Title
RESOLUTION NO. R-1314-97: A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORMAN, OKLAHOMA, AMENDING THE NORMAN 2025 LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION PLAN SO AS TO PLACE LOTS 7, 8, AND 9, BLOCK 16, ORIGINAL TOWN OF NORMAN, CLEVELAND COUNTY, OKLAHOMA, IN THE MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION AND REMOVE THE SAME FROM THE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION. (213 E. TONHAWA STREET)
Body
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is proposing a three story townhouse with three dwelling units for the site. The current land use designation for the site is Low Density Residential. The applicant’s proposal for a three unit townhome requires the land use designation to be changed to Medium Density Residential. The site is currently vacant and the lot size is more than adequate to support this type of development.
STAFF ANALYSIS: The 2025 Plan identifies two criteria that must be examined before a land use change is approved.
1. There has been a change in circumstances resulting from development of the properties in the general vicinity which suggest that the proposed change will not be contrary to the public interest.
This site was platted as part of the Original Township of Norman and has undergone many land use changes within recent history. As Norman has expanded and urbanized, the general vicinity of this request has transformed from characteristically residential use to a mix of uses. For example, areas previously intended for single-family homes have been converted into beauty salons and converted to multi-family dwellings. Some homes have been demolished and are now parking lots. Many homes that have exceeded their life span have been demolished and are now vacant lots - just as this site.
Overall, this area has changed dramatically from once a residential neighborhood to an urbanized area. Directly across the street from the site on the south side of Tonhawa is a vehicle service shop, an office building, a metal warehouse building and a vacant lot. On the north side of Tonhawa, abutting the proposed site, are two rental properties. On the east side of this proposal is a duplex that was once a single-family home, that duplex abuts a center for adults with disabilities. On the west side of this proposal is a single-family home and west of there is a parking lot. There is a mix of land uses surrounding this proposal. The proposed change will not be contrary to the public interest in light of the many mixed land uses in the general vicinity.
2. There is a determination that the proposed change would not result in adverse land use or adverse traffic impacts to surrounding properties or the vicinity.
The applicant’s proposal for a multi-family dwelling for this site will not result in adverse land use or traffic impacts to surrounding properties. Parking for the development will be provided by an off-street parking lot which is located in the rear of the property and accessed off the alley. The design proposal for the parking lot accommodates the required parking for the townhouses with the option of some additional parking if needed. The developer has indicated more than required landscaping will screen the parking lot.
The amount of traffic this development will create in the vicinity is minor in comparison to the surrounding commercial uses that generate higher traffic counts. Within this general vicinity there is a collector street and West Gray Street and East Main Street, minor arterial streets, two blocks south of the site. In addition, there is also the ability to access many services through different modes of transportation; for example, Legacy Trail connects downtown and the University of Oklahoma and downtown Main Street connects east and west Norman. Because of the various land uses mentioned within the vicinity there is not an adverse land use or traffic impact that would negatively impact the surrounding property owners.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of Resolution No. R-1314-97 due to the criteria for a Norman 2025 Land Use and Transportation Plan having been met. No adverse land uses or traffic impacts will be associated with this proposal.
Planning Commission, at their meeting of February 13, 2014, did not recommend approval of this Resolution, on a vote of 2-3.