Springfield Tried to Rewrite Local Zoning. The Fight Isn't Over

If you live in Frankfort, Mokena, Tinley Park or another southwest suburb, many of the rules controlling what can be built in your neighborhood are decided close to home.

Your village decides where different types of housing can go, how much parking a development may need, what setbacks are required, whether certain projects need a public hearing, and many of the other rules that shape how a community grows.

This spring, Illinois lawmakers considered a housing package that would have moved some of those decisions away from individual towns and replaced them with statewide rules.

The proposal was called the Building Up Illinois Developments plan, better known as BUILD. Its main House bill, HB 5626, did not pass before lawmakers left Springfield this spring.

But that does not mean the issue disappeared.

The bill remains pending, local officials continue to warn about the loss of local control, and a separate housing bill that Frankfort officials were watching actually became Illinois law in July.

What Could BUILD Actually Change Around Here?

The legislative language is long and full of terminology most people will never have a reason to use in normal life.

The practical question is much simpler: if BUILD became law, what could be different in a southwest suburban neighborhood?

There are several major pieces.

More Housing Could Be Allowed on Some Residential Lots

One of the biggest proposed changes involves what is commonly called "middle housing." That includes duplexes, triplexes, four-unit buildings and small groups of homes arranged together.

Under HB 5626, municipalities would have to allow a certain number of housing units on residential lots where detached single-family homes are already permitted.

What Does "As of Right" Mean?

This is one of those government phrases that sounds much more complicated than it needs to be.

HB 5626 says certain qualifying housing would be allowed "as of right."

In normal language, that means a property owner or developer who meets the clear requirements would not have to convince a village board or zoning commission to make a special exception for the project.

For qualifying middle housing, the proposal would generally prevent municipalities from requiring additional discretionary reviews such as special-use permits, planned developments, public hearings or subjective design reviews unless the same review also applies to detached single-family homes.

Building codes, safety requirements and other objective rules would still apply.

What changes is the ability of a local board to say, "We want to review this particular project before deciding whether it belongs here."

Backyard Apartments and Other ADUs Would Have to Be Allowed

Another major part of BUILD involves accessory dwelling units, usually shortened to ADUs.

An ADU is basically a second independent living space on the same property as a single-family home.

It could be a backyard cottage, an apartment above or inside a garage, a converted basement, an attached addition or another separate living area with its own space for sleeping, cooking and a bathroom.

HB 5626 would require municipalities to allow one ADU on properties in zoning districts that permit single-family homes.

The municipality could not require the people living in the ADU to be related to the people living in the main house. The proposal would also restrict towns from imposing additional design, lot-size or setback requirements simply because an ADU was being added.

Supporters see ADUs as a relatively simple way to create additional housing and give homeowners another option for aging parents, adult children, renters or additional income.

Local officials opposing the state mandate argue that towns should be able to decide for themselves where and under what conditions those additional living units make sense.

The State Would Also Limit Local Parking Requirements

Parking may sound like a small part of a huge housing proposal, but it became one of the issues suburban officials repeatedly raised.

Under HB 5626, municipalities generally could not require more than one parking space for a single-family home or more than one-half of a parking space per multifamily housing unit.

Certain smaller residences and other qualifying developments could not be subject to a local minimum parking requirement at all.

Suburban officials have warned that parking standards can affect street congestion, snow removal, emergency access and the way higher-density housing fits into an existing neighborhood.

Supporters of BUILD argue that requiring large amounts of parking can increase construction costs and consume land that could otherwise be used for housing.

BUILD Would Also Change Parts of the Development Process

There are other pieces of the legislation that are less visible to homeowners but matter to how developments get approved.

The proposal creates deadlines for municipal reviews and inspections. If a town misses certain deadlines, a developer could eventually use qualified third-party reviewers or inspectors instead of continuing to wait for the municipality.

BUILD would also standardize how certain fees charged to new residential developments are calculated.

Those fees matter because new development can require additional roads, water and sewer capacity, stormwater improvements and other public infrastructure.

Local officials argue that communities need flexibility because the cost of accommodating new development can vary dramatically from one town to another.

Why Is Springfield Pushing This?

The state's argument is also fairly straightforward: Illinois needs more housing, and Governor JB Pritzker's administration believes some local rules make building that housing slower and more expensive than it needs to be.

The administration has promoted BUILD as part of a larger housing affordability plan designed to increase housing supply, reduce development delays and allow more types of housing to be built.

