Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks And Trails topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission backs Kirkpatrick-Red Ridge nature preserve; trail advocates seek assurances
Summary
The Planning Commission recommended city-council approval of a new PUD to preserve land purchased by Red Ridge and the Kirkpatrick Family Foundation for a nature preserve, while neighbors and trail advocates asked for more time and a clearer plan for the Deep Fork Trail connection.
The Oklahoma City Planning Commission on Feb. 27 recommended approval of PUD 2055, a proposal by Red Ridge and the Kirkpatrick Family Foundation to preserve roughly 30–35 acres near Lincoln Boulevard as a nature preserve, while several speakers urged the city and applicants to clarify how the Deep Fork Trail will connect through or around the property.
The proposal would strip prior, more intensive PUD development rights and establish an agricultural/nature-preserve PUD that the applicant says will protect trees and habitat. Mark Zitzel of Johnson and Associates, representing the applicant, told the commission the current proposal “is seeking to do exactly that” — to “strip the land of really development potential” and preserve it rather than build a town‑center-style development previously contemplated for the site.
Why it matters: The tract sits near the Deep Fork Creek corridor and near interstate views that residents described as a scenic gateway. Supporters said the purchase and PUD will conserve cross-timber forest remnants in an area under development pressure; trail advocates and neighbors said the city and new owner must coordinate so the Deep Fork Trail linkage is not blocked or delayed.
Park planners and residents urged continued coordination rather than binding the trail alignment to the PUD. Melinda McMillan Miller, director of the City of Oklahoma City Parks and Recreation Department, said Parks is “working very closely with the Kirkpatrick Family Foundation on this very property and trying to determine a better path for the Deep Fork Trail” and that alternatives are being developed with ODOT and consultant Half‑Mann & Associates. She said Parks would return to the foundation with alternatives and continue discussions about a preferred alignment.
Several speakers asked the commission to delay action so planners could present trail alternatives and associated easement plans. Russell Pace Jr., a Ward 1 resident who chairs past trail committees, said he was surprised by timing and asked the commission to “give us some more time to study this PUD,” because he and other trail supporters had only recently seen the filing and feared trail language in earlier PUD versions had been lost. Resident Xenophon Warrior said the site is “very special” and urged that the owner “work with the city of Oklahoma City on the coordination of the trail construction plan along the Deep Fork Greenway.”
Applicant representatives and staff said the PUD is not intended to prevent construction of the trail and that trail easement acquisition is handled through a separate city process outside zoning. Zitzel said the project “is not preventing a trail from occurring” and asked that trail conversations continue outside the zoning process. The applicant declined to include a binding easement in the PUD, saying they are already engaged in discussions with the city and did not want to burden the PUD with a provision they are pursuing separately.
Commission action and next steps: A motion to recommend city‑council approval passed unanimously. The recommendation moves the application to City Council for final action. Parks staff and the applicant said they will continue negotiations about trail alignment and easement acquisition with ODOT and property owners.
Speakers and commenters listed the public‑process steps they sought (longer review time, added neighborhood meetings and explicit coordination with Parks and ODOT). The city attorney and planning staff told the commission they cannot require acquisition of a trail easement through the PUD approval process; easements are acquired through separate property or public‑works procedures.
The commission’s recommendation means the matter goes next to City Council; speakers were told they may testify again at that public hearing.
Ending: The commission recommended approval of PUD 2055 with no dissent. Parks said it will present trail alignment alternatives to the foundation and continue outreach to neighbors; trail advocates said they will press elected officials to secure an easement or alignment that preserves the planned Deep Fork Trail connection.
