Council rejects Arendipa Boulevard PUD; members cite compatibility concerns for East Edmond

The Edmond City Council voted down a proposed planned unit development (PUD), Z25-3, for roughly 16.5 acres at the southeast corner of Danforth Road and Arendipa Boulevard. The ordinance would have rezoned the property from GA (general agriculture) to a mixed PUD allowing a commercial tract and a residential tract with up to 68 units (duplexes or townhomes).

Planning staff described the site and the PUD statement, noting a mix of allowed uses, a proposed tree-preservation buffer, and a plan that included a commercial “hard corner” along the arterial. The applicant’s consultant, Mark Zitzow with Johnson and Associates and Kendall Dillon with Crafton-Toll, walked the council through the concept plan, said the design anticipates roughly 40% building/parking coverage with about 60% open space, and argued the site meets city comprehensive-plan criteria for suburban infill and that nearby infrastructure is sufficient.

Several councilmembers expressed strong concern about compatibility with long-standing East Edmond planning expectations, saying the neighborhood had been told the area would transition to single-family R1/R2 development and that higher-density uses would erode that vision. A councilmember said the proposal felt “incompatible” with adjacent large-lot and high-value single-family housing and asked why duplexes and other attached housing were being pursued on this parcel. The applicant replied the PUD format was used to ensure controls over uses and transitions and that the project provides housing types not currently abundant in the area.

After discussion the council took a motion to approve the ordinance; the motion failed (three votes in favor, one against, one abstention). The record shows the planning commission had recommended approval 3–1.

The council discussion included questions about floodplain encroachments shown on the concept and whether the final design could avoid the city floodplain entirely or, if not, pursue a variance. Staff said the area in question is a city regulatory floodplain (not FEMA-mapped) that results from the city’s urban basin studies and that the applicant could adjust final design or request variance at later steps.

Ending: The rezoning failed and the applicant may revise the proposal if they choose; councilmembers asked staff for better guidance on how PUDs should be evaluated relative to the city’s comprehensive plan for East Edmond before similar future requests.