Details Meeting Name: City Council Agenda status: Final-revised Meeting date/time: 5/23/2018 3:30 PM Minutes status: Final   Meeting location: Council Chambers - 3rd Floor There will be no meeting on May 30, the 5th Wednesday of the month. Published agenda: Agenda Published minutes: Minutes   Meeting video: Video   Attachments: Meeting Items (37) Public Comments (55) 37 records Group Clear sorting Clear grouping Group by Type Group by Result Export Export to Excel Export to PDF Export to Word Show: Legislation only Legislation only All agenda items File # Ver. Agenda # Type Title Action Result Action Details Video CO 18-29 1 1 Communications & Receive/File Letter from the Department of Safety and Inspections declaring 1757 Sheridan Avenue a nuisance property. (For notification purposes only; public hearings will be scheduled at a later date if necessary.) Received and Filed   Action details Not available AO 18-32 2 2 Administrative Order Amending the 2018 spending budget for the Office of Technology and Communications. Received and Filed   Action details Not available RES 18-801 1 3 Resolution Establishing the rates of pay for the new classifications of GIS Specialist I and GIS Specialist II in EG 02, Grades 030 and 034, respectively of EG 02, AFSCME Technical. Laid Over Pass Action details Not available RES 18-802 1 4 Resolution Establishing the rate of pay for the new classification of GIS Analyst in EG 06, PEA, Grade 014. Laid Over Pass Action details Not available RES 18-806 1 5 Resolution Approving the Memorandum of Agreement for the 2018 Wage and Fringe Adjustment between the City of Saint Paul and the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades District Council #82. Laid Over Pass Action details Not available RES 18-464 1 6 Resolution Establishing the rate of pay for the new classification of Data Release Coordinator in EG 09, SPSO, Grade 010. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 18-738 1 7 Resolution Establishing the rate of pay for the new classification of Data Release Specialist in EG 02, AFSCME Technical, Grade 037. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 18-753 1 8 Resolution Approving the Memorandum of Agreement for the 2018 Wage and Fringe Adjustment between the City of Saint Paul and the Pipefitters Local Union #455. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 18-787 1 9 Resolution Approving the Memorandum of Agreement for the 2018 Wage and Fringe Adjustment between the City of Saint Paul and the International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers, Local 10. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 18-827 1 10 Resolution Accepting the gift of airfare, lodging, and expenses associated with travel from Cities for Action for Kaohly Her, Mayor Carter’s Policy Director, and Lyly Vang-Yang, Policy Associate, to attend the Cities Taking Action Best Practices Conference. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 18-826 1 11 Resolution Accepting travel and lodging costs for City staff Jamie Radel to attend a convening in Grand Rapids, Michigan, as part of the Invest Health program. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 18-812 1 12 Resolution Extending the 2040 Comprehensive Plan process. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 18-804 2 13 Resolution Identifying the need for Livable Community Demonstration Account (LCDA) funding, and authorizing a pre-development application for grant funds for the East Seventh Street Housing Site. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 18-759 1 14 Resolution Authorizing the Police Department to accept a grant in the amount of $491,508 from the State of Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development for the LECPA program renewal. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 18-732 2 15 Resolution Authorizing the City to enter into Cooperative Agreement No.1030979 with the Minnesota Department of Transportation for federal participation in a force account for the Grand Avenue Pedestrian Safety Improvement Project. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 18-818 1 16 Resolution Approving the application with conditions, per the Deputy Legislative Hearing Officer, for Benzel Automotive LLC (License # 20180000688), d/b/a Benzel Motors, for an Auto Repair Garage license at 985 Randolph Avenue. