The developer could change the proposal 60 more times, but there would be at least a few angry people, regardless.
For various reasons, most Tulsans aren't interested or concerned about land use and zoning.
The developer is asking for a revision to Tulsa's zoning map, namely, a major amendment to an approved Planned Unit Development which would allow for:
1) bringing the corner Conoco station property into the existing PUD;
2) razing (or otherwise removing) the existing house on 15th and the existing office building on Utica; and,
3) constructing a new CVS store on the combined, enlarged property.
Tulsa's Zoning Code is based around promoting the general welfare of the
public. The purpose of Planned Unit Developments is to allow for more flexible, innovate land use, subject to
public review and approval by the City Council.
When a developer asks for a special category of zoning, it's not unreasonable for the public or for the City Council to expect a special, higher-quality development in return.
In my opinion, the existing PUD is better than the proposed amended PUD. The existing PUD incorporates several existing small-scale buildings and small-scale parking areas, plus some mature landscaping. To me, whether or not a CVS (or any other drugstore) is built on that particular corner isn't the issue. It's not important. The northeast corner of 15th and Utica would be a good location for a drugstore, no doubt. But the Phillips 66 corner would be a good location for a drugstore, too. The Arvest corner also would be a good drugstore location. And the Stillwater National Bank corner would be a good location, as well -- in fact, it once was:
Source: The Beryl Ford Collection/Rotary Club of Tulsa, Tulsa City-County Library and Tulsa Historical Society
I think most of us here on the forum, most Tulsans, and most of the City Councilors would agree that the existing single-story Conoco store development is unattractive. The most recent CVS proposal (I've seen) would be a visual improvement to the very corner itself, but it's not a simple "crummy old convenience store/brand new drugstore" trade-off. The CVS proposal would make the actual street
corner look better, but would make the properties to the north and to the east worse. In my opinion, the issue needs to be evaluated with that totality in mind. In pains me to think that Tulsa might lose another historic house and a two-story brick office building in order to gain another ordinary single-story drugstore.
I'm not angry about the CVS proposal. I was very disappointed in the 11th & Utica QT case, but I'm not angry about it. Life's too short.
The planning commission even agreed that because CVS sells drugs and milk and greeting cards, it's a mixed use building. The small area plan isn't worth the paper it was written on to those who are charged with implementing it.
What irks me the most about these types of zoning cases is to sit through hours and hours and hours of meetings and work sessions about urban design and zoning, only to face silly arguments about how a building set back farther from the street, with an enlarged parking lot surrounding it, is more "pedestrian friendly" than the building it replaced. As I wrote in a previous post, selling three different products in a single building doesn't make it a "mixed-use" building. If the TMAPC honestly thinks that, and if the City Council believes that, then we're hopelessly lost.
In this particular case, what's on the site now (a couple of two-story buildings and a single-story building) is better aligned with the Comp Plan, the Small Area Plan, and the intent of the original PUD than the proposed CVS development is. The City Council can't demand that a two-story CVS be constructed. That's not fair. But the Councilors can rightfully say to the developer, "You're asking us to amend a long-approved PUD. We have approved a Small Area Plan for that neighborhood, and within that approved plan, two-story buildings and mixtures of uses are preferred in that location. You're asking for our permission to change the zoning to allow you to remove a couple of existing two-story buildings from the property. You're proposing a single-story building. That's contrary to the Small Area Plan."
The intersection of 15th & Utica
could be developed in a variety of ways. It
has been developed in a variety of ways. At one time, there were gas stations on three of the four corners:
Source: The Beryl Ford Collection/Rotary Club of Tulsa, Tulsa City-County Library and Tulsa Historical Society
And, in my opinion, the design of the DX station was clean and Modern -- much better and more interesting than the current Conoco store building:
Source: The Beryl Ford Collection/Rotary Club of Tulsa, Tulsa City-County Library and Tulsa Historical Society
As I see it, the intersection has been a mess for decades. The most enduring features might be the utility poles and overhead power lines.
