P&Z approves scaled-down missing middle plan

A zoning map approved by the Springfield Planning & Zoning Commission last night dials back on the introduction of missing middle housing in the heart of residential neighborhoods.

At its Feb. 26 meeting where P&Z considered proposed changes to the citywide zoning map, members opted to split the question to approve most rezonings but to take time to workshop the rezoning of properties slated to move from single-family residential, or R-SF, to a new zoning designation of mixed-density neighborhood – low, abbreviated as R-MX1.

According to a staff report presented to P&Z, in a series of missing-middle workshops conducted for residents of nine center city neighborhoods, residents identified 4,569 sites that would be appropriate for missing middle housing – that is, housing that has more density than single-family but less than a multifamily apartment building, to include duplexes, small multiunit homes and townhomes. These sites were earmarked for a change to R-MX1.

Of the sites targeted in eight neighborhood workshops, 3,775 parcels were originally classified as R-SF.

The report said 51,000 property owners received a notification letter by mail with legal notice of a proposed change in their zoning designation.

Numbers of parcels deemed appropriate for missing middle housing varied by neighborhood, from 1,424 in Woodland Heights – 59.4% of that neighborhood’s single-family parcels – to only 39 in Weller, amounting to 4.4% of its single-family stock.

Other neighborhoods also had more than half of their single-family parcels selected by residents for the new designation. In the Tom Watkins neighborhood, 821 parcels, amounting to 59.7% of single-family properties, were tapped, and in Grant Beach, there were 535 parcels, or 63.5%.

Conversely, neighborhoods identifying under 10% of parcels for conversion were Heart of the Westside, with 123 parcels, or 9.7%; Doling, 180 parcels, or 9.6%; and West Central, 46 parcels, or 4.7%.

With P&Z’s unanimous vote last night – not counting two absent commissioners, David Jacquez and Helen Gunther – the commission pulled back the reins on increasing density within neighborhoods, and specifically within their single-family dominated centers.

Justin Crighton, assistant director of Planning and Development, characterized resident input as robust. He noted 51,000 letters were sent out to notify property owners of the change, and out of these, 87 owners of properties zoned single-family residential requested removal of their properties from the automatic translation to R-MX1.

Crighton cited the Forward SGF comprehensive plan, which calls for integrating missing middle housing into the city’s neighborhoods, and the land development code, which identifies R-MX1 as appropriate through both transition areas and strategic integration, which it defined as deliberate and coordinated placement to further the goals of Forward SGF.

“Nine workshops, 200 participants, 4,569 resident-identified sites: That’s exactly what a deliberate and considered effort looks like,” Crighton said. “The 2023 housing study adopted by City Council also independently corroborates the need to diversity housing choices.”

At its March 23 meeting, City Council heard the first reading of part of the split question approved by P&Z, with a zoning map update that excluded the properties included in last night’s P&Z discussion, according to past Springfield Business Journal reporting.

Some on council raised questions, with Councilmember Brandon Jenson saying he had not seen a divided bill from P&Z previously and Councilmember Monica Horton pointing out that the map change seemed to originate from a request to staff from a single City Council member.

The first half of the P&Z recommendation is scheduled to come up for a council vote on April 6. P&Z’s R-MX1 rezoning recommendation is slated to have its initial reading by council on April 20.

‘Rental capital of southwest Missouri’
In discussion, Commissioner Dan Scott outlined a list of objections to the original map considered by P&Z with 4,569 parcels slated to be translated to R-MX1.

“You seem to be doing a lot to justify missing middle housing,” he said. “I can speak for the commission on this – there’s no question we support missing middle housing. This is strictly a remapping exercise where we try to decide where that missing middle housing goes.”

Scott quoted a section of Forward SGF that states higher-density housing should be oriented toward higher-intensity roadways to preserve the single-family character in the heart of neighborhoods.

Crighton said the R-MX1 district was designed to integrate density throughout neighborhoods, but Scott countered that the text does not include the word “throughout.”

