601 W. Main

[Pete]

Appeal was denied yesterday by the Board of Adjustment.

There is still the chance the Police Assn will take this to district court.

[warreng88]

Police association shot down in bid for garage

By: Molly M. Fleming The Journal Record January 4, 2018

OKLAHOMA CITY – After its third city meeting, the Oklahoma City Police Association will still not be able to construct its parking garage at 601 W. Main St.

At its Thursday meeting, Oklahoma City’s Board of Adjustment upheld two decisions made by the Downtown Design Review Committee. The DDRC denied two renderings of the garage. Those decisions were made in August and in September.

The plan presented in August was six stories. It was discussed first at Thursday’s meeting. It would have had 13,000 square feet of ground-floor commercial retail space and more than 200 parking spaces. Some of the spaces would have been available for monthly use by non-association members.

The garage presented in September was five stories.

There was some question as to whether the DDRC acted within its legal limit. The decision in September was criticized for being about design, rather than use of the property.

A parking garage is allowed as a use for the property.

The police association’s attorney, Kent Gilliland, read a letter from the city’s municipal counselors, who said the DDRC has no authority to change the allowed uses in downtown.

“It’s undeniable that we’re a permitted use,” Gilliland said.

ADG architect Scott Dedmon designed both concepts for the garage. He went over the guidelines and framework for the area. At the September DDRC meeting, he tried to ask a question about the vote because it appeared the committee was going to make a decision about the property’s use and not the design itself.

“This should not be a use issue,” Dedmon said at Thursday’s meeting. “That is not in the purview of the DDRC.”

Attorney David Box, his father and law partner Dennis Box, and their partner John Michael Williams have been protesting the parking garage. They own property on the east side. They were also concerned about how the garage would affect activity at Bicentennial Park.

Attorneys Brian Griffin and his brother and law partner, John Griffin, own property to the east. They also spoke against the garage.

“This is not a commercial garage,” Brian Griffin said.

He added that the Arts District garage is not fully leased, and there are two more parking garages being built with the BOK Park Plaza building, about a block to the east.

“I wonder about the commercial viability of this,” Griffin said. “I think this is a bad use for this precious parkland.”

Developer Richard McKown spoke against the garage, arguing the land should be preserved for a residential project.

“This is an exquisite site for residential use,” McKown said.

Former Councilman Pete White said putting a garage on the site would close off the last opportunity to make Bicentennial Park an active park. He said the only time the park is active is during the Festival of the Arts.

Board of Adjustment member Jeff Austin said just because the use is allowed doesn’t mean the project is appropriate.

“That’s why there is a Downtown Design Review Committee,” he said.

Gilliland said after the meeting that the police association has 10 days to decide if it will take the decision to district court. The association has not made a decision yet, he said.

[OkCity57]

So, this has essentially given authority to the Design Review Committees to arbitrarily rezone the use of property? I did think they were allowed to change permitted uses. Some projects were approved in SoSA even though most of the neighbors disagreed with the uses. The Municipal Counselor's office said they couldn't deny a project based on use? Guess it depends on who the neighbor is.......

[Uptowner]

They will win in a heartbeat at district court. Definition of use is GALAXIES outside of committee powers.

[T. Jamison]

On to district court.

http://newsok.com/police-association...rticle/5579866
http://www.oscn.net/dockets/GetCaseI...a&cmid=3617389

Also, I included this excerpt from the Notice of Appeal because I found it to be rather interesting.

[Pete]

They filed on Friday and the City was just notified / served yesterday.

They make a good point: Why does this get denied with the city itself built a huge parking structure that actually fronts all of the park to the east of City Hall?

[CloudDeckMedia]

Pete, thanks for your helpful aerials on Page 3 of this thread. I would oppose this parking structure on the park's boundary because it will eliminate any pedestrian interaction from offices, residences, retail or surface lots. Further, I suspect that a multi-story fascia would cause an acoustical problem when concerts are held in front of Civic Center. I favor keeping Bicentennial Park's boundary uncluttered.

This differs from the small park east of City Hall that is flanked on three sides by City Hall, the Arts District parking garage and OKCMOA. To me this works, and affords a great view to the east, especially at dusk.

Each is a different and unique space.

[dankrutka]

Of course, the problem here isn't the rejection of the parking garage (there are good reasons to reject it), but the city's inconsistency and lack of transparency in how they apply standards.

[catch22]

I don't want a garage here but I am on the side of the police association here. I hope they win.

[Rover]

They filed on Friday and the City was just notified / served yesterday.

They make a good point: Why does this get denied with the city itself built a huge parking structure that actually fronts all of the park to the east of City Hall?

So, because one mistake was made we should be barred from preventing it happening again?

I also find it interesting that public employees don’t seem to really care what the public wants. Then they want support for their concerns.

[dankrutka]

I also find it interesting that public employees don’t seem to really care what the public wants. Then they want support for their concerns.

How are you determining “what the public wants” on this issue?

[Rover]

Okay, I’ll bite....you think they want a parking garage at this park? Is that what you want?

[dankrutka]

Okay, I’ll bite....you think they want a parking garage at this park? Is that what you want?

Bite at what? You claimed that public servants were going against the public will. That was an interesting claim and I was just asking how you know the pubic will on this issue. So again, how are you determining “what the public wants”?

[Rover]

nm. Not getting baited into an argument. You ar welcome to your opinion.

I for one am glad that there is an effort to get the highest and best use for a property made more valuable by our public’s money. Most whom I’ve visited with agree. We may well be the outliers though.

[king183]

nm. Not getting baited into an argument. You ar welcome to your opinion.

I for one am glad that there is an effort to get the highest and best use for a property made more valuable by our public’s money. Most whom I’ve visited with agree. We may well be the outliers though.

Hmmm, you're acting pretty odd recently, Rover. Not sure why that is. Dan simply asked a straightforward question: How are you determining "what the public wants"? Really, that's it-- it's not a trap. He's not arguing with or baiting you; he's asking you to explain how you made the conclusion in your post.

[Rover]

Hmmm, you're acting pretty odd recently, Rover. Not sure why that is. Dan simply asked a straightforward question: How are you determining "what the public wants"? Really, that's it-- it's not a trap. He's not arguing with or baiting you; he's asking you to explain how you made the conclusion in your post.

I responded that way because that is a typical way to try to discredit any observation that is without a broad polling, vote of the people, etc. Outside of taking a poll, of course I cannot say for sure and there is no use to try to defend the opinion or observation. I am not interested in going back and forth, which these discussions seem to get sidetracked with. I merely stated my observation, which I concede may be different than others.

I am in touch with a large number of professionals in the real estate business, as well as accountants, lawyers, etc. ... persons generally knowledgeable of what is happening in the city and downtown. This issue isn't a huge issue with them, but most understand and agree that something other than a garage is best use. And, most don't understand why the officers insist to have it there when there are other options. I would dare say that a huge number of avg. citizens are totally unaware and non-opinionated on this project. So, I haven't polled to see, but most whom I've discussed this project with don't understand the police position on it. So, can I say for sure that they are working against the public's interest?...no.