City Beat: Is Springfield’s zoning process flawed?

Monica Horton: Developer made some assumptions that did not pan out.

Brandon Jenson: Codes that are in place disallow the creativity that is needed.

Abe McGull: Springfield is in danger of becoming a "doughnut hole" for development.

• 
• 
• 

Council OK’s five rezonings

Springfield City Council approved five rezoning requests during its Oct. 21 meeting.

Three of the five proposals envisioned new housing in the city, ranging from single-family homes or duplexes to multifamily apartment buildings and even a pocket neighborhood.

The following measures were approved:

• 1719 E. Atlantic St., 0.2 acres rezoned to restricted industrial from residential townhouse at the request of Skyline Investment Co. The developers, who own adjacent properties, told the Planning & Zoning Commission that they do not intend to develop the parcel but want all properties to have the same designation.
• 2533 N. Fort Ave., 4.6 acres rezoned to low-density multifamily residential from single-family residential at the request of Suresh Chiluveru. The applicant intends to develop a multifamily housing project.
• 700 blocks of North Broadway and North Weaver Avenues, 1.4 acres rezoned to planned development from residential townhouse at the request of the Drew Lewis Foundation. The applicant intends to build a single-family residential compact pocket neighborhood that includes 14 dwellings and a clubhouse.
• 1055 S. Campbell Ave., 0.22 acres rezoned to office from high-density multifamily residential at the request of Family Tax Service LLC. Through this measure, the applicant sought to make the long-time office usage conform with its zoning designation.
• 1400 block of North Beverly Avenue, 1.1 acres rezoned to residential townhouse from heavy manufacturing at the request of Amax Properties LLC. The applicant intends to construct new residential structures, either single-family or duplexes, on the existing lots.

Other action items

• An application was approved to apply for Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant funding from the U.S. Department of Energy for window replacements in the Historic City Hall rehabilitation project. The amount of the funding is $221,000.
• A $1.1 million sewer replacement project was approved in the vicinity of Bagnell Street and Biloxi Avenue. The work will eliminate 19 septic systems.
• A first reading was held for a bill to accept $3.5 million in state general revenue funds for improvements to Hammons Field, home of the Springfield Cardinals. The funds have been allocated, pending council approval, by the Missouri Department of Economic Development. The funds would pay for stadium audio replacement, steel cleaning and repairs, masonry repairs, among other items.

Springfield City Council’s rejection of a rezoning request from BK&M LLC on Oct. 21, and the two-year process that led to it, have highlighted problems with the city’s zoning process.

This was the message of some members of council in remarks prior to the 4-4 vote. Because of a successful protest petition by neighborhood representatives, a 6-vote supermajority was required for the rezoning passage, which would have allowed general retail development to commence at the northwest corner of Sunshine Street and National Avenue in the University Heights residential neighborhood.

The development effort was first announced in 2022, and BK&M’s subsequent rezoning and planned development proposals were denied three times by the Planning & Zoning Commission. In previous appearances before council, the measure was postponed – either remanded to P&Z or referred to a council committee. It also was withdrawn from two previous council agendas by the developer, in October 2022 and January 2024.

Voting against the measure on Oct. 21 were council members Heather Hardinger, Monica Horton, Craig Hosmer and Brandon Jenson. Voting for the rezoning were Callie Carroll, Derek Lee, Mayor Ken McClure and Abe McGull. One council member, Matthew Simpson, recused himself from the vote, citing a family connection to the neighborhood.  

Jenson said the rezoning process, which sought a change to general commercial from single-family residential, had proved itself to be flawed throughout the two-year effort by developers led by Ralph Duda. 

He said he was hopeful all parties could find a path forward. 

“The process itself and the codes that we have in place don’t allow for this kind of creative problem-solving that our comprehensive plan really demands that we be utilizing,” Jenson said. 

According to Chris Wynn, the civil engineer from CJW Transportation Consultants LLC who represented BK&M at the council meeting, the developers plan to resubmit a proposal to council in the future. There is a cooling period of six months to propose the same rezoning measure, he said, but the company could propose a different measure – such as a planned development, if a specific tenant signs on, or a zoning designation that is less intensive, like an office or limited business designation.

“They haven’t gotten to that point yet,” Wynn said.

More planning needed
Horton expressed the view that more planning was needed to determine the future of the corner. She said the development that was proposed does not conform well with the city’s Forward SGF comprehensive plan. 

Horton added that a corridor study is necessary so that thoughtful planning and explanation can occur with public feedback – “Not during a legislative process where decisions are codified,” she said. 

Council rejected a motion by Hosmer for a National Avenue corridor study in January 2023. The motion came with the suggestion of a 210-day development delay to allow time for the study – too long, some council members felt, to keep stakeholders waiting.

