Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Antler Falls Pud topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning commission continues Antler Falls PUD setback amendment after applicant absence

Broken Arrow Planning Commission · December 5, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The commission continued a requested minor amendment to the Antler Falls PUD after the applicant did not appear; commissioners expressed concern about a proposed reduction in side-yard setbacks (from a previous 1-and-9/10-feet configuration to a proposed 1-and-7-foot standard) that would yield about 8 feet between houses.

The Broken Arrow Planning Commission on Monday continued consideration of a minor amendment to the Antler Falls Planned Unit Development after the applicant failed to appear.

Staff described PUD 18-14-20-24 as a minor amendment to PUD 12-42-20-23 for a 45.84-acre single-family residential development at the southeast corner of Houston Street and Midway Road, with up to 160 lots on private, gated streets. "The amendment is as follows: the new standard they are proposing is 1 foot and 7 feet with a minimum of 8 feet between buildings," staff summarized during the presentation.

Commissioners pressed staff for details about how the architecture would be treated and why the applicant proposed the smaller side yards. A commissioner pointed out a drafting error in the PUD narrative that references Kenosha Street when the property fronts Houston Street; the commission asked staff to correct that language.

Chair (commissioner) moved to continue the item to the next meeting and require the applicant's presence; another commissioner seconded. The motion passed on a roll-call vote with all members voting yes (roll call recorded as Mindy Paine: Yes; Jonathan Thompson: Yes; Hailey Klimba: Yes; Jason Cohen: Yes; Robert Goranson: Yes).

Next steps: the item was continued so the applicant can address questions about the rationale for reduced setbacks, how architectural features were being counted, and to allow staff to correct the PUD narrative.