Creek Line Village rezoning

Owner of the horse farm to the west, he asked for denial or a PUD, plus a fence/buffer on the west boundary to keep people away from his hunter-jumper horses.

Lives directly in front of the property; raised concerns about fitting two entrances in the 660 feet of frontage and preferring 60-foot lots, and later asked about protections if a cemetery or burial site is disturbed.

Urged careful review: density doesn't fit the rural area, school capacity is a concern with 3,000+ unbuilt homes already approved, and asked for transparency about reports of a Native American burial ground on the southeast corner.

Said nothing has changed since the earlier version was voted down — 50-foot lots are still 'postage stamp' lots that don't fit the area's long-term plan.

Rural landowner with horses wants a 50-foot greenbelt on the west and north lines, wider perimeter lots, height limits, and drainage details — asked for denial or a continuance, not opposition to development itself.

Said the developer heard but didn't listen — the surrounding area is one-to-two-acre lots, and only acreage lots would satisfy him; asked for denial again.

Corner-lot owner with a 26-foot-deep pond said the plan doesn't address drainage and asked for denial so the developer returns with larger, transitional lots.

Tulsa Home Builders Association lobbyist urged approval, saying the proposal exceeds what the comprehensive plan requires and asks whether Broken Arrow is truly open for development.

A developer and adjoining landowner said 40-foot lots are the wrong use for the land across from his property.

An Arrowwood Estates resident argued 160+ postage-stamp lots don't fit an area of 1–2 acre lots and noted the Planning Commission's denial.

A resident whose yard faces the site opposed the 178 small-lot homes, citing a mismatch with surrounding acreage properties and property value concerns.