Letter to the Editor: Goalpost keeps moving in rezoning attempts at Sunshine, National

RELATED

City Council member raises, then drops, University Heights redevelopment proposal

Dear editor,

I felt we were very close at our October council meeting.

During our last council hearing, Heather Hardinger – although voting in opposition – said that this process had failed both the neighborhood and the developers.

I agree, but it's failed at our direct expense and since we were so close and we are making further concessions, I think it's appropriate to allow us to come back to the table before the six months. Council has granted approval to accelerate this six-month cool off period on prior rezone applications. I don't understand what makes ours any different?

It's been almost two and a half years since this began and we've experienced constant delay and denial. That directly relates to costly expenses incurred by our company.

Those houses we own at the corner are old and many require costly maintenance. We've spent $7,500 in repairs just in the last month alone. Add on top of that there are taxes, insurance and mortgage. It's incredibly costly to continue to delay.

In good faith, last night we were hoping to accelerate the six-month window to minimize some of these costs and make additional very costly concessions for the neighborhood in hopes of getting this to the finish line.

These changes included:

• Us buying 1101 E. Sunshine so that our second access point can be taken off of University Street and put onto Hampton. This addresses a major concern from the neighborhood. This will include us widening Hampton and adding curb and sidewalk as well.

• The development must have a minimum of seven residential dwelling units or lodging units. This aligns more closely with Forward SGF's comprehensive plan. We chose the number seven as a minimum to compensate for the seven homes we would be removing.

• Finally, we would prohibit any one-story retail strip centers from being allowed on this site. The neighborhood and council seemed weary of another development similar to the one on the northeast corner of the intersection.

• Most of the other prior conditional overlay districts we had would remain, with just a few subtle changes.

My team worked diligently with several members of council to make these changes and find solutions to major concerns we’ve heard from the neighborhood in hopes of finding a positive and palatable outcome. All our changes further aligned us with Springfield’s Forward SGF comprehensive plan, which is supposed to be the city’s blueprint for rezoning.

However, something very strange happened last night that appeared to be far outside Brandon Jenson’s control. Although we disagree on some things, I know firsthand Brandon’s interests are purely on finding compromise and putting Springfield first. Last night, there was definitely something that caused him to pivot at the last minute because I know he believed in the bill he was prepared to put forward.

Some of his comments regarding the flood of nasty letters are reflective of the gross treatment and accusations that my company, family and I have been enduring from certain members of this neighborhood for over two and a half years.

They ask. Then we give in. Then the same 10-20 vocal opposed neighbors make calls and send their nasty emails. Then the city moves the goalpost. Then this process repeats itself again and again. This circle of nowhere continues to be our experience while we desperately try to rezone the northwest corner of the second busiest intersection in Springfield to commercial use. A corner where two other commercial developments seamlessly sailed their way to a successful rezone within the last seven years.

—Ralph Duda III, president of BK&M LLC