The Edmond City Council on a 5-0 vote approved Ordinance No. 4058 to rezone about 645 acres from General Agriculture to a planned unit development called East Edmond Z24-17, permitting mixed residential, commercial and civic uses and an attached village‑style plan.

The proposal submitted by representatives of the McClendon family allows, at its maximums, up to 4,500 residential units and up to 120 acres of general commercial, with a standard maximum building height of 80 feet and limited special‑structure height to 120 feet. The council’s vote followed public hearings, a planning commission recommendation (3‑1) and an extended developer presentation about the project’s design and open‑space commitments.

Todd McInnis, representing the applicant, told the council the development is intended as a long‑range, multigenerational project and said the team had engaged neighbors and staff throughout the review. “Thoughtful, sensitive, intentional, patient — those are the words that represent this project,” McInnis said during the applicant presentation. Planners described a network of trails and a linear green spine, two village squares, senior‑living components, townhomes and a mix of housing types framed by preserved natural drainage corridors.

Hank Baima of White Horse Planning, the project planner, said the design begins by “asking what the land tells us,” and emphasized topography, watershed protection and trail connectivity as drivers of the plan. The applicant’s presentation highlighted roughly 200 acres of the site mapped as preservation/open space and multiple internal trail connections intended to link to the city’s larger trail network.

Neighbors and lake‑community representatives pressed the council and applicant for firm protections. Tyler Ashby, who lives adjacent to the southern boundary, said the rear of his property is heavily wooded and asked for documented protections for the existing tree buffer. “The back of our property is heavily wooded…these trees are critical for either noise, light, heaven forbid a homeless encampment,” Ashby said during public comment.

Mike Schwain, vice president of the Lake Hiwassee Development Company, asked the council to make stormwater quality and quantity a formal part of the review: “These could destroy our lake, our investment, and our recreation in retirement,” he said, urging ongoing coordination among the developer, city stormwater staff and lake stakeholders.

Other speakers voiced a range of views. Some residents and nearby landowners urged stricter written commitments on buffers and tree preservation; others who attended community forums and site visits praised the plan’s emphasis on trails, open space and walkable village amenities.

City staff noted the PUD must comply with Edmond’s stormwater and development ordinances; subsequent steps before construction include required preliminary and final plats, site plan review, engineering approval and permitting. Planning staff told the council that the PUD design statement and subsequent reviews would govern buffers adjacent to the mapped preservation areas and that tree‑preservation and landscaping requirements would apply when plats and site plans are submitted.

Council members said they expect to hold the applicant to commitments made during the hearing and in the PUD language. Councilman Josh Moore said he intended to approve the PUD but warned the developer would face future votes if commitments were not honored: “If they don’t do what they have promised me when they come in for a preliminary plat, a final plat, a site plat… I’ll vote no,” Moore said.

The planning commission had recommended approval by a 3‑1 vote; the council approved the ordinance 5‑0. The approval allows the applicant to begin the more detailed engineering, platting and permitting process required before construction can start.