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 18-823 1 18 Resolution Approving adverse action against the Auto Repair Garage and Motor Vehicle Salvage Dealer licenses held by L & J Auto, Inc., d/b/a L & J Auto, Inc. (License ID# 20040005299) at 1365 Pierce Butler Route. (To be withdrawn) Withdrawn   Action details Not available RES 18-833 1 17 Resolution Approving a waiver of the 45-day notice requirement to issue a Liquor-Outdoor Service Area (Patio) license with conditions to Stone Saloon SBC, d/b/a Waldmann (License ID #20170000652) at 445 Smith Avenue North. Adopted As Amended Pass Action details Video Ord 18-17 1 19 Ordinance Granting the application of Baker East Partners to rezone property at 821 Raymond Avenue and 2421 Territorial Road from B2 Community Business and VP Vehicular Parking to T3 Traditional Neighborhood, and amending Chapter 60 of the Legislative Code pertaining to the zoning map. Adopted Pass Action details Video Ord 18-18 1 20 Ordinance Granting the application of LB 842 Ray LLC to rezone property at 2330 Long Avenue from T2 Traditional Neighborhood to T3 Traditional Neighborhood, and amending Chapter 60 of the Legislative Code pertaining to the zoning map. Laid Over to Third Reading/Public Hearing   Action details Video Ord 18-21 1 21 Ordinance Amending Chapter 44 of the Administrative Code on Employee Authority in Immigration Matters pertaining to law enforcement certifications for victims of crimes. Laid Over to Third Reading/Public Hearing   Action details Video Ord 18-22 1 22 Ordinance Amending Chapter 409 of the Legislative Code to allow the City Council to waive the distance restriction for certain off-sale liquor establishments which existed prior to January 15, 2003. Laid Over to Third Reading/Public Hearing   Action details Video RES PH 18-143 1 23 Resolution-Public Hearing Accepting the financial assistance of The Saint Paul & Minnesota Community Foundations and Sunrise Banks to fund technical assistance and anticipated expenses associated with the Children’s Savings Account task force. Adopted Pass Action details Video RES PH 18-133 1 24 Resolution-Public Hearing Approving the allocation of additional 2018 Municipal State funding to the Pascal-Snelling Improvements, Johnson Parkway Trail, and Como Avenue Trail Projects, as proposed by the Department of Public Works. Adopted Pass Action details Video RES PH 18-136 2 25 Resolution-Public Hearing Amending the financing and spending plans in the Police Department in the amount of $310,000 for the 2017 Port Security Grant Program. Adopted Pass Action details Video RES 18-884 1   Resolution Proclaiming Saturday, June 2, 2018 as Reverend Gloria Roach Thomas Day in the City of Saint Paul. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 18-891 1   Resolution Honoring and recognizing the contributions of Pang Mang Thao in the City of Saint Paul on June 2, 2018. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 18-814 1   Resolution Authorizing the Fire Department to pay for all costs incurred for the department Innovation Team meeting on May 29, 2018 at the Paul and Sheila Wellstone Center. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH SAO 18-30 2 34 Resolution LH Summary Abatement Order Appeal of Patrick Brown to a Summary Abatement Order at 792 THOMAS AVENUE. (Public hearing held May 23) Laid Over Pass Action details Video RLH RR 18-13 4 26 Resolution LH Substantial Abatement Order Making finding on the appealed nuisance abatement ordered for 1426 DESOTO STREET in Council File RLH RR 17-29. (Public hearing continued from May 23) Continue Public Hearing   Action details Not available RLH SAO 17-65 7 27 Resolution LH Summary Abatement Order Making finding on the appealed nuisance abatement ordered for 25 ELIZABETH STREET EAST in Council File RLH SAO 17-56. (Public hearing continued from April 11) Adopted As Amended   Action details Not available RLH CO 18-15 2 28 Resolution LH Correction Order (Code Enforcement Only) Appeal of Maria Denison to a Correction Notice at 1990 HOYT AVENUE EAST. Continue Public Hearing   Action details Not available RLH VBR 18-21 2 29 Resolution LH Vacant Building Registration Appeal of Peng Yang to a Vacant Building Registration Renewal Notice at 64 JESSAMINE AVENUE EAST. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH VBR 18-23 2 30 Resolution LH Vacant Building Registration Appeal of Sheng Lee and Wamoua Lee to a Vacant Building Registration Fee at 1426 MECHANIC AVENUE. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH FCO 18-52 2 31 Resolution LH Fire C of O OR Correction Order Appeal of Ray Kaiser to a Re-Inspection Fire Certificate of Occupancy With Deficiencies at 613 PARKWAY DRIVE. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH VBR 18-20 2 32 Resolution LH Vacant Building Registration Appeal of My Lam (for PIR Group LLC) to a Vacant Building Registration Renewal Notice at 103 ROBIE STREET WEST. