MAP OF PETITION SIGNERS
7/12/21 Total SIgnatures: 465
Residents: 215
Shopper/Visitor/Nearby Neighbors: 187
Bus. Owners/Employees: 63
July 13th, 2021: Text of Email sent to PED
My name is Susan St John, of 25 St Albans St S, in a multifamily building. I shared the A Better Way petition two weeks ago. I am having computer difficulty and health issues due to the stress of this proposal, so I have asked my Block Club to help me send the following email on my behalf. This letter includes updated numbers on the petition against the 695 Grand/Dixies proposal.
At the July 1st, 2021 hearing on the rezoning, we were told that the rezoning was separate from our objection to the building. We object to the size (height, lot coverage, bulk) and the site planning (placement on the lot) of the proposed building. Just today, the staff report was issued that cited the potential rezoning as supportive of granting the variances. We feel bamboozled. Last hearing we couldn’t say it was too big, but now that T3 has been recommended, we can’t use the East Grand overlay to object to the size anymore?! How can a potential rezoning, one that hasn’t even been granted, be used to justify variances from the more restrictive overlay district? When there are two zoning districts, the more restrictive applies.
What is our recourse? Updated petition totals:
New Total: 465
Residents: 215
Shopper/Visitor/Nearby Neighbors: 187
Bus. Owners/Employees: 63
My Block Club has mapped the signers, to disprove the false assertion that opposition is limited to those within a block or two of the proposal. The opposition is widespread, among neighbors who value and have invested in Grand Avenue, Summit Hill, and our neighboring neighborhoods. Residents do want more housing, but we want middle density that is compatible with our neighborhoods. Please, listen to us.
This map was prepared based on the earlier scanned petition, and does not include the new signers I am presenting now. It was prepared by my neighbor with higher technical skills than I.
My block is 100% multifamily. We support multifamily housing, and we want more housing, especially affordable housing, but I am here to present more signatures on the petition against this development as proposed for 695 Grand/Dixies.
The Petition presented has been collected by volunteers in a short time, starting a few days after the application for 695 Grand/Dixies development was filed.
These signatures were gathered in person through the pandemic, heatwave temperatures and in the rainy weather of the last week. This was 100% volunteer effort and the signatures are 100% from the actual community — real people who know and value Grand Avenue and the Summit Hill neighborhood.
Neighbors and Grand Ave supporters were reached by walking the neighborhood. The vast majority of the signatures were collected on the sidewalks of Grand Avenue and neighboring streets, from the people who were walking by. Another large portion were collected by popping into Grand Avenue businesses, and from the porches of residents. These signatures are from people who visit Grand Avenue, who live near Grand Avenue, and who care deeply about Grand Avenue and its success. They also care about the success and livability of the neighborhood, because we need each other.
The petition reads:
A Better Way for Grand Avenue in Saint Paul
We oppose the 695 Grand/Dixies project proposal—which violates all existing zoning codes. We oppose the proposed rezoning, conditional use permit, and all modifications and exceptions to current zoning. We support a better way for those who live, visit, shop, eat, walk, and bike on Grand Avenue.
I support a balanced, mixed-use project that meets current zoning regulations, with no variances or other zoning exceptions.
Sincerely, Susan St John
SAGGS Block Club
July 14th, 2021: Press Release
Susan St John, a neighbor on St Albans St South, just submitted to public comment 465 signatures against the Dixies Proposal. The neighborhood block club has formed a group called A Better Way St Paul, that wants a different model for adding housing to their neighborhood.
“We have excellent examples of mutlifamily housing right here in Summit Hill. It’s middle housing. It’s the scale of housing that Jane Jacobs wrote about all those years ago. Three story apartment-style flats, rowhouses, and our unique converted mansions that provide multifamily housing. We want more housing at a compatible scale. We just want the developer to follow the rules,” says St John.
Fellow neighbor Gary Todd is frustrated with the city. “The City PED-Zoning Committee voted on Thursday, July 1st to approve a request to change the zoning of one lot at 695 Grand Avenue to allow a developer to build a 5-story building. Compared to current, existing zoning code ordinances, the proposed structure will be 67% taller, have a 22% larger footprint and fail to transition, as required, to the lower density adjacent residential districts. Concerns for negative impacts to the neighborhood are being overrun by the drive to expand financial gains. Public comment for this proposal was against by an enormous margin of 10 to 1 (480 against – 42 for), yet to no avail. The zoning code is supposed to protect our neighborhoods from efforts by greedy developers who take value from the surrounding community to maximize their profits. What is our recourse when neighborhood councils and public officials fail to represent the interests of the area?”
St John continues, “At the July 1st, 2021 hearing on the rezoning, we were told that the rezoning was separate from our objection to the building. We object to the size (height, lot coverage, bulk) and the site planning (placement on the lot) of the proposed building. Just today, the staff report was issued that cited the potential rezoning as supportive of granting the variances. We feel bamboozled. Last hearing we couldn’t say it was too big, but now that T3 has been recommended, we can’t use the East Grand overlay to object to the size anymore? How can a potential rezoning, one that hasn’t even been granted, be used to justify variances from the more restrictive overlay district? When there are two zoning districts, the more restrictive applies.”
Elysia Gallo, a renter and neighbor on Osceola, participated in public meetings with Summit Hill Association. She feels that the district council did not listen to neighbors. “I have to tell you, it is beyond frustrating to attend these Zoom meetings where our concerns are simply not heard, or talked over. What I heard at the meetings: people want more affordable housing. They want more racial equity. What we need are more affordable options that provide homes to a variety of working families, not luxury investment units. We need a safe and walkable city, not a behemoth that will force people to search for parking and have blind garage exits just feet from the sidewalk where pedestrians and children travel. We need to encourage development, yes — but development at a scale that is compatible with OUR neighborhood.”
She continues, “What we love about our neighborhood is its historic charm. It feels like the heart of Saint Paul, not just for its business district, but for the grandeur of the brownstones and Victorian mansions that extend far beyond just Summit Avenue. It is walkable, pleasant, and charming. We do NOT want Grand Avenue to become a copycat of University or Snelling. We do not want to see a building take up more space than it is allowed by existing zoning codes and the East Grand Avenue Overlay. We want more mixed-use housing (specifically: affordable housing that is in sync with the neighborhood) but the design as proposed is too big and too tall. If you grant a variance to this project, many more will follow, until the look and feel of our neighborhood is eroded. It is important to not make exceptions as this will create a dangerous precedent.”
