Compromise may be 'close' on proposed 7 Brew — council postpones vote on development

Allowing for the possibility of a compromise, Springfield City Council postponed a vote on a controversial Sunshine Street drive-through for two weeks.

The city council debate was restarted after months of government meetings over the proposed 7 Brew Coffee. Shot down by city council once before, the rezoning has been denied three times by the city's Planning & Zoning Commission even as city staff supported the project throughout.

When the proposed drive-through came before council in July, council members opted to allow the lot to be rezoned as a Limited Business District but denied the further designation required for a drive-through business to operate on the parcel. That means a coffee shop or other establishment could be built there, but not a 7 Brew drive-through.

When the proposal was last before city council, all but Councilman Richard Ollis voted against the allowance of a drive-through.

Instead of opting for another business that does not require a drive-through, developer Royce Reding has adapted his 7 Brew plan again and is asking council to reconsider their summer vote.

Since the last iteration of the 7 Brew was presented to the city, developers say they've made several concessions to neighborhood concerns. These included reducing the evening hours from 10 p.m. to 9 p.m. for Sunday through Thursday and from 11 p.m. to 10 p.m. on Friday and Saturday. They also plan to place music speakers away from residential neighborhoods and toward Sunshine Elementary School across the street to its north.

More:Springfield's Planning and Zoning Commission shoots down 7 Brew coffee for third time

Would Sunshine driveway fix the problem, or make it worse?

For several councilmembers, the remaining sticking point is the plan's entrance and exit on Jefferson and Roanoke Avenues, which could lead drivers into nearby residential neighborhoods. Asking why there could not be an entrance off of Sunshine Avenue, City Manager Jason Gage said it would likely be a "very bad idea" to have a Sunshine Street entrance.

"You already have two roadways that intersect with Sunshine. … It's fairly close to existing movement. That can create some fusion of cars. Perhaps a car hasn't signaled; it looks like they're going to turn but where are they going to turn? For example, is it Jefferson or the driveway really close to it?" he said.

Gage also pointed to an analysis conducted by the city that suggests traffic would not substantially increase because of the development as currently designed.

"I think the main point of the traffic is volume. When you look at it as a comparison for what the area is dealing with, it's very insignificant as a whole," Gage said.

Councilmembers seemed skeptical the development would not substantially add traffic.

"Is the analysis enough for us to make an informed decision to how the neighborhood would be impacted by traffic inflow and outflow? You know, this is something that a lot of neighbors have brought to our attention — concerns about bottlenecking on Jefferson and Sunshine," said Councilwoman Heather Hardinger.

Councilman Matt Simpson said the plan was "very close" to compromise and motioned for the issue to be tabled until council's next meeting to "allow staff to work with the applicant to see if there is something we can all agree on."

Councilman Abe McGull said he believed the developer and neighbors would agree to a compromise.

"If we could look at some sort of way we can actually enter on sunshine or eliminate one of the secondary arteries, I've talked to the developer of the project, he said he's open to that. (If) citizens would be open to that I would be inclined to vote for it," McGull said.

Some on council seem to have decided already

The motion to table passed in a 5-3 vote — punting the issue until council's next meeting in December. Councilpersons Mike Schilling, Richard Ollis and Craig Hosmer voted against the tabling and Councilwoman Monica Horton was absent from the meeting.

The three members who voted against the motion to table all seemed to have much more set opinions on the development.

Councilman Ollis pointed out that commercial development on the corner was inevitable and ultimately good for Springfield.

"I believe that Sunshine is a commercial corridor. Frankly, it's a commercial corridor from Highway 65 all the way out to almost Republic and beyond …," he said. "As for the bigger picture, I think we need to be a community that supports investment."

Hosmer, who opposes the development, countered — stating the city should equally focus on investment in development and neighborhoods.

"We talked about investment. We have to look at an investment not only in developers, but also the investment that neighborhoods have made … We should protect them just as much as we protect the developer that's investing money in the City of Springfield," Hosmer said.

More:As University Heights controversy looms, zoning commission asks the city for a plan

Meanwhile, Schilling said the proposed development is "out of harmony" with the surrounding neighborhood.

"It just seems like more chaotic motor vehicle stuff going on. You know, I think the best use for that and one of my colleagues and I, we talked briefly about it would be for the city to buy that corner and turn it into a pocket park."

Speaking near the end of the debate, Mayor Ken McClure announced his support for the project — pointing to a previously proposed bed-and-breakfast at the corner of Sunshine and National Avenue that council shot down in 2016.

"If I had a vote that I could take back, it would be that one. Council opposed it. The Planning and Zoning Commission opposed; the staff supported it. Staff was the only one that got it right," McClure said. "And in a matter that's not yet before either the Planning and Zoning Commission or the council I believe that much of the current angst could have been resolved had that conditional use permit been approved. I do not want us to make the same mistake."

This article originally appeared on Springfield News-Leader: Compromise may be 'close' on proposed 7 Brew — council postpones vote