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH VBR 18-22 2 33 Resolution LH Vacant Building Registration Appeal of Chad VanVeldhuizen to a Vacant Building Registration Notice at 1570 STILLWATER AVENUE. Adopted Pass Action details Not available  Add New Comment 55 records Group Clear sorting Clear grouping Group by File # Group by Name Group by District Group by Opinion Export Export to Excel Export to PDF Export to Word File # Date  Name District Opinion Comment Action Ord 18-18 7/2/2018 7:26 PM     Against Today, I rounded the corner from Ellis Avenue (which is lined with No Parking signs) to Territorial Rd (which also has a long stretch of No Parking spots near that intersection. All of the available parking (little that there was) was occupied. It is laughable that interim council member Henningson said she sees “plenty of parking” in the area. The average person is not allowed to park in Baker Court’s parking lot, and just walk away. I find her mocking of the situation an insult to the intelligence of those of us suffering to find a place to park. +1 -1 1 Ord 18-18 6/12/2018 6:58 PM Janelle Schnadt   Against I am against the proposed rezoning. It's unclear to me how many stories are being proposed. One concern I have is how that impacts others living in the area -- especially the houses nearby where their natural light source will be reduced. Parking is another big concern. I am a customer at Salon George, and it just seems unfair that the small local businesses will be negatively impacted despite all they have, and continue to do, for the area. In addition, how about the residents, especially senior citizens? Parking is already tight in the area and this will impact the folks who depend on Meals on Wheels, rides to appointments, as well as rides to the SAP leisure center where they can exercise, have meals and socialize. The new apartment building on Como Avenue/Dowsell Avenue is an example of a conscientious builder. Those units have underground parking so residents and businesses in the area are not negatively impacted by a lack of parking. Please give this more careful thought. +1 -1 1 Ord 18-18 6/12/2018 3:32 PM Carol Mulligan   Against I am a customer of Salon George. I am concerned about the negative liveability issues of building high-density housing (lack of sun, green space, noise, etc.) within the neighborhood surrounding Salon George, and, in particular, about the impact of building 20-50 units without adequate parking. I wish Minneapolis/St. Paul had an extensive m*** transit system (similar to NYC or D.C.'s subway system) that could deliver people close to their destinations, but we do not have that, and until we do, many people will continue to own cars to get to the grocery store, doctor, church, library, theater, etc. It is not realistic to think that the majority of residents in the new development will be traveling by light rail or bike all of the time. +1 -1 1 Ord 18-18 6/7/2018 2:59 PM     Against After watching the zoning hearing yesterday, I realized that The representative from the District 12 Council is using my answers to the St Anthony Park survey to work against my opinion. In the survey we were asked what we appreciated about our area. Of course we are glad we have affordable housing, but that doesn’t mean we were asking for someone else to build more. This is a total misinterpretation of the statistics in this survey, and I very much doubt that this new development will add ANY housing that could be considered affordable. I am really disappointed that they ever did a survey, if this is how they had planned to use it +2 Ord 18-18 6/6/2018 2:53 PM Carla Asleson   Against I live directly to the south of the proposed project. My objection to the project is the lack of proposed parking. It is simply not realistic to ***ume that people that buy or rent here will not have cars. The vast majority of people who use bicycles as their primary mode of transportation also own a vehicle. Those vehicles must park somewhere, and it will be on our already-at-capacity public streets. I have no objection to a 3 or 4 story building ONLY IF there is a provision for each unit to have at least one on-site parking spot (underground if necessary). Also, please do not take my lack of presence at today's hearing as a lack of interest. If this hearing were held in the evening hours, I would have been there but I work for a living and can't be downtown in the middle of a work day. +1 Ord 18-18 6/6/2018 3:11 AM Carol Claugherty   Against I am of course in favor of small business. I have read daily the comments for and against what is happening here but all I ask is that you do this one thing. Put yourself in the shoes of these business owners. They took the monumental first step of opening a business factoring in everything necessary to build a successful businesss and over several years endured all the joys and pitfalls of being a small business owner. Then one day they walk into their businesses and discover someone is telling them basically all of what they have worked toward for 5-10-15 years could change in an instant by the decision to take away the necessary parking they have always been able to offer your clients and what is a huge component to their businesses. If those making the final decision on this critical issue in the days ahead would for a moment see this entire scenario as if it were ‘their’ small businesses ....it may help in their decision process. +1 Ord 18-18 6/5/2018 3:16 PM Julie Hillenbrand   Against I have been a client of Patty George since 1990. Out of all the places she's been, the current location on Raymond Ave is by far