Tulsa council continues debate on rezoning at Florence Avenue after neighbors raise privacy, traffic and process concerns

The Tulsa City Council on Wednesday continued a rezoning application for roughly 9.5 acres at the southeast corner of East 101st Street South and South Florence Avenue after nearby homeowners urged more time to review an optional development plan and to weigh traffic and trespass impacts.

Planning staff described two competing versions of an optional development plan offered for Z7799. Nathan Foster of the Tulsa planning office told the council the applicant’s proposed ODP (version 1) would retain housing as an allowed use while adding setbacks and limits on signage and lighting; a staff‑drafted version (version 2) would further restrict multifamily apartments and require denser landscaping and lower monument sign heights.

The case matters to neighborhood leaders because the site borders several established subdivisions and a private retention pond that residents said already suffers trespassing. “We were not aware of any ODP being developed by the developers,” Vinton Naar, president of the Delaware Point Homeowners Association, told the council. “We request that you vote no so that we can be involved in the process.”

Foster said highlights of the ODP options include a 25‑foot setback along South Florence Avenue and the southern property line (the code minimum for an OL zoning would be 10 feet), limits on second‑story windows (translucent glass or sill requirements to reduce direct sightlines into yards), and lighting limits that cap fixture height at 12 feet within 100 feet of the west and south boundaries. Version 2 would increase landscape buffering to one tree every 20 feet (versus one tree every 25 feet under the base code) and limit monument signs to 6 feet tall.

Developer representatives said they had engaged on the ODP and were willing to accept a number of the tradeoffs; Jared Cottle, describing the development team, said the group was “amenable to both versions” but preferred the broader allowances in version 1. Nick Lombardi, another applicant representative, said the project began about a year ago for a medical office user and that including some housing could offset market risk if office demand softens. He said the team would be willing to consider limits on units per acre; the discussion referenced a 12‑units‑per‑acre cap as a possible benchmark.

Neighbors from Delaware Point and Chelsea Pond described concerns that multifamily housing adjacent to private yards and a retention pond would bring more foot traffic and trespassing, and that the late circulation of an ODP left residents feeling “blindsided.” Sally Reynolds, Chelsea Pond HOA president, said she wanted clarity on whether multifamily was allowed in the ODP the applicant had agreed to and asked for time to negotiate.

Councilors discussed options including denial, approval, continuance and remand to the planning commission. Several councilors urged a short continuance so neighbors could meet with the developer and review a side‑by‑side comparison of ODP versions. Councilor Doctor Wright moved to continue the item to 5 p.m. on April 30; Councilor Bush seconded. The motion carried on a roll‑call vote and the hearing was continued.

What’s next: Council staff and the developer agreed to meet with neighborhood representatives and return to committee and the council on or before the April 30 continuance date. The planning office said the ODP materials would be circulated to council offices and interested parties in advance of the next hearing.