Scott suggested the shift to R-MX1 could threaten the city’s goal of increased homeownership if a high percentage of the properties become rentals, while Crighton countered that providing more missing middle housing does not threaten homeownership.

“I think that the answer to the housing shortage is to add more units of housing, so I think this is an appropriate strategy and appropriately placed,” Crighton said.

Scott said he respectfully disagreed.

“The city’s option sets up the city to become a rental capital of southwest Missouri. It just scares me,” he said.

Commission Chair Randall Doennig clarified that P&Z approved the organic translation of zoning codes from the old land development code to the new one, something that is set in motion and slated for City Council approval on April 7. A total of 4,881 parcels were organically translated from residential townhouse to R-MX1.

“The idea that this commission completely ignored missing middle housing and didn’t do any R-MX1 zoning is incorrect,” he said, to Crighton’s agreement.

Scott suggested that enthusiasm from neighborhoods may be overstated.

“It’s come across as you almost have pompoms in your hand that the neighborhoods really want this – let’s go, let’s go, let’s go,” he said.

But Scott said it is hard to find a positive comment out of nearly 50 submitted by residents.

Crighton said the city brought forth its recommendation in good faith with the backing of residents, including those who attended neighborhood workshops, but Scott said overall attendance by residents at the workshops appears to number only about 142, once non-resident participants are removed from the count.

Transitional placement
Scott said the revised map proposed by P&Z locates R-MX1 in parcels along collector streets and corridors.

He presented a memo with 20 objections to the original map considered by P&Z, with 15 objections quoting text from Forward SGF.

Scott quoted Forward SGF as saying a greater focus on integrating diverse uses should be at edges and areas of transition. Several areas of the text cited by Scott referred to the need to focus on the periphery of neighborhoods on high-use roadways and near activity centers. The document discusses preserving single-family character in the heart of neighborhoods.

He also looked at a detailed map of future place types in the comprehensive plan.

“There’s no indication on the future map that large portions of traditional and center city neighborhoods are planned to become a mixed residential place type,” he said.

Other commissioners went on the record to agree with Scott.

Eric Pauly said the revised map errs on the side of caution, which he said he is happy for.

Jennifer McClure said she was comfortable with both maps but prefers P&Z’s amended map, which she sees as more of a phased approach to incorporating higher density. McClure suggested the city can continue to move forward with demonstrated success of missing middle efforts.

Christopher Souliere said single-family housing should be looked at as a priority on its own and not as an opportunity for missing middle development.

Bill Knuckles agreed that neighborhood integrity is important, and putting cracks in that integrity with blanket placement of the R-MX1 designation is not a good method.

Doennig praised the staff for its community engagement, but he encouraged a tempered view of the input received.

“Unfortunately, attendance at those meetings was shy of 200 people across the nine neighborhoods,” he said. “That number also included staff, press and other persons who were not property owners in those neighborhoods. Based on the information provided in tonight’s staff report, the Grant Beach, Midtown and Tom Watkins neighborhood meetings had only 11, 9 and 8 possible owner attendees respectively; yet, those small groups identified the additional 3,775 parcels which are to be nonorganically or additionally rezoned on that original map.”

He added that letters to property owners did not specifically say that their property designation was changing to R-MX1 from residential single family and were not told how many parcels in their neighborhood were affected.

“I feel like a great deal of responsibility was placed on those property owners to understand all of the ramifications of this process,” he said.

A second set of letters did specifically notify property owners of the change to their own properties, yielding a higher response rate from owners asking not to be rezoned, Doennig said.

“This makes me feel like we’re winning if we give property owners more information and that the result is potentially going to be better,” he said.

He added that missing middle is an important goal for the city, but the rush to facilitate it should not come at the expense of transparency in the process or at the expense of neighborhood residents who may not have a clear understanding of impacts of missing middle on ownership rates or density.

Finally, he said the remaining roughly 2,700 parcels identified on the original map are still eligible to be considered separately for standard rezoning to R-MX1, and for 90 days after City Council passage, the process will be free of charge.