Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Storage Architectural Materials topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves storage-facility variance after residents secure brick exterior for perimeter walls
Summary
The Oklahoma City Board of Adjustment approved a variance allowing metal paneling on most self-storage buildings but required brick on exterior-facing walls of Building G after neighborhood protests and multiple community meetings.
The Oklahoma City Board of Adjustment on an unspecified January meeting approved a variance allowing metal paneling for most interior buildings at a proposed self-storage project but required masonry (brick) on exterior-facing walls of Building G to address neighborhood concerns.
Neighbors and board members said the change was intended to preserve the visual character of the adjacent Fieldstone neighborhood and to respond to more than 50 written protests submitted on the application. The applicant, Ethan Slavin of 44 Storage LLC, said the primary reasons for requesting a metal finish were future maintenance and thermal concerns for non–climate-controlled storage units.
Ethan Slavin, representing 44 Storage LLC, told the board the project had been continued from a January meeting because of protests and an additional community meeting. “The reason we're requesting for a metal panel is maintenance for one,” Slavin said. “If somebody backs their car into this building ... being able to replace that metal panel is gonna be a lot more seamless from a maintenance standpoint,” he added, and said masonry raises waterproofing and thermal-mass issues for unconditioned storage units.
Neighborhood representatives pressed for masonry on portions of Building G visible from homes. Representative Emily Geiss summarized neighborhood requests after a community meeting, saying residents wanted “the back of Building G to be bricked” so the development “preserve[s] the visual integrity of their neighborhood.” Resident Wimberly Condren of Fieldstone said her neighborhood submitted 50 letters, and she urged the board to require brick on the west, east and south ends of Building G.
Board discussion focused on visibility, grading and the number of formal protests. One board member said the masonry decision on the east side addressed visibility created by site slope, while another member said Building G’s south side would be minimally visible and had a high brick fence separating it from homes. After debate, the board offered to require brick on exterior-facing walls of the building perimeter; the applicant’s team agreed to the change on the record.
A motion to approve the variance (case number 15820) with the modification that exterior-facing walls be brick passed by voice vote. The motion was made and seconded by board members whose names were not recorded in the audio transcript. The board chair announced the application approved after the vote.
The applicant also committed to follow-up design approvals and to coordinate with staff on final materials and details. The board noted that the public protests received and the February community meeting materials were included in the record.
What’s next: The applicant will move forward with building-permit steps and any required design reviews consistent with the board’s brick requirement for exterior-facing walls of Building G.