the best. My daughters attended gymnastics at St Anthony Park Gymnastic's club so the trek over the river to this wonderful neighborhood is all too familiar to me. Because I come from Minneapolis, it is important to me that I be able to drive and park within a reasonable distance from the salon. I am a life time resident of South Minneapolis and know too well the frustrations that the light rail has brought upon property owners and businesses near the blue line. Intersections that used to be safe are no longer safe due to the congestion caused by 200 unit apartment buildings being built everywhere along the line. Please do not change the Zoning which will impact the parking for the wonderful small businesses in this neighborhood. +1 Ord 18-18 6/3/2018 6:06 PM     Against I live in the immediate area of this proposed development change. Bradford Street is already crammed with parked cars during the day. Children waiting for school buses in the area would be far less safe with increased on-street parking. Additionally, there is precious little green space - what little we have must be preserved. Changing to T3 would allow for higher building and reduce sunlight for residences around this proposed development. Developments of this magnitude are far more appropriate along University and Territorial. This neighborhood does not need larger-scale development. Plenty of other properties away from this block are available. The Seal high rise is an unfortunate example of what not to do. This would be another. +2 Ord 18-18 6/2/2018 4:12 AM       At last month's meeting the D12 SAPCC Land Use Committee opposed a request for variance for the sorority at 1381 Cleveland wanting to add a few extra bedrooms, due to issues with parking and high density (https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/STPAUL/2018/05/31/file_attachments/1016177/1381%2Bcleve%2Bappeal%2B2.pdf). Why push back on that request, which seems inconsistent with the generally positive reception of the Land Use Committee given to the Long site in South Saint Anthony, which has similar issues? Can someone please enlighten me as to the difference? +1 Ord 18-18 6/2/2018 4:08 AM       At last month's meeting the D12 SAPCC Land Use Committee opposed a request for variance for the sorority at 1381 Cleveland wanting to add a few extra bedrooms, due to issues with parking and high density (https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/STPAUL/2018/05/31/file_attachments/1016177/1381%2Bcleve%2Bappeal%2B2.pdf). Why push back on that request, which seems inconsistent with the reception given to the Long site in South Saint Anthony, which has similar issues? Can someone please enlighten me as to the difference? Ord 18-18 6/2/2018 2:38 AM     Against There is no need to rush to p*** a zoning change in this case where there are no actual plans that demonstrate such changes are necessary. This block around 2330 Long has a mix of housing all in the 2 to 3 story range and density up to 10 units per standard city lot. That is appropo to 2330 and completely allowable in T2 zoning. What is the rush to jump head long into a zoning change? What would be the harm in waiting? My dad said that during World War II, people were always encouraged to ask “Is this really necessary?” So, in line with that regimen, I ask “Is this really necessary?” +4 Ord 18-18 6/2/2018 2:37 AM     Against One of the things that makes the neighborhood around 2330 Long an attractive place to reside is the the abundance of open, green space. 2330 has been a notable contributor to that. To remain a livable and charming neighborhood there needs to be green space, landscaping and buildings set back from the side walk in ways the entrain green up to a building’s curtain wall. How do neighbors encourage such planning? By holding leverage that brings developers to discuss these issues with neighbors concerned with the esthetics of the area. That leverage includes holding out for design plans prior to allowing zoning changes. +4 Ord 18-18 5/31/2018 3:30 AM Karlyn Eckman   Against South St Anthony Park has experienced an unprecedented housing boom with light rail. How much more high-density housing development can D12 sustain without consequences? Our concerns are with increased noise, traffic, congestion, impervious surface, stormwater, nighttime lighting and loss of trees. Who is addressing these impacts of the proposed development? We have lived on Raymond, one block from the Long site, for three decades. We were already considering selling and moving away due to increased noise and traffic, which have affected our quality of life in this once-quiet neighborhood. BTW, the same developer evicted 50+ established artists and small businesses from C & E to create market-rate apartments. Most had to move our businesses out of the neighborhood due to lack of affordable studio space. I was one of them. +3 Ord 18-18 5/30/2018 10:21 PM Sarah McGee   For I am a long time client of Salon