The proposed study could have been conducted three times since then. Council did approve funding of $100,000 for a Sunshine Street corridor study in July.

McGull said that as an elected official, he feels government should give security to those people who want to pursue their dreams, and that includes those who buy property with the hope of building a commercial development. 

McGull said if the municipality dispatches progress to another city, Springfield is in danger of becoming a “doughnut hole” situated in the middle of successful development outside of the city. 

“If we drive off development – if we drive off the people who have big dreams – they’ll build somewhere else,” he said. 

In Horton’s view, speculation by the developer hurt his case.

“In my estimation, I can tell that some assumptions about property acquisition, demolition and rezoning were made on the part of the applicant that are not panning out, with little guarantees from the get-go,” she said. “And this may be why the developer has been amenable to further restrictive uses and paying for traffic improvements.”

At the same time, she said, she saw no general neighborhood consensus in opposition to commercial development on the corner.

Duda was present for the vote, but he left the council meeting without making a statement to members of the media. He did not reply to a Springfield Business Journal request for a comment.

Developer accommodations
At the meeting, BK&M was represented by Wynn, who told council Duda had worked with McGull on an amendment that was intended to address neighborhood concerns. The amendment limited strip centers and got rid of dollar stores and other businesses neighborhood residents deemed undesirable.

“Ultimately, you know, it was done out of good faith,” he said. “We hope that tonight you guys can see that Mr. Duda and BK&M have time and time again done everything they can. They’ve taken the requests of City Council, they’ve taken the requests of the traffic department, they’ve taken the requests of the city and the neighborhood, and they’ve put together a zoning ordinance to make it so that this corner could be developed in a way that could be beneficial to the city.”

Residents of the University Heights neighborhood saw things differently, and because of an amendment to the council bill that would have limited uses of the development in a conditional overlay district, they had a chance to speak up before the vote.

“We don’t see any major differences in the amended COD that makes the developer’s proposal any less damaging to the affected neighborhood, or Springfield as a whole,” said resident Donna Heman.

She enumerated what was missing from the proposal: a guarantee that development would not intrude into the neighborhood’s interior, a protection of homes and families on adjoining properties, an exclusion of exiting traffic onto Sunshine Street or changes to the allowable vertical scale of the project.

She said the development was wrong from an ethical, public-policy-making perspective and from a practical perspective of viability.

“What this looks like is a tool to help sharpen the developer’s knife,” she said. “It does not attempt to hide what I perceive as biased support for a development company and an almost flippant disregard for people, animals, the environment, homes and families.”

She concluded that passage of the rezoning measure would certainly result in a referendum, meaning a vote could be put to all city residents. In a similar development disagreement, city voters in 2022 rejected Elevation Enterprises LLC’s multiuse property proposal in Galloway Station.

The referendum was permitted by a decision from the Missouri Court of Appeals that said there was a cancerous anomaly in the way the city deals with neighborhoods.

Increasing density
Jenson said he fears encroachment of nonresidential development into an established neighborhood. He also pointed out that Forward SGF specifically identifies the value of the aesthetic of National Avenue.

The challenge, he said, is to accommodate increased density in a thoughtful way.

 “We as a council have a responsibility to make sure that when we are supporting redevelopment and adaptive reuse, which our community is going to face a whole bunch of in the future as we face limited opportunities for outward expansion, we have got to figure out the right way to make sure that as we support increased density in neighborhoods and increased commercial activity – and let me be clear, I don’t think any neighborhood is going to be free of increasing density and commercial development,” he said.

The city is currently rewriting its zoning codes, with plans to adopt the revisions in early 2025 to go into effect in June, and some officials have stated the revised codes could work in harmony with the Forward SGF comprehensive plan to solve some of the problems experienced in the Sunshine and National process.

The rewrite aims to streamline some processes by setting uniform design standards within zoning districts and allowing P&Z to approve conditional overlay districts without council approval. Hardinger said that her “no” vote was neither a vote against development nor a statement that nothing commercial should go on the contested corner.

But she said it is clear that the rezoning process has failed, both for the developer and the city.

“In my opinion, this case has exposed some serious flaws in the current process of how we handle rezoning cases, and it is a reminder that we need to do better,” she said.

Getting closer
Wynn said the outcome of the council vote was disappointing to the BK&M team.

“Ralph and BK&M have a lot of time and money invested in the property,” he said. “He’s still actively looking. They’re going to find something that works for them, the city and the neighborhood.”

Wynn said he feels the parties are getting closer to a mutually desirable outcome, and council is getting closer to approval.

“One of the City Council members was willing to vote yes if we were able to save the house at the corner of National and University,” he said. “Ralph Duda was willing to do that.”

Another amendment was in the works to preserve that property, he said, but the city ran out of time.

“It’s just a matter of working with those final City Council members,” Wynn said.