Neighborhood residents ask for city referendum to block Medical Mile apartments

Residents of neighborhoods surrounding a south Springfield development have gathered petition signatures in an attempt to stop the development of an apartment building, The Reserve at Medical Mile. 

On June 3, they submitted 1,928 signatures to City Clerk Anita Cotter, whose office must now verify them. A total of 1,499 signatures were required, according to Arlene Chriswell, a resident of the High Meadow East neighborhood in south Springfield and one of the people who went to the clerk’s office to turn in the signatures. These figures – number of submitted signatures and number required – were confirmed by city spokesperson Cora Scott. 

The property at issue is 7.6 acres at 3302 S. Maryland Ave. On May 4, Springfield City Council approved a rezoning of the property to make way for The Reserve at Medical Mile at the request of developer Bibi Oaks LLC. 

The project is a 182-unit apartment building that ranges from three- to four -stories high and abuts a single-family residential neighborhood to its west. On its east is the commercially and institutionally developed area of the Medical Mile on National Avenue. 

The project proposal includes revisions by the developer from a higher-density four-story development with 198 units. 

Residents of the High Meadow East neighborhood raised concerns about a lack of transition between the multifamily and single-family parcels. Council voted 7-2 to approve a rezoning, with Councilmembers Brandon Jenson and Craig Hosmer opposed. A successful petition by nearby residents prior to the vote meant that a six-vote majority was needed in order for the measure to pass, and that standard was met. 

Jenson previously noted that the city’s comprehensive plan, Forward SGF, requires zoning to take transitions between density into consideration. 

Chriswell said neighborhood volunteers obtained more signatures than required. 

“A dedicated few have put in extra effort from our mostly retired neighborhood,” Chriswell said via email. 

If signatures are found to be sufficient, outcomes may include a council repeal of its rezoning decision or an election at an unspecified future date allowing voters to decide whether to allow the rezoning to stand, according to past SBJ reporting on such petitions. 

A 2025 ballot petition regarding the Galloway Village development called the Chimney Rock subdivision was rejected by Cotter, who said the administrative decision by council was not subject to referendum, and that issue is now the subject of a court case filed by property owner Dan Clark. 

The ballot initiative is a model that was successfully deployed by Galloway Village residents in 2022, when a petition drive led to a citywide vote to halt a mixed-use development by Elevation Enterprises LLC across from Sequiota Park. It was a decisive result, with 70.5% of voters quashing the project. 

That same developer, under the name Galloway Village LLC, began work on a new project on the site in May. 

Neighborhood objections 
In addition to the petition drive, residents of nearby properties continue to register concerns about the development and about processes used to clear the way for it. 

Abbigale Haralson of High Meadow East shared with Springfield Business Journal her May 29 correspondence with the city of Springfield. In her email, she outlines what she calls unaddressed concerns, technical scoring discrepancies and unaddressed conflicts of interest with the planned development. 

Haralson said in the email that she is documenting the systemic breakdown of the municipal process, starting with the scoring system used by city staff on the project – a system that she maintained “double-dipped” in assigning points twice for its proximity to CoxHealth, once for its status as an institutional infrastructure asset and a second time as a major regional employer. Several other scoring metrics also earned Haralson’s scrutiny. 

Haralson additionally criticized the failure to grant neighborhood requests for several technical studies appropriate to make way for a four-story commercial structure alongside the 1970s single-story neighborhood. 

Requested studies that Haralson claimed were not performed were an independent traffic impact study, a professional acoustic study, a downstream stormwater runoff analysis and a certified shadow and photometric study. 

Haralson also criticized what she called an institutional collapse of decorum and communication. She said the Planning & Zoning Commission slashed public speaking times without providing justification and started the clock before some of her elderly neighbors could reach the podium. 

She also accused some City Council members of failing to look at speakers, “instead choosing to engage in side conversations and giggle,” she said. “The contempt for citizen engagement was on full public display.”