Board denies request to waive 300-foot buffer for proposed impound yard after residents raise environmental, property-value concerns

The Board of Adjustments voted to deny a request to waive the city’s 300-foot separation requirement for an auto impound yard at 1218 North Irving Street.

Bert Woodring, speaking for Metro Towing and Recovery and potential buyers of the site, asked the board to forgive the 300-foot requirement so the company could operate an impound yard, store vehicles for police and highway patrol to retrieve and eventually auction unclaimed cars. Woodring said the company would install an 8-foot to 10-foot perimeter fence, site security and low lighting and that the operation would hold a state Department of Environmental Quality permit and a city stormwater permit. “We’re gonna put a good fence around it. We’re gonna have low lighting on the property. It’ll be maintained 24 hours a day,” he said.

Residents and neighborhood leaders urged denial. Fed Davis, president of the Northeast Oklahoma City Neighborhood Coalition, said the 300-foot buffer exists for reasons that still apply to the site and asked the board to vote no. Vernon Craig, who said his family has owned property nearby since 1957, raised concerns about leaking fluids from impounded vehicles, 24-hour lighting and extra traffic near schools and recreation centers. “The code should stay enforced. It’s there for a reason,” Craig said.

Other witnesses described potential environmental impacts and declining neighborhood fortunes. Velma Jean “Grama Jean” Madison and Linda Brooks Barnett said the site sits within two to three blocks of Douglas High School, Moon Junior High and community facilities and argued the yard would depress property values and create dust, noise and runoff problems. Sandino Thompson, a community developer and board member of Northeast Renaissance, Inc., said the 300-foot buffer “is very applicable in this instance” and reminded the board the property last changed hands in February 2018 when the zoning and encumbrances were already on the title.

Board members expressed similar concerns. Several said the proposed use is too intense adjacent to R-1 residential zoning and cited the city’s historical placement of industrial uses near neighborhoods as a factor in refusing a variance. One board member noted that uses allowed on the property under other ownership could be more harmful, but that did not alter the conclusion that a waiver was inappropriate here.

Woodring replied to environmental objections by noting regulatory controls: the yard would operate under a DEQ permit and a city stormwater permit and the business uses procedures such as drip pans to capture residual fluids from towed vehicles. He also said only a record service (wrecker) needs the variance; other uses such as a body shop would be subject to separate approvals.

After public comment and discussion, a motion to deny the variance was made, seconded and carried by the board. No vote tally was recorded in the transcript; the chair announced the motion carried and the case was denied.

The denial leaves the 300-foot separation requirement in place for this parcel. The applicant indicated the request was tied to a potential contract and purchase of the land; the board did not set follow-up steps or conditions for future resubmission in the transcript.