George, but I often walk from the Raymond station on the green line or from my home 0.7 miles away. I've also bicycled to and from the salon on multiple occasions (helmet hair has never bothered me). When I have driven there, parking along Raymond is generally not a problem, and I'm certain customers (including myself) are willing to walk a block or two to reach the salon (which is common at Salons on Grand Avenue and Selby). If parking turnover is a problem, perhaps the city could consider extending the metered parking on Raymond up another couple of blocks and/or adding another handicap space or two. We need more housing in St. Paul, especially housing that has restaurants and transit within easy access, and this is an exciting development that I am happy to support. +8 -3 4 Ord 18-18 5/30/2018 6:12 PM Linda Bryan   Against A previous comment "for" this zoning change stated: "While the commenters here are correct that the neighborhood is quiet and beautiful in its own right, they are wrong in suggesting that a 3 story development will change that." The current T2 zoning would allow for a development of up to 4 stories. T3 would take it to 6 stories. So I am ***uming the earlier commentor is fine with its current T2 zoning, since that would allow a 3 story complex, & wants you to vote 'no' on rezoning. Ord 18-18 5/30/2018 2:29 AM Jeb Rach   For There is a lack of housing throughout the metro, and especially in St. Paul. Development and rezoning such as this will help to alleviate the housing crunch, especially for those of us living a car-light or car-free lifestyle. The location is ideal for such car-light/car-free development with shops and light rail connections nearby. +1 -3 Ord 18-18 5/29/2018 10:35 PM Nicki Jones   For I both live and own a business in the area, and I strongly support the increase in housing options that can be well-supported by access to transit. +5 -7 Ord 18-18 5/28/2018 11:01 PM Amy Carter   Against Although I do not live in this area I am a long-time customer of salon George. On busy days at the Salon and surrounding business there is little to no parking. Now you are considering adding high density housing to the area with very little off street parking being provided. I cannot imagine living in this area and now with very little notification you will make it harder for the current residents and businesses. Time to let the voices and wishes of the people be heard! Ord 18-18 5/28/2018 5:45 PM Ben Ashley-Wurtmann   For We need more transit oriented housing. This is a good fit for the area and will help create better demand for local shops from pedestrians. +3 -3 Ord 18-18 5/28/2018 5:39 PM Ian Light   For I am in favor of the rezoning of 2330 Long Ave from T2 to T3. I used to live in SAP for 5 years. While the commenters here are correct that the neighborhood is quiet and beautiful in its own right, they are wrong in suggesting that a 3 story development will change that. The neighborhood is incredibly walkable, with easy access to transit, as well as a grocery store and other local businesses. We should enhance that walkability by allowing more people live in a space that doesn't require a car. Additionally, it will provide more patrons to support those businesses. With the cost of housing rising in St Paul, we should be more concerned with providing good spaces to live and expanding our tax base. Neighborhoods are for people, not cars. +3 -4 Ord 18-18 5/27/2018 4:05 PM Patty George   Against Interesting how my 842 nbors do not realize the impact a big development has on a neighborhood. As they retire they will not face what is to come. When they were in full motion, there was plenty of parking for all, residents and businesses. But, going forward is our concern. The encroachment of LRT into residential areas with small businesses will change, and not always for the better. I bought into a community for a 30-40year business plan. There was plenty of parking before Raymond Ave was reconstructed and bike lanes took away parking on one side for residents and businesses. Now with the over-developments happening all over the city, neighbors don't seem to get to voice their concerns. If you don't live next to highrises that take away your sun 4-5 months of the year or take away your ease to frequent a friend or business, you don't understand how this will affect your property values or business viability. Building without ample parking will be a detriment to all. We are not N.Y.! Ord 18-18 5/27/2018 3:56 PM Patty George   Against Interesting how my neighbors do not realize the impact a big development has on a neighborhood. As they retire they will not face what is to come. When they were in full motion, there was plenty of parking for all, residents and businesses. But, going forward is our concern. The encroachment of LRT into residential areas with small businesses will change, and not always for the better. I bought into a community for a 30-40year business plan. There was plenty