The case of a proposed Walmart Neighborhood Market at the intersection of Covell and Coltrane Roads, originally litigated a decade ago, appeared in Oklahoma County District Court again last week after the City of Edmond denied site plans to move the project forward. The court reached the same conclusion it did 10 years ago, once again granting developers the right to build despite the city’s objections.
Attorney David Box, representing plaintiff Coltrane Land Development, LLC, opened his argument in District Judge Anthony Bonner’s courtroom Wednesday by emphasizing the issue’s protracted nature.
“Ten years ago, I brought forth a site plan,” Box said. “We believe you’ll rule in our favor, and the City of Edmond will appeal.”
The first half of Box’s prediction came true. Bonner sided with the plaintiff, denying the city’s motion to strike and sustaining partial summary judgement in the developers’ favor. The case marks the second lawsuit filed related to the proposed Walmart, as developers had previously won a lawsuit in 2016 on the same project. The newest litigation was brought against the City of Edmond last August after the city denied the site plan.
Bonner’s motion to sustain upholds all of the plaintiff’s claims with the exception of inverse condemnation, which can be further litigated to seek compensation for the city “depriving [developers] of the use and enjoyment” of the owned property.
During his argument, Box made multiple references to the previous opinion from the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals, which upheld the developer’s right to build the Walmart. Although the Oklahoma Supreme Court then affirmed that decision in 2017, members of the Edmond Planning Commission denied the site plan again in June 2025. The developer appealed to the Edmond City Council, and in July, council members upheld the planning commission’s decision.
“Edmond did the unthinkable,” Box said. “They cowered to the citizens once again.”
RELATED
‘Dangerous grounds’: Edmond City Council denies Gardenia Apartments, hearing set in Walmart case by Faithanna Olsson
After Box’s summary of past litigation, Edmond’s city attorney, Madeline Sawyer, began her response.
“I think there’s a lot going on here,” Sawyer said. “The question is not how similar or dissimilar [the revised site plan] is to the old [plan], it is whether [the current plan] complies with the requirements at this moment in time.”
Sawyer pointed to the concerns from Edmond City Council members such as Ward 2 Councilman Barry Moore’s citation of Edmond City Ordinance Title 22.3.5 Section D4 which specifies new developments should be vetted for “visual compatibility of the height, area, yards and overall mass, as well as parts of any structure or attendant facilities with the character and development of the surrounding area.”
Asked for comment on Wednesday’s ruling against the city, Moore said he had none.
Box called the concerns raised by council members at the July 2025 meeting “coached.” He argued multiple times that the choice was not discretionary, since he said the site plan as presented met all city ordinance requirements for new developments.
“It’s ministerial. You either do or do not meet the requirements,” Box said.
Sawyer held to the council’s ruling.
“If those standards are met, the approval is ministerial. Here, they weren’t met. Council made that decision,” Sawyer said.
Bonner asked what specifically fell outside of the city’s planned unit development requirements. Sawyer answered that the city’s primary concern was the character and compatibility with the surrounding area.
Box disagreed with Sawyer’s assertion that any objective standards were not met.
“She can’t point to an ordinance to prove my client’s plan is not fully compliant,” Box said.
Asked about the new ruling, Ward 4 Councilman Phil Fraim said that, based on a Feb. 19 order requiring Edmond to comply with the entry of judgement in the original lawsuit, it did not surprise him that another judge sustained the claim.
Asked if city leaders intend to appeal, the Sawyer’s office said she had no comment, as did Mayor Mark Nash.
“We do not comment on ongoing legal matters,” Nash said.
Box also declined to comment on Bonner’s ruling.
Executive session discussion regarding the lawsuit was listed on the Edmond City Council’s agenda for Monday’s meeting, but no action was taken related to the matter.
