Broken Arrow Planning Commission Meeting – February 12, 2026
Broken Arrow Planning Commission Meeting – February 12, 2026
The Broken Arrow Planning Commission met on February 12, 2026, to consider a planned unit development amendment for an office building expansion and receive a presentation on the upcoming Build Our Future bond program. The meeting included a public hearing, discussion, and unanimous approval of the PUD amendment.
Consent Calendar
- The commission unanimously approved the consent agenda (roll call: Mindy Payne yes, Jonathan Townsend yes, Jalee Klempa yes, Jason Cohen yes, Robert Gorenson yes). Item 4C will go to the city council on March 3, 2026 at 6:30 p.m.
Public Comments & Testimony
- During the public hearing for Item 6A, staff read a letter from John K. Sport (owner of Alps 11 shopping center) outlining nine concerns regarding stormwater drainage, parking, construction access, and potential noise. The letter writer was unable to attend. The applicant, Jesse Stringer of 8 Point Creative, responded that most concerns pertained to neighboring properties or were addressed through engineering standards. He stated that his client had spoken with the letter writer and reassured him that any adverse stormwater issues would be legally addressed. No other members of the public spoke.
Discussion Items
- PUD Amendment (Item 6A): Staff presented a request for a major amendment to PUD 50 (PUD 002592-2025) on 0.64 acres at 2208 and 2210 South Aspen Place, just south of Washington Street and west of Aspen Place. The amendment seeks to facilitate an expansion to an existing building. Key changes include: reducing the parking ratio from 1 space per 200 sq ft to 1 space per 525 sq ft (current code requires 1 per 350 sq ft for office/professional uses), removing fire lane standards in favor of current fire lane regulations (reviewed and approved by the fire marshal), and removing the requirement for Bradford Pear trees (now off the accepted tree list). The application is tied to a site plan review. Commissioners questioned the applicant about parking demand, stormwater runoff, and the fire lane. The applicant stated the building houses a carpet cleaning company and storage, with few employees, and that the existing parking lot was never more than 50% full. He noted that neighboring lots are largely vacant, offering potential shared parking. The fire marshal had no objections.
- Bond Program Presentation (Item 8): Kenny Schwab, Assistant Manager of Operations, presented the "Build Our Future" bond program to be voted on April 7, 2026. The program has two components: a General Obligation bond of $415 million (91 projects, no property tax increase) funded by existing property tax millage, and a temporary half-cent dedicated sales tax of $53 million (38 projects, 5 years) for youth and adult sports. The GO bond includes seven propositions: streets ($205M), public safety ($56M), quality of life ($74M), public facilities ($65M), stormwater/drainage ($11M), and library ($4M). The sales tax (Proposition 8) would allow upfront borrowing to complete sports complex improvements at Arrowhead, Indian Springs, Challenger, and Neen House within three years. Schwab noted that the half-cent would cost about $0.50 per $100 spent, bringing the city's sales tax rate to 4.05%. Public forums are scheduled for March 2, 12, 26, and April 2. Commissioners asked about the fire station plan (two new stations, station 1 relocated), the drainage advisory committee for Proposition 6 (private property partnerships), community feedback on the sales tax, and the risk if the bond fails. Staff explained the benefits of reinvestment and that each proposition is a separate vote. No action was taken.
Key Outcomes
- Item 6A (PUD Amendment): The commission voted unanimously (5-0) to approve the PUD amendment per staff recommendations. The item will proceed to the City Council on March 3, 2026 at 6:30 p.m.
- Item 8 (Bond Presentation): No action required; the presentation was informational.
- Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at approximately [time not given] after a roll call vote (with a humorous "no" vote noted in transcript).
Meeting Transcript
Ready. All right, so at 5 30, go ahead and get started. I have a roll call. Mindy Payne, here. Jonathan Townsend. Here. Jalee Klempa. Here. Jason Cohen. Here. Robert Gordon. Here. Item number three, old business. We have an item four, items on the consent agenda. Do we have any items to be pool? I don't. If not, we're ready for a motion. I'll move to approve. A second. I have a motion second roll call vote. Mindy Payne. Yes. Jonathan Townsend. Yes. Jaley Klempa. Yes. Jason Cohen. Yes. Robert Gorenson. Yes. Item 4C will go to the city council on March 3rd, right here at 6 30. Item number 5, items not removed from the consent agenda. We have done item six, public hearings. 6A 26-183. Staff want to cover that. Yes. This is public hearing consideration and possible action regarding PUD 002592 2025. Planned unit development for JCP expansion, 0.64 acres. Uh commercial general located approximately just south of Washington Street and just west of Aspen Place. And this is a major amendment of PUDE 50. PUD 002592 2025 is a major amendment to PUD 50 on 0.64 acres, which is currently platted as lot 7 block 1 of the Brent Woods Center edition. This property is located just south of Washington Street and just west of Aspen. Excuse me. This amendment is intent is intended to facilitate site plan approval of an expansion to an existing building already on site. During the site plan review process, a parking re a parking requirement of one parking space per 200 square feet of building space was identified. Parking requirements under current code require office business or professional uses to have one parking space per 350 square feet, which would require the existing building and proposed expansion to have 17 spaces. The applicant is requesting to change this parking ratio from one parking space per 200 square feet of of building floor area to one parking space per 525 square feet of building floor area. The applicant is also requesting to remove the fire lane standards within PUD 50 in favor of modern and current fire lane regulations. Any fire lane or other fire safety aspect of the side plan site plan will be reviewed and approved by the broken air fire marshal. There were no objections from the fire marshal to this change.
openpublica.com