of parking before Raymond Ave was reconstructed and bike lanes took away parking on one side for residents and businesses. Now with the over-developments happening all over the city, neighbors don't seem to get to voice their concerns. If you don't live next to highrises that take away your sun 4-5 months of the year or take away your ease to frequent a friend or business, you don't understand how this will affect your property values or business viability. Building without ample parking will be a detriment to all. We are not N.Y.! Ord 18-18 5/27/2018 3:07 PM Linda Bryan   Against The Stolpestad family has given me an education on how development (or more aptly redevelopment) works. You don’t chose a rundown property to renovate. You pick a place with good vibes. A warm fuzzy warehouse filled with artists’ studios, or a peaceful neighborhood, where everyone gets along. You look on the zoning map for vulnerable spots, then drop your wallet there. Take something that’s on the edge of acceptable to the residents, and change the zoning to make it unacceptable. We are not a derelict warehouse, or an undesirable residential area. We do not need replacing. Please vote against this rezoning. There are plenty of empty spaces south of Territorial Road that are much better suited for this kind of redevelopment. Go find them! +1 Ord 18-18 5/27/2018 2:29 PM Gisela Peters   For I support the rezoning of 2330 Long Ave. from T2 to T3 – as well as the proposed development of 842 Raymond Ave. and 2330 Long Ave. The condo building (phase I) and the multi-unit affordable housing units (phase II) are a gain and not a detriment to the neighborhood. Many arguments proffered in opposition of the zoning change are not based on facts. The ***ertion that there is a parking problem is not true. As the former co-owner of and now renter at 842 Raymond Ave., I can attest to the fact that there is ample on-street parking along Raymond, Long and Bradford Avenues. The opposition to the rezoning is framed as a dichotomy between small businesses (= good) and big development (=bad), which obscures the fact that St. Anthony Park and the city of St. Paul as a whole need more affordable housing and higher density. The street does not belong to the customers of one business (salongeorge) – it should be shared by residents and customers, motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists alike. -2 Ord 18-18 5/27/2018 1:55 PM F. F. Peters   For My business is next door to Salon George, going on 16 years (I was there before Patty George moved in--and happy to have her here!). Patty is super-focused on on-street parking in front of her salon--on Raymond Ave. There is ample on street parking within feet of her entrance---back entrance also---along Bradford and Long Avenues. I have never seen in 15 years of observing, all on street parking spaces filled within very close walking distance of Salon George. Patty's building and my building where I am still a tenant having sold it in late-2017 (842 Raymond Ave.) have never had any parking problems (unless one believes that Raymond Avenue on-street parking belongs only to us--which it doesn't). I support the re-zoning request for making the back lot T-3, and Patty's bulding also supported higher densities when it requested T-2 zoning a few years' ago with me. We will all find parking for our customers/clients. The future is bright. Let's step into it-together. +1 Ord 18-18 5/27/2018 1:03 PM Lyn Throckmorton   Against St. Paul has had a haphazard approach to development along Raymond avenue and it is negatively affecting the livibility of the neighborhood. This development, without parking for new residents, will stretch an already crowded parking situation. In addition to the impact on small businesses the residents of the homes in the area will lose parking and pedestrian safety will be jeopardized. Please vote against granting this rezoning application. +2 Ord 18-18 5/27/2018 3:33 AM Phoebe G   Against I’ve worked for a couple of businesses along Raymond Ave. this quaint neighborhood is a home to many small business but unfortunately parking has always been a challenge. I am strongly against re zoning for large LLCs to build swanky new high rises. Keep Saint Paul small! Support small businesses! Ord 18-18 5/26/2018 3:00 PM Lylia Davitch   Against I work on Raymond Avenue, and there have already been parking issues over the years. I strongly believe these new developments will only cause more problems in the area. To build these developments and not implement a parking strategy that won’t take away from the small businesses in the area is completely unfair. Not only will it be extremely congested, but will inevitably push small businesses out of the area, not bring them in. I oppose the T2 and T3 rezoning. Ord 18-18 5/26/2018 2:12 PM Liz Lightfoot   Against I live on Raymond and have been a customer of small businesses on Raymond. I'm against the development of 2330 Long Avenue into a large