The governor's plan also included $250 million in proposed housing, infrastructure and homeownership investments.

From Springfield's perspective, allowing duplexes, triplexes, four-unit buildings and accessory apartments in more places could increase the number of available homes without requiring every new housing project to be a large apartment complex.

So the disagreement is not simply "Springfield wants housing and the suburbs don't."

Southwest suburban officials have repeatedly said they support creating more housing. Their objection is to the state deciding which housing types every community must allow and limiting the rules local governments can use.

Frankfort, Mokena and Tinley Park All Pushed Back

The opposition was not limited to one town.

Local governments across the Chicago suburbs organized against the proposal during the spring legislative session, arguing that housing decisions should remain closer to the residents affected by them.

Frankfort

On April 6, 2026, the Frankfort Village Board approved Resolution No. 26-10 in support of preserving municipal housing authority.

The resolution urged the Illinois General Assembly and Governor to preserve the ability of municipalities to control local land use and zoning without additional state restrictions.

Mokena

On April 13, the Mokena Village Board formally adopted a resolution opposing the BUILD Illinois legislation and HB 5626.

Tinley Park

At Tinley Park's April 21 Village Board meeting, Trustee Ken Shaw criticized the proposed state mandates and urged residents to contact state lawmakers.

"State of Illinois, as I said, state of Illinois can't run itself and they want to run every community in town."

Shaw's comment was his criticism of the proposal, not a neutral description of the legislation. But it captures how strongly some local officials viewed the shift in authority toward Springfield.

Why Local Officials Say This Matters

A town does more than decide whether a building looks nice or whether residents like a particular development.

Growth can affect roads, sewer systems, water capacity, stormwater drainage, fire and emergency services, traffic and local schools.

At a suburban mayors' press conference opposing BUILD, local leaders repeatedly argued that those conditions are different from one community to another.

A town with available sewer capacity, wide roads and nearby transit may be able to handle a development differently from a community where the infrastructure is already strained.

That is the heart of the local-control argument.

It is not necessarily an argument against building more homes. It is an argument over whether Springfield should establish minimum housing rules for the entire state or whether individual communities should continue making more of those decisions themselves.

So What Happened to the BUILD Act?

For all the attention BUILD received this spring, HB 5626 never became law.

The bill was introduced in the Illinois House on February 18 and referred to the House Rules Committee the following day.

It remains there as of August 9, 2026.

There was no final House vote rejecting HB 5626, and there was no vote approving it.

For residents who do not follow the Illinois legislature, the important distinction is simple:

The proposal stalled. It was not enacted, but it was not permanently killed either.

Another Housing Bill Frankfort Was Watching Did Become Law

While BUILD received much of the attention, another housing proposal raised concerns in Frankfort later in the spring.

House Bill 4571 gives certain large counties additional powers to create or preserve affordable housing.

Governor Pritzker approved the bill on July 10, 2026, and it became Public Act 104-0554 that same day.

The law allows qualifying counties to acquire property for affordable housing, transfer property to other government bodies, lease or sell certain property below market value for qualifying housing, and work through county land banks or land trusts.

The law is written to include counties with a county-executive form of government and a population between 650,000 and 2 million. Will County falls within that category.

Frankfort Mayor Keith Ogle had raised concerns about HB 4571 before it became law because of what he believed expanded county housing powers could eventually mean for municipal control.

Why This Is Worth Watching in the Southwest Suburbs

For most residents, the important part of this story is not HB numbers, committee assignments or legislative procedure.

It is much closer to home than that.

Who decides whether a lot that has traditionally been used for one house can accommodate several homes?

Who decides whether accessory apartments should be allowed throughout single-family neighborhoods?

Who decides how much parking a new development should provide?

Who decides what developers should contribute toward the infrastructure needed to support additional housing?

Today, many of those decisions are made locally. BUILD would move some of those decisions into statewide law.

There is a legitimate housing problem behind the debate. Housing has become increasingly difficult to afford, and adding supply is part of that conversation.

There is also a legitimate question about whether the same housing rules make sense in every community from Chicago to Frankfort to a small town elsewhere in Illinois.

That is why this issue did not disappear when BUILD stalled in the spring.

The bigger fight is still unresolved: when Springfield and your local community disagree about how your neighborhood should grow, who should get the final say?

I will update this article if HB 5626 begins moving again, if a replacement proposal is introduced, or if additional state housing legislation changes the rules affecting southwest suburban communities.

Common Questions About the BUILD Act and Local Zoning