIN AND UH, WITH THE CITY'S CHANNELIZATION PROJECT, IT HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THE FLOODPLAIN.
SO NOW IT'S UH, DEVELOPABLE TRACK OF LAND AND UH, SO THE DEVELOPER WOULD LIKE TO ADD IT TO THE EXECUTIVE PARK.
I WOULD SAY THAT THE, THE INTENT OF THE BUILDING, I KNOW WE'RE NOT AT SITE PLANS, SO WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT BUILDING ELEVATIONS, BUT THEIR PLAN IS TO STICK WITH THE SAME RESIDENTIAL STYLE, UH, BUILDING AS WHAT'S IN THE ASTORIA EXECUTIVE PARK.
SO THEY'RE NOT PLANNING ON A, ON A SIGNIFICANT DEPARTURE FROM THAT STYLE OF THE BUILDING.
DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE? I DO.
REAL QUICK, UH, JUST IN KIND OF A RESPONSE TO THAT, UH, CAN YOU PUT IN HERE THAT IT WOULD BE LIMITED TO ONE STORY BECAUSE I, I THINK THE OTHER, I MEAN, UH, IT'S 35 FEET, UH, HEIGHT RESTRICTION AND I THINK THAT'S FINE.
BUT, UM, WOULD YOU CONSIDER JUST MAKING IT ONE STORY AS OPPOSED BECAUSE THEY, WITH 35 FEET, YOU COULD, UH, BASICALLY HAVE A TWO STORY THERE AND I'D PREFER IT NOT, NOT BE TWO STORY.
I I THINK WE'D BE WILLING TO DO THAT.
UH, BECAUSE YOUR OTHER BUILDINGS WERE ONE STORY AS WELL.
SO THE, I THINK THERE ARE A COUPLE OF TWO STORY BUILDINGS IN ASTORIA.
UM, BUT UH, BUT WE'D BE WILLING TO OKAY.
UM, ALSO THE, UH, IT SAYS THAT THE SENSITIVE ORDER STANDARDS, UH, WILL BE FOLLOWED.
SO THERE YOU'LL PROBABLY IN THE SITE PLAN, ADDRESS THE, UH, SCREENING, I MEAN, UH, FENCING AND SO FORTH.
YEAH, WE'LL WE CAN ADDRESS THAT AT, AT SITE PLAN.
DO ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT AT THIS POINT IN TIME? UH, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC THAT WISH TO SPEAK EITHER FOR OR AGAINST? YES, MA'AM.
IF WE COME FORWARD, PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF, UH, BY NAME AND ADDRESS.
I LIVE AT 31 0 9 BROKEN BOW COURT.
MY, UM, EMPLOYER IS OKLAHOMA FARM BUREAU.
SO I'M HERE REPRESENTING OKLAHOMA COUNTY FARM BUREAU.
UM, WE'RE HERE JUST TO SEEK INFORMATION ON WHAT THIS DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO BE BECAUSE WE HAVE SUCH A PROBLEM WITH PARKING DOWN ASTORIA EXECUTIVE PARK.
THE STREETS ARE LINED ON BOTH SIDES WITH EMPLOYEES THAT PARK IN THE STREET JUST SO THAT THE PARKING LOTS CAN BE AVAILABLE FOR, UM, CLIENTS OR PATIENTS OR WHATEVER THE BUSINESS IS.
UM, SO I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW, MY BOARD WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT IF WE
[00:10:01]
CHANGE THIS FROM SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING TO A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, HOW ARE WE GONNA ADDRESS THE PARKING THAT WASN'T ADDRESSED IN A STORY PARK PARK WHEN EVERYBODY HAS TO PARK IN THE STREETS? OKAY.DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? WELL, I THINK THAT'S MORE OF A SITE PLAN ISSUE AT THIS POINT.
UH, AND, AND, UH, THE LIMITATION OR THE AGREEMENT TO LIMIT THE BUILDINGS TO ONE STORY SHOULD HELP IMPACT THAT.
UH, BUT AGAIN, THAT'S, THAT'S NOT REALLY NECESSARILY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE TONIGHT.
WELL, ISN'T THIS TO LOOK AT RE ZONING? IT'S A MATTER OF, IT'S A MATTER OF REZONING TO DETERMINE WHETHER RE OR NOT IT'S APPROPRIATE TAKES INTO ACCOUNT PARKING.
WELL THE ISSUE OF THE ISSUE OF PARKING THOUGH IS AS THE GENERAL RULE IS CONSIDERED AT SITE PLAN TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT IT'S GOING TO BE APPROPRIATE FOR THE TYPE OF BUILDINGS AND WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE.
UH, BUT, AND THERE'LL BE ANOTHER MEETING FOR THAT, THAT THAT'S THE WAY IT POP.
THERE'LL BE ANOTHER PUBLIC NOTICE WHENEVER THEY WANNA DO THE BUILDING AND THAT'LL BE ANOTHER, THEY'LL BE IN HERE
SO JUST SO YOU KNOW, BUT I, I THINK, UH, RIGHT NOW COULDN'T SHE JUST CALL THE CITY AND ASK? I MEAN, YEAH, YOU CAN VISIT THE CITY STAFF AND SEE WHAT THE PARKING SPACE, UH, REQUIREMENTS ARE BECAUSE IN ORDER FOR A COMMERCIAL PROJECT TO BE BUILT BASED UPON THE SPACE, THEY REQUIRE A SPECIFIC AMOUNT OF PARKING PLACES BASED UPON PROJECTED USE.
AND IT'S JUST NOT, AND NOT JUST PARKING, IT'S ALSO THE TRAFFIC COMING THROUGH THIS LITTLE CIRCLE.
UM, WHEN YOU CAN'T DRIVE, BUT ONE CAR RIGHT NOW, ONE WAY BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO PULL IN TO LET SOMEBODY ELSE BY, YOU KNOW, IN A PARKING LOT.
DO WE KNOW IF THOSE ARE PUBLIC STREETS OR IS THAT A PRIVATE STREET? IT'S A PUBLIC STREET.
THEY'RE PUBLIC STREETS ON THE GROUND AROUND SURROUNDING THE PROJECT.
I KNEW THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS, I WASN'T SURE IF THE DRIVE IN MM-HMM.
AND DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WISH TO SPEAK EITHER FOR OR AGAINST THIS PROJECT? OKAY.
SEEN AND WHILE, UH, AGAIN, THE ISSUE OF PARKING IS SOMEWHAT A SITE PLAN ISSUE, IS IT SOMETHING THE APPLICANT WOULD BE COMFORTABLE ADDRESSING AT THIS POINT IN TIME VERY BRIEFLY TO, OR IS IT SOMETHING THAT YOU ALL HAVE EVEN CONSIDERED AT THIS POINT IN TIME? WELL, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE, UH, CONSIDERED THE OVERALL ISSUE, UH, FOR THIS SITE.
WE WOULD INTEND TO MEET THE CITY STANDARD FOR PARKING.
UH, AND I WOULD SAY THAT THERE IS A CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN, AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE, ON THE BOARD IT IS STILL CONCEPTUAL.
UM, AND WE WILL ADDRESS THAT SPECIFICALLY AT, AT THE SITE PLAN.
UH, MEETING, DO WE HAVE ANY MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION THAT HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENT AT THIS POINT IN TIME? UH, SCENE NONE.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE PUD WITH THE ADDITION THAT THE BUILDINGS CONTAINED THEREIN WILL BE LIMITED TO A ONE STORY BUILDING? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS AMENDED ASD.
DO WHAT I THINK YOU HAVE TO SAY AS AMENDED, AS WELL AS AMENDED
AND THAT PROJECT IS APPROVED BY, OUR ITEM IS APPROVED BY VOTE OF FIVE TO ZERO.
IT WILL BE BEFORE CITY COUNCIL ON OCTOBER 28TH.
[D. Case No. ES24-00006; Public Hearing and Consideration of a Street and Utility Easement Closing located on the north side of 7th Street, west of Fretz Avenue. (SDF Properties, LLC; Ward 3)]
TO CASE NUMBER ES 24 DASH 0 0 0 0 6 PUBLIC HEARING IN CONSIDERATION OF A STREET AND UTILITY EASEMENT CLOSING LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF SEVENTH STREET, WEST OF REZ AVENUE.SDF PROPERTIES IS THE APPLICANT AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT.
MS. MCCONE, WILL YOU PLEASE PRESENT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING APPROVAL TO CLOSE THE NORTH 15 FEET OF THE 80 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY ON WEST SEVENTH STREET, WEST OF FRETZ AVENUE.
THE CLOSING WILL BRING THE RIGHT OF WAY INTO ALIGNMENT WITH THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST AND ALLOW FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE.
NOTICE WAS SENT TO FRANCHISE UTILITIES AND WE RECEIVE NO OBJECTIONS.
DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF CITY STAFF AT THIS POINT IN TIME? BY MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION? SEEING NONE, WOULD THE APPLICANT CARE TO ADD ANYTHING FURTHER? I'D BE HAPPY TO ADDRESS ANY QUESTIONS.
AND DO WE HAVE ANY MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC THAT WISH TO SPEAK EITHER FOR OR AGAINST THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT? SEEING NONE.
DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS BY MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION? SEEING NONE, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? MOTION? SECOND.
THAT ITEM IS APPROVED BY A VOTE OF FIVE TO ZERO AND IT WILL BE AT CITY COUNCIL ON OCTOBER 28TH.
[A. Discussion and Consideration of the 2025 Planning Commission Schedule of Regular Meetings.]
ITEM IS, UH, THE DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF THE 2025 PLANNING COMMISSION SCHEDULE OF REGULAR MINUTE, UH, REGULAR MEETINGS.HAS EVERYONE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THAT AND DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? PRETTY OPTIMISTIC
[00:15:03]
OKAY.AND WOULD CITY STAFF LIKE TO ADD ANYTHING FURTHER? I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
SO YOU DON'T NEED TO READ ALL THE DATES IN DIRECTOR JUST TO MAKE SURE WE CAN CHECK OUR CALENDARS OR ANYTHING.
EVERYONE HAS TO GET OUT THE CALENDAR.
UM, DO WE NEED TO GO AHEAD AND VOTE TO APPROVE THOSE AT THIS POINT IN TIME? DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE? MOTION? SECOND, UH, THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED OR THE NOT MINUTES, BUT THE CALENDAR IS APPROVED BY A VOTE OF FIVE TO ZERO AND THAT BRINGS US TO ADJOURNMENT.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? ALL RIGHT.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN.