Guyutes

[catch22]

Unable to make it. Sounds promising though.

Best of luck.

[Urbanized]

...I'll be the guy in some sandy tan pants and a turquoise t-shirt

Does this have something to do with the cougar thread?

[AP]

Does this have something to do with the cougar thread?

[Plutonic Panda]

I'm here

[Plutonic Panda]

Does this have something to do with the cougar thread?

you got me

[Pete]

You can watch the Planning Commission meeting live here:

SIRE Public Access

Guyutes is #21 on the agenda.

[Mr. Cotter]

Well, that didn't go well. Planning Commission is requiring a SPUD application to control the noise and parking.

[catch22]

How can they enforce parking in an area where there is no such requirement?

[Pete]

Well, that didn't go well. Planning Commission is requiring a SPUD application to control the noise and parking.

Ugh.

There are already noise ordinances in place and they secured additional park even though that isn't required.


I am really starting to worry about the Planning Commission.

[Pete]

How can they enforce parking in an area where there is no such requirement?

They have to have a "parking plan", which can be just street parking but the ambiguous wording can be used against developers as well.

[Mr. Cotter]

They can't enforce the parking.

There are some legitimate concerns with the noise. Guyutes plans to have 3 walls on their rooftop, and a SPUD could include that as an ongoing requirement. If a blanket ABC-2 were given, a subsequent owner would not be bound by the measures Guyutes is taking.

[Pete]

^

Were you there or did you watch on-line?

[BDK]

Can we get some people from this board appointed to the planning commission? Jeez...

[Paseofreak]

I wish that someone had submitted the sound testing and an explanation of the inverse square law so that commission could see just how cautious they are being based only on their imagination of what might happen. It just wasn't clearly explained.

[Pete]

I'll get a full report and next steps later today, as I know the people directly involved.

It may be a simple matter of having to jump through one more hoop (SPUD application) before getting everything they want.

[BoulderSooner]

They can't enforce the parking.

There are some legitimate concerns with the noise. Guyutes plans to have 3 walls on their rooftop, and a SPUD could include that as an ongoing requirement. If a blanket ABC-2 were given, a subsequent owner would not be bound by the measures Guyutes is taking.

The city noise ordnance is in effect for everyone.

[Pete]

^

And they discussed the noise issue extensively in yesterday's Urban Design meeting.

City staff referenced the precise ordinances and how they were enforced; decibel levels, measured from the fence line, etc.

Also, as I had previously mentioned the proprietors met with the president of the homeowners and conducted their own test to his satisfaction.

[Paseofreak]

This seems to have gone terribly wrong in terms of the commission overstepping their authority. I know they are all well intentioned people, but they really are setting a precedent for restricting land use further than current acceptable standards. If more restriction is needed then write and pass a damn ordinance! This willy-nilly because I think so governance is a load of crap.

[Pete]

Although this worries me -- not only for Guyutes but for the future of Urban OKC -- I want to find out more before getting too upset.

As I said, it may just be an additional step to make sure everyone is happy.

[Mr. Cotter]

^

Were you there or did you watch on-line?

I watched online.

They requested the SPUD contain what they would do to limit the noise (3 walls), detail their parking plan, and state hours of operation (with a strong hint that 2 am daily would get the application rejected).

[Mr. Cotter]

Although this worries me -- not only for Guyutes but for the future of Urban OKC -- I want to find out more before getting too upset.

As I said, it may just be an additional step to make sure everyone is happy.

They were very upbeat, and almost supportive, in their suggesting a continuance.

[Pete]

The comments about the hours are the most troubling.

They are legally authorized to stay open that late and any noise issues have already been covered and would fall under existing ordinances.


This is very dangerous ground and this is far more than about Guyutes; it's about the precedent.

[Plutonic Panda]

Although this worries me -- not only for Guyutes but for the future of Urban OKC -- I want to find out more before getting too upset.

As I said, it may just be an additional step to make sure everyone is happy.

They continued it. They were worried if someone else moved in after they did, there would be no limits to walls or sounds barriers, so the planning commission said and I qoute "we want to have a comfortable level of control''.

BTW, OKSea was approved for that and mentioned they will be build a dog park with a bar which is really cool.

[Paseofreak]

They (commission) are regulating something that has been demonstrated and can be scientifically proven not to be an issue. Further, existing regulations already establish a noise performance standard. In doing this they are arbitrarily and unreasonably imposing unfair financial burdens upon Guyutes and denying them a level playing field on which to compete for business if hours of operation restrictions are imposed and additional parking is mandated. Complete BS!

[Plutonic Panda]

I was going to try and speak up and say something along the lines of "I live in Edmond and this is the kind of development that brings me here and in a year or so, will ultimately dictate if I mover into this area or not. I want to live in an area that feels alive and has the options of restaurants at all times and within walking distance that doesn't require a car. I hope to see the continued boom of Uptown 23rd''

However, immediately when I raised my hand, someone else got up in protest to speak out against it and seemed like a very reasonable guy until he wanted them to close down at 11 on the weekend, which makes no sense.