CO-23 rezoning
Summary not yet generated for this topic.
Community sentiment
Related issue
71st & Union apartment rezoning (CO-23)→At a glance
- Public comments
- 26
- Last 30 days
- 7
Discussed at 1 meeting in the last 60 days; most recently Oct 28, 2026.
Public comments (26)
Urged a no vote, citing hundreds of petition signatures, a split planning commission, floodplain and gas line concerns, and saying the district already has its share of affordable housing.
Council (Regular) - Oct 28, 2026 · 16:21 →Asked the council to delay the rezoning so easements and setbacks for a five-lane Union Avenue can be set first, warning 400 parking spaces would dump onto a two-lane road.
Council (Regular) - Oct 28, 2026 · 18:15 →Detailed confusing ingress/egress at the I-75 interchange, worsening traffic, asked that existing oak trees be preserved, and questioned the concentration of low-income housing in District 2.
Council (Regular) - Oct 28, 2026 · 22:13 →Asked for low-density, long-term housing instead of apartments, saying young buyers need starter homes to put down roots.
Council (Regular) - Oct 28, 2026 · 28:07 →Argued the development violates FAA regulations regarding Jones Riverside Airport and potentially stormwater rules, and described the protest petition process as rife with backroom dealing after Horizon West's last-minute withdrawal.
Council (Regular) - Oct 28, 2026 · 29:35 →Described the hours of work collecting over 56% of protest signatures and her frustration when Horizon West withdrew minutes before the deadline; asked the council to vote no or slow down.
Council (Regular) - Oct 28, 2026 · 36:10 →Cited Jenks school saturation, regional traffic filtering in from the county, and said the council's job is to protect residents, not the developer's profit.
Council (Regular) - Oct 28, 2026 · 39:25 →Lives directly across from the site; said she never got an April notice letter, and asked whether the city had consulted OneOK or the gas utility and for a post-construction traffic study.
City of Tulsa Planning Commission - Sep 2, 2026 · 1:06:45 →A pilot who flies out of Jones Riverside multiple times weekly; asked that airport approach-corridor and height safety implications be examined.
City of Tulsa Planning Commission - Sep 2, 2026 · 1:09:02 →First learned of the project July 23 via a sign; asked for more time, criticized the subsidized out-of-state developer's lack of local risk, and urged fairer distribution of assisted housing.
City of Tulsa Planning Commission - Sep 2, 2026 · 1:10:34 →Raised the gas line risk, questioned whether a housing crisis exists, asked about variances and incentives, urged saving century-old oak trees, and cited Better Business Bureau complaints against the developer.
City of Tulsa Planning Commission - Sep 2, 2026 · 1:14:00 →A 24-year resident near the golf course described dangerous driving at 71st and Union and lamented the loss of the area's natural character.
City of Tulsa Planning Commission - Sep 2, 2026 · 1:18:32 →A resident since 1972 who said she and many neighbors never received the notice letter and believes traffic was worsening before the highway construction.
City of Tulsa Planning Commission - Sep 2, 2026 · 1:21:11 →Executive director of Housing Forward; painted a picture of a $50,000-a-year single mother benefiting from affordable units near jobs and transit, and cited research showing multifamily proximity doesn't hurt home values.
City of Tulsa Planning Commission - Sep 2, 2026 · 1:22:08 →A young father who bought in West Highlands in 2023; prefers low-income housing not increase in the area, citing crime concerns and renter-versus-owner commitment.
City of Tulsa Planning Commission - Sep 2, 2026 · 1:25:35 →Bought her lot in 2021 hoping to build a forever home; paused plans after learning of the project and urged denial, saying District 2 already carries the most Section 8 housing.
City of Tulsa Planning Commission - Sep 2, 2026 · 26:31 →A 30-year real estate broker who detailed existing low-income housing in District 2, traffic congestion, absentee-owner concerns, and predicted property value harm.
City of Tulsa Planning Commission - Sep 2, 2026 · 28:26 →Questioned wall thickness, landscaping maintenance, and Dominium's low-income track record; said he's against more low-income housing in the district.
City of Tulsa Planning Commission - Sep 2, 2026 · 33:31 →A biologist and mother raised traffic, Jenks schools bus capacity, and water contamination and erosion into Polecat Creek; asked for ecological, traffic, and safety studies.
City of Tulsa Planning Commission - Sep 2, 2026 · 34:44 →A civil engineer flagged fire station six's troubled 71st/Union turn, high-pressure gas line proximity, and asked to defer traffic studies until area road projects finish.
City of Tulsa Planning Commission - Sep 2, 2026 · 39:12 →Lives across from the site; described half-mile traffic backups and argued the development doesn't make Tulsa better; asked the commission to deny.
City of Tulsa Planning Commission - Sep 2, 2026 · 42:13 →Said infrastructure must come before development, described daily backups near his home, and asked the commission to reject or table the item for further study.
City of Tulsa Planning Commission - Sep 2, 2026 · 47:08 →A 34-year resident who helped block an earlier apartment proposal across the street; said neighbors prefer residential development that protects property values.
City of Tulsa Planning Commission - Sep 2, 2026 · 55:26 →Speaking for the development community, argued for density near highways, defended fair-housing principles, and urged approval rather than extracting more concessions.
City of Tulsa Planning Commission - Sep 2, 2026 · 57:50 →Wanted lower density to protect property values, described nightmare traffic at 81st/75, and read from a news report alleging a class action against Dominium over parking fees.
City of Tulsa Planning Commission - Sep 2, 2026 · 59:57 →Raised traffic growth, lack of sidewalks and bike lanes for carless residents, Jenks school impacts, and who will maintain the landscaped buffer.
City of Tulsa Planning Commission - Sep 2, 2026 · 1:04:19 →