Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Manufactured Home topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board denies request to place manufactured home for family caregiver
Summary
The Oklahoma County Board of Adjustment denied a request to place a manufactured home on a parcel to house a family member with health needs, citing prior review and objections raised during the hearing.
Get email alerts on the Residential Manufactured Home topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Oklahoma County Board of Adjustment voted to deny a request to place a manufactured home on a parcel so the applicant could care for a family member with suspected early-onset Alzheimer’s. The applicant, Rob Nixon, told the board he and his wife had recently returned from working out of state and planned to move the applicant's relative onto the property to be near family care.
Staff reminded the board this application had been considered previously and described the parcel-size limitations under county zoning: about 2 acres are required for each residential unit and the property has a little more than 2½ acres, short of what would be needed to lawfully support two residential units without a variance. Nixon said the change since the prior hearing was that a tenant who had been living on the property had vacated and the family had begun repairs.
Nixon described the household situation and his intent to care for his mother-in-law, saying the family had made substantial interior and exterior improvements and that the tenant had moved out. He said, in part, that they wanted the manufactured home “so that she could be closer to family. I'll take care of her.”
Board members noted the prior hearing record and zoning requirements. After discussion, a motion to deny the request carried on a roll call; Jennifer Arsenal, Randy Goodman and Cooper Robinson each recorded an aye vote.
The denial leaves the applicant without board permission to place the manufactured home in the requested location under the variance request as presented. Staff recorded that the application had been previously considered and that records and any submitted emails or protests remained on file.

