Slavik Family Tract Focus for Development Debate in Wildwood

The future of Wildwood’s commercial development and the viability of its revamped Town Center Plan is once again the focus of debate over the fate of a large, undeveloped piece of land near the city’s center.

At a recent city council meeting, an argument emerged over a 4-2 recommendation from the city’s Planning/Economic Development/Parks Committee to keep a change in land use that would discourage large-scale commercial development at the 50-acre parcel known as the “Slavik Family Tract.”

The Slavik property is one of four that were set aside to be dealt with individually after they proved to be a hurdle in passing an update to the city's comprehnsive zoning plan. 

Proponents of the change included Mayor Tim Woerther and Council Member Tammy Shea, who argued that the move reflected Wildwood’s vision to “not be like everything else” in the St. Louis area.

“We don’t just zone everything commercial because we don’t want that,” she said.

Councilmember Sue Cullinane invoked the specter of the divisive battles around public financing tools, such as TIFs, that such developments have drawn in nearby cities like Ellisville. The land in question is located on the west side of State Route 109 and south of State Route 100 and has in the past been the proposed site of Target-anchored development.

“If there is a large commercial development, they will ask for a TIF. That’s how they do business,” she said.

She also added that the proximity of big retail projects, including the two outlet malls set to open in Chesterfield in August, make it “pie in the sky” to assume that developers would rush out to Wildwood to pursue something similar.

The city’s Town Center Plan, developed under the philosophy of "new urbanism," would give the Slavik Property three primary land use designations – Workplace, Neighborhood General and Neighborhood Edge Districts. Such designations outline what kind of development is encouraged but don’t carry the same weight as an actual zoning.

Opponents of the change see the move as devaluing the property and limiting its potential for development by excluding the commercial land use designation, which it had held previously.

Councilmember Ron James said it had a history of being designated for commercial use and said without it, it would be unlikely to generate much interest among developers.

“I just don’t think the plan will work,” he said. “I think we need to leave this as it is.”

He also insisted that the city would have the right to turn down any development that comes along regardless, so there was no harm in keeping the designation.

Public Works Director Joe Vujnich pointed out that such an assertion is not necessarily the case. If the land use calls for high-density commercial, then it makes it hard to turn down something that fits that criteria.

“From the perspective of your city planner and your city attorney, it is easier to change the plan than to deny that plan when it is consistent with the land use,” he said.

As examples, he pointed to the Wildwood Hotel and the B&B Theatres Wildwood 10, which were both granted zoning exceptions. He noted that there isn’t anything in the land use designation that strictly prevents a large-scale retailer from moving into the property.