Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Planning Commission recommends denial of Roberts Road rezoning after neighbors cite roads, drainage and covenants
Loading...
Summary
The Oklahoma City Planning Commission voted to recommend denial of SBUD 17-63, a request to rezone 12516 Roberts Road to allow a two-lot split. Neighbors and commissioners cited private road conditions, flood risk and an existing restrictive covenant as reasons to oppose the rezoning.
The Oklahoma City Planning Commission voted Aug. 28 to recommend denial of SBUD 17-63, a rezoning request for 12516 Roberts Road that would have allowed the 3.5-acre parcel to be split into two lots. Commissioner John LaForge moved to recommend denial; Commissioner Meek seconded the motion, and the commission voted to recommend denial.
Neighbors who live along Roberts Road and nearby Hoffman Road told commissioners the road and local infrastructure cannot support additional lots and homes. Kelly Work, representing five of the six Roberts Road property owners, said the private road is only about 10 feet wide, dead-ends and lacks turnarounds for garbage and emergency vehicles. “The infrastructure is simply not there to support it,” Work said.
Why it matters: Commissioners and residents said the application would set a precedent for further subdivision, placing more traffic and maintenance burden on a private road and increasing flood risk for downstream properties.
What opponents told the commission: Several residents described long‑standing drainage and flood issues along the creek that crosses properties north of Roberts Road. J.R. Little, who owns an adjacent lot, told commissioners that the creek routinely floods and that adding impervious area would increase runoff to downstream neighbors. Little also said the road’s width would make access by emergency vehicles difficult during floods or other incidents.
Legal and covenant questions: Opponents pointed to a recorded restrictive covenant covering Roberts Road properties that they said restricts lot splits below five acres until Roberts Road is improved to city standards and dedicated to the city. Work said approving the rezoning would conflict with that covenant and risk weakening long‑standing neighborhood protections.
Applicant response: Mason Schwartz, representing the applicant, said the request was narrowly tailored to allow a buyer to build a personal residence and a future home for a family member. He said many lots along Roberts Road are already smaller than five acres and that any future split would be subject to required state, local and federal drainage reviews. Schwartz told commissioners the developer would meet the drainage ordinance and other permitting requirements.
Commissioners’ reasoning: Commissioners focused on compatibility and infrastructure. Several said a single house on the parcel would be less controversial but that approving a second lot would be too large a change for the existing private road and for residents who rely on it. Commissioner LaForge said he believed the applicant could pursue other legally available options but that the commission should not recommend approval under the current request.
What happens next: The commission’s action is a recommendation to the City Council; the final decision rests with council members. Residents were told they could raise the same concerns directly at the City Council hearing if the applicant pursues that route.
Provenance: Transcript records begin with the applicant’s presentation at 00:72:25 and close with the commission motion to recommend denial at 01:41:45.
