Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Gatewood topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Gatewood residents successfully press Planning Commission to recommend denial of rezoning for 1422 NW 17th
Summary
Residents of the Gatewood urban conservation district and neighbors urged the Planning Commission to deny a rezoning request that would allow two new two‑story apartment buildings on a narrow mid‑block lot. Commissioners debated alley upgrades, protection of mature trees and a 30‑foot height cap before recommending denial to City Council.
The Oklahoma City Planning Commission on Sept. 25 recommended denial of SPUD 17‑65, a rezoning request for 1422 Northwest 17th Street that would have allowed the owner to build multiple two‑story rental units on a lot in the Gatewood urban conservation district.
Neighbors and preservation advocates packed the meeting to oppose the proposal. ‘‘This is not a simple thing of giving easement,’’ Elizabeth Banks said, describing a 50‑foot easement that would require homeowners to surrender fences, trees and sections of septic laterals. Thomas Lovett, who identified himself as a resident, told commissioners he feared the rezoning was an ‘‘attempt to circumvent’’ the city’s new accessory‑dwelling ordinance and would set a damaging precedent.
The commission spent more than an hour negotiating technical evaluations aimed at reducing impacts: a reduction of maximum building height from 35 to 30 feet, a requirement that side egress windows be translucent/frosted, and a condition that any alley access be improved to city public‑works standards for the full width of the property and to the east to Douglas. The applicant, Jess Struble, agreed in the hearing to several of those provisions if the commission wished to add them.
A motion to recommend approval that would have included the additional technical evaluations failed for lack of a second. Commissioners then moved to recommend denial; that motion passed and the item will go to City Council in 6–8 weeks. Planning staff noted that if the applicant later pursues residential development under a specific plan or plat, additional review and possible amendments to the comprehensive plan would be required.
The dispute centered on the mid‑block location: residents and commissioners described a narrow alley and limited access, arguing that adding multiple units would worsen congestion and compromise privacy. Supporters of the application said they had worked with staff and planned to preserve trees and add on‑site landscaping and parking.
Next steps: the Planning Commission’s recommendation, minutes and staff memo will be transmitted to the City Council for final action. Residents were urged to contact their council representative and provide written comments before the council hearing.
