Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Rezoning 507 Sondren topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council hears public hearing on rezoning for 507 Sondren; bill introduced following safety and fill concerns

O'Fallon City Council · October 10, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The O'Fallon City Council held a public hearing Oct. 9 on a proposal to rezone 507 Sondren Street from R‑1 single‑family residential (Downtown Overlay) to R‑3 medium‑density residential to allow a 16‑unit apartment development.

The O'Fallon City Council held a public hearing Oct. 9 on a proposal to rezone 507 Sondren Street from R‑1 single‑family residential (Downtown Overlay) to R‑3 medium‑density residential to allow a 16‑unit apartment development. Jeff Simmons, an engineer with Bax Engineering, told council the proposal followed Planning & Zoning review and that access limitations prevented the site from being divided as for‑sale townhomes.

"We first approached the city with a proposal for for sale townhomes. However, because of access issues ... we settled on the apartment proposal," Jeff Simmons said, describing access from a private east‑west driveway and planned building layout, storm detention and site mitigation measures.

Brian Kaufman of Elizabeth Madison Real Estate, the developer’s representative, said the same builder has constructed similar units elsewhere and presented example elevations. "If this council has a way to make that happen, we can build affordable homes. If not, Mike doesn't wanna deal with rentals," Kaufman said, noting the team’s preference for for‑sale units but explaining the change in approach.

Several residents and a regular public commenter raised objections. Arnie C. A. C. Dinoff, who identified himself as a city public advocate, urged council to deny the rezoning and asked for state environmental review of the fill placed on the site. "A lot of red flags have gone up with this property," Dinoff said, citing unpermitted fill, potential hazardous material and concerns about retention and density calculations.

Council members focused questions on access, site fill and required conditions. Council member Ragsdale asked why the private drive was acceptable for apartments but not for subdivision of for‑sale units; the applicant said apartment access can be located on an access easement rather than dedicated public right of way. Staff confirmed Planning & Zoning would require geotechnical analysis and an environmental investigation before any building permits would be issued.

No final vote was taken. Council introduced Bill 7791 for first reading, an ordinance providing for the rezoning of the parcel; any formal approval would require further council action after P&Z conditions are satisfied.

Planning staff noted the site contains an existing single house and that imported fill has been placed over time; staff said permits and corrective measures will be required as part of the development review. Council members asked staff to verify remediation and geotechnical compliance as a condition of approval.

This matter will return to Planning & Zoning and to council for additional review; the ordinance remains at first reading.