|
82
<br />
<br />Association, scrupulous records must be kept of
<br />any body buried or otherwise disposed of in the
<br />state. Neither Calvary Cemetery, to the west of
<br />Tract 8, nor Rolling Oaks Cemeten/, north of
<br />Tract 8 and east of the access easement,
<br />showed any platted plots south of the flood-
<br />plain, which ts where the marker, and presum-
<br />ably, the gravesite, was. (In Tulsa and probably
<br />other cities, cemetery pto~s are pla~ed like sub-
<br />division tots.) Therefore, no body was officially
<br />at the site of the grave marker. ','et upon further
<br />investigation, it was dear that what appeared to
<br />be human remains had lain undisturbed for
<br />decades beneath a soil surface. No records
<br />existed of any graves, and the marker was
<br />enough to have become ilte§ibte.
<br />
<br /> Further investigation revealed that the
<br />State Banking Commission was the entity to
<br />be notified. A staff member of that agency,
<br />the state cemetery examiner, deals with
<br />cemetep/identification when a trust is
<br />involved, as provided for in Oklahoma
<br />statutes. It was determined that there was,
<br />in fact, a burial plot or plots under the mark-
<br />er, although unrecorded. This left the devel-
<br />oper with a few choices, most of which
<br />
<br />involved time and money. Jeff Levinson, the
<br />developer's attorney, says, "There are many
<br />times when an owner can know too much
<br />about a tract to be developed."
<br />
<br /> No work could proceed until the developer
<br />chose one of the available options, The first was
<br />to try to identify *,he persons buried there, in
<br />order to notify their family members. DNA testing
<br />is possible only ifa person with matching DNA is
<br />registered. With no more §uidance than a very
<br />old burial site, it seemed highly unlikely that a
<br />match could be found, "The location of unidenti-
<br />fied corpses renders a propert',t virtually unus-
<br />able,'' Levinson says.
<br />
<br /> The second choice was to purchase indi-
<br />vidual graves and caskets for each of the bodies
<br />(if they could be isolated) and relocate them.
<br />This would also entail notifying any family mem-
<br />bers, which had already been ruled out.
<br />Ultimately, the developer chose not to develop
<br />the area in question, but to donate the/and to
<br />Roiling Oaks Cemetery, thereby omitting it from .
<br />Tract 8. Another access point was designated
<br />through Tract A, but with a double-wide gate into
<br />Tract 8, as required by the city fire marshal.
<br />Oeveiopment on the PUD is now underway,
<br />
<br />Zoning
<br />
<br />Looking for a new vision for nonconformity re§ula-
<br />lion? Don't miss this session at APA's national con-
<br />ference in Wash'lng,on,' D.C. this spring.,
<br />
<br />The prevailing provisions for nonconformity regulation
<br />are too restrictive, essentially strippin§ communities
<br />of unique, viable uses. Find a more flexible approach
<br />to nonconformity that is possible and necessary ~or
<br />community health 3nd characten Learn how new
<br />proacl~es can r_rac~s~:,;~rm nonconfo,-mides from a liabil-
<br />
<br />some five years after the original application was
<br />filed.' Development of offices on Tract A is pro-
<br />ceeding, with Tract 8 to follow.
<br />
<br /> By all accounts, the developer did every-
<br />thin§ he should have. If there are lessons to
<br />be learned, they are to be wary of developing.
<br />adiacent to a cemetery, and to know what
<br />entity ,/our state designates to be notified in
<br />case of unexpected bodies. Furthermore, once
<br />a grave or the semblance of one is discovered,
<br />all work should cease.
<br />gone Matthews, AICP, is principal regional
<br />planner [or the Indian Notions Council of
<br />Governments in Oklahoma.
<br />
<br />THE END OF LAKEWOOD'S WEST END?
<br />garry Seth, AICP
<br />
<br />A political uprising over the use of eminent
<br />domain for redevelopment has cost the mayor
<br />{]1: Lakewood, Ohio, her iob. The plan was
<br />overturned in a referendum by an exceptional-
<br />ly narrow margin, and it put the Cleveland
<br />suburb under scrutiny on the CBS ~elevisJon
<br />show, 60 Minutes, as well as in several news-
<br />papers across the nat/on. The politically divi-
<br />sive West End project failed while winning
<br />49.88 percent of the vote last November, and
<br />Mayor Madeline Cain won only 46 percent of
<br />[he vote in her failed bid for reelection. Voter
<br />turnout was approximateiy three times the
<br />norm in previous municipal elections.
<br />
<br /> What :fi§§ered such controversy? For
<br />sta~ers, Lakewood, with about 56,000 resi-
<br />dents, is a classic inner-ring suburb, located just
<br />west of Cleveland along Lake Erie. Like many
<br />other such suburbs throughout the nation, it
<br />faces many fiscal challenges related to replacing
<br />its aging sewer lines, water mains, streets, and
<br />other public infrastructure as well as providing
<br />community and educational facilities within the
<br />means of a stagnant or declining' tax base.
<br /> Tom Bier, director of the Center for
<br />Housing Research and Policy at Cleveland State
<br />Universit'F's Levin Eollege of Urban Affairs, noted
<br />this scenario in a report to the city during a
<br />meeting in lune ~oo2. "Because the decks are
<br />stacked so heavily a§ainst [inner-rin~ suburbs],"
<br />he reported, "it is crucial that communities like
<br />Lakewood take proactive measures to maintain
<br />and strengthen their condition and standing in
<br />the rog'ion, or the,/will erode. While there is a
<br />great deal of attractive housing and many other
<br />positive amenities in Lakewood, there is also a
<br />
<br />ZONINGPRACTIEE oz.o4
<br />A[4£RICAt~ PLANNING ASSOCIATION I pt~ 14
<br />
<br />
<br />
|