Jenks council approves major amendment to Frasier Falls planned unit development, limits smallest lots to 55 feet

The Jenks City Council on a unanimous vote approved Ordinance No. 1656, a major amendment to the Frasier Falls Planned Unit Development (PUD) that adjusts lot sizes, removes gated‑community language and keeps a set of shared amenities to be delivered by the developer.

The amendment, described by planning staff as a rework of a project first approved in 2021, changes the proposed layout for the subdivision on the general location noted in council materials and presented new figures for lot counts and sizes. Council members spent most of their discussion on minimum lot widths, whether the development would be gated and how and when the community amenities would be built and conveyed to a homeowners association.

Why it matters: The PUD governs specific development standards for a multi‑phase subdivision and carries enforceable commitments about shared amenities, HOA administration and site design that affect adjacent neighborhoods. Residents who live in the existing Frasier Meadows and nearby subdivisions told the council they were concerned that smaller lots and a different builder would reduce home sizes, change the neighborhood character and increase the proportion of rental properties.

Council and staff said they want the amendment to fit within the city’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) where possible. Councilmember Brown said the “biggest concern I had with any of these areas was the lot widths,” and proposed eliminating the 50‑foot lots to move the project closer to UDO standards. Council adopted that change in the motion to approve.

Planning staff told the council the original comprehensive plan would have allowed up to 130 homes on the portion of the property; the 2021 approval had authorized 109 lots and the current amended plan presented to council listed 117 lots before the council’s change. Staff also noted the development will be governed by a mandatory homeowners association and that PUD documents require the listed community amenities; if the developer seeks to alter or delay them, the city would require a public amendment process.

Developer Charles Wilmerhauser and Robert Bell, representing the applicant, addressed council. Wilmerhauser said the proposed product reflects market demand for smaller, lower‑maintenance homes and that lot configurations had been revised after earlier reviews by planning commission. Residents and nearby homeowners twice raised concerns during public comment about the builder represented in the application—Schubert Mitchell—saying the company’s prior projects had produced smaller floor plans and that several promised amenities in the existing neighborhood had been delayed.

Councilmember Brown proposed and later moved approval with the amendment that the smallest lots be 55 feet wide (eliminating the originally proposed 50‑foot lots). Brown estimated that removing the 50‑foot tier would reduce the total lot count by about two lots (from 117 to roughly 115) but would bring the proposal closer to UDO conformity on lot width and area.

Council members who spoke in favor emphasized the project’s masonry first‑floor requirement and the presence of neighborhood amenities, while voicing skepticism about gated access because of long‑term maintenance costs and impacts on future connectivity of adjacent properties. Several council members and staff reiterated that the PUD document and the city’s permitting process legally bind the developer to build the amenities shown in the approved PUD or to return to the city for an amendment.

The motion to approve as amended passed unanimously: Brown — yes; Short — yes; Emmons — yes; Bossier — yes; Abel — yes; Murray — yes; Mayor Box — yes.

The council also approved the emergency clause for Ordinance No. 1656, making the amendment effective immediately.

Looking ahead: Staff and the developer said the amenities (pool, walking trails, sport court and shared facilities) are intended to be built in later phases and the PUD contains the list of required shared items. Residents were advised to notify city staff if promised amenities fail to materialize; staff said enforcement tools include withholding certificates of occupancy and requiring developers to correct code enforcement issues before additional subdivision approvals proceed.