Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves two center‑city planned unit developments on West Apache with variances; neighbors urge caution
Summary
The council unanimously approved CCPUD rezonings for 126 and 214 West Apache (items 40 and 41) on amended site plans, allowing duplexes with six bedrooms per unit and other variances; public commenters raised concerns about preservation of neighborhood character and the proliferation of large multi‑bedroom units.
The Norman City Council on June 23 approved two companion center‑city planned unit developments (CCPUDs) for 126 and 214 West Apache, passing ordinances on second and final readings after applicant revisions and a friendly amendment to the CCPUD site plans.
Applicant representative Mr. Joyce presented the projects together, describing a series of revisions that reduced initial requests (no longer asking to exceed the 65% impervious‑coverage cap and adding to green space) and aligning some dimensions with existing buildings in the block. Joyce said planning commission had approved the revised plans (126 unanimous; 214 by a 7–1 vote) and that the newest rendition extended the building to the property line in response to council feedback.
Key approvals included variances to allow six bedrooms per unit, a two‑unit minimum, and a reduced 2'‑4" setback consistent with existing development. Joyce said the configuration and parking (tandem parking in the rear and two cut‑out spaces) were intended to support walkability and a market for student and near‑campus housing.
Public commenters urged caution. Lee Hall, who chaired earlier center‑city committees, noted that the AIM Norman plan and the updated character areas intended to limit multi‑bedroom units and encourage more units with fewer bedrooms. "What we really needed was more units and less bedrooms," Hall said, cautioning that approving large bedroom counts could return to earlier housing patterns the plan sought to change. Other neighbors raised concerns about loss of historic character, impacts to single‑family homeowners and precedent for future variances.
Council members addressed stormwater and fire‑apparatus issues and discussed market demand for multi‑bedroom units near the university. Council adopted the friendly amendment to update the CCPUD narrative and site plan for each property; both ordinances passed on final reading as amended (unanimous votes).
Outcome and next steps: Both CCPUDs were approved as amended. Council members and staff said they will continue to monitor center‑city implementation, finish the urban design implementation plan (UDIP) and return to broader zoning adjustments and incentives for affordable housing as needed.
