Transcript Staff Writer

Two hot topics brought a larger than usual crowd to the Norman Planning Commission for Thursday's regular meeting, with one applicant going away happy, the other not.

An application seeking a recommendation for a change in the Norman 2025 Land Use and Transportation Plan to expand seating and parking at the popular barbecue restaurant Van's Pig Stand on at 320 N. Porter Ave. went down on a split vote of 4-2 to deny the recommendation.

Planning commissioners Ed Adwon and Fred Walden voted against denying the recommendation to allow special use for parking, with commissioners Paul Minnis, Duane Olinger, David Nordyke and Mike LaBrie voting in favor of denial. Commissioners Susan Ferguson, John Drayton and Curtis McCarty were absent.

A proposed controversial addition adjacent to Norman's Sutton Urban Wilderness Park received a nod for a recommendation, also on a split vote of 5-1, but with much concern expressed by planning commissioners.

Minnis cast the lone "nay" vote.

Van's Pig Stand, a three-generation restaurant chain headquartered in Shawnee, drew nearly unanimous acclaim from supporters and protesters for its excellent barbecue.

But the battle for extra parking for peak demand periods ran into a philosophical barrier -- that of not tearing down homes to make way for parking, especially in the core area.

Attorney Sean Rieger, representing Jerry's LLC, said if Van's Pig Stand is to compete with other barbecue restaurants in town, it must be allowed to offer better services.

"If you keep it as it is, then you've diminished the viability of North Porter (as a commercial district)," Rieger said. "North Porter is a crimped, tightly designed street. ... If you are going to reinvest in the core, you have to allow businesses to invest ... on terms that will let them succeed."

Rieger pointed out that other businesses, including Hiland Dairy and Norman Regional Hospital, have been allowed to demolish small homes in core Norman to make way for parking.

Minnis said parking lots destroy the viability of neighborhoods.

"There are options -- they are called streets," he said. "Van's has such good barbecue, people may be willing to walk 80 feet."

Adwon disagreed with that option.

"The problem with street parking in the core area is that the streets are quite narrow," he said. "You create as big a problem with street parking."

LaBrie said he hoped another solution would be found for the parking problem.

"I do agree that if you chew into one, we will be asked again next month. Pretty soon, you have a domino effect you can't stop," he said.

Attorney Will Mattoon said he believed keeping the businesses healthy on Porter is important to the core area and downtown.

"And I think anything we can do to generate additional revenue and sales tax is certainly a plus," Mattoon said.

Rieger claimed the city's long-range plans showed the two houses in question as R-3 or multi-family dwelling district.

"It's a conscious decision to leave that buffer in R-3," Rieger said.

But the city's Revitalization Manager Linda Price shot that argument down, saying she was involved in how the lines were assigned in the plan.

"Neighborhoods have reiterated that they don't want further commercial intrusion," Price said.

The Sutton Creek Addition vote was equally controversial, with about a dozen speaking against the development proposed for a 53-acre tract one-half mile east of Porter Avenue on the south side of Rock Creek Road. The 134-unit development would abut Sutton Urban Wilderness on the east and the IOOF cemetery on the west. It is bisected by a creek with a floodplain running through it.

Attorney Harold Heiple, representing applicants John Mertens and Doug Greeson, told planning commissioners he didn't know of any other city that reserved a large space for a wilderness park.

"One-hundred and forty acres is an enormous natural space in an urbanized area," Heiple said.

Heiple said the use of the Sutton Creek Addition property was consistent with other low-density developments in the area.

Greenbelt Commission chairperson Diane Fitzsimmons asked that the property not be rezoned from A-2 or rural agricultural district to a Planned Unit Development or PUD, citing the addition's potential impact on Sutton Wilderness.

Fitzsimmons said if a greenbelt system is going to go through Norman, "then Sutton Wilderness is one of its biggest jewels. ... The Sutton Wilderness Park was identified as a cornerstone of the greenbelt system in 2002."

She said there would be damage to the riparian area with increased runoff, more pets in the area and suggested the development be limited to west of the riparian corridor of the creek.

Judith Wilkins, Sutton Wilderness board chairperson, said the board had not received notification of the proposed development as required by the city ordinance that requires notification within 350 feet of any proposed zoning or plan change.

Wilkins said she was concerned about sediment runoff into the creek that would occur during the construction process.

"This has been zoned as institutional," said Larry Edmondson, a member of the Norman 2025 committee. "No one anticipated that would be sold. ... The city had the authority to make the plan -- they certainly have the authority to deny the changes. ... You add impervious surfaces and you'll do damage to downstream and the (Lake) Thunderbird watershed."

Others expressed concerns about predation of pet cats and dogs into Sutton Wilderness, light pollution and use of pesticides and herbicides in the area. Protesters also said homeowners would likely be complaining of snakes and other "critter" problems.

Casey Crosbie said he felt like rights of owners of plots in the IOOF cemetery were being ignored, since the addition would come within a few feet of cemetery plots.

Several protesters asked that the city consider acquiring the property east of the creek.

Heiple confirmed that there had been some discussion about selling the east portion of the property and committed to "good faith negotiations" with the city on creating a conservation easement in the area.

"We are not closed to discussion about east of the creek, but I don't hear about where the money is going to come from," Heiple said.

Several commissioners spoke out in favor of the east portion becoming a conservation easement of some sort to protect Sutton Wilderness, but they didn't believe they had grounds to deny the application.

"I strongly encourage the city to acquire it," LaBrie said.

All other items were approved unanimously, including:

A request by Terre Verde development LLC for the Park Hill Addition, a Planned Unit Development, for a 68.79-acre tract on the south side of Tecumseh Road and east of 12th Avenue NE.

A request by Wildwood Community Church of a site plan for the Hall Park Fourth Addition for a 8.74-acre tract at 1501 24th Ave. NE.

Closure of a portion of Linn Street, north of Alameda Street and west of Findlay Avenue. Applicant is William Mattoon as president of the Huntington Investment Corporation.

An ordinance amending the side yard and rear yard setback requirements of the RE or residential estate dwelling district from 25 feet to 10 feet for accessory buildings only.

A final plat for the Temple Addition at 512 N. Interstate Drive. Applicant is the Estate of Lucy Kathryn Simons.

A final plat for Eagle Cliff South Addition, Section 3, one half-mile south of Cedar Lane Road and 500 feet west of 12th Avenue SE. Application is Eagle Cliff Limited Partnership LLC.

A final plat for Wyndam Place at Anatole Addition, one block south of Alameda Street on the east side of Triad Village Drive, submitted by Farnam Group Resources, Inc.

A final plat for Value Place Addition, one-half mile south of Indian Hill Road, on the east side of Interstate-35. Applicant is Value Place LLC.

Carol Cole 366-3538 ccole@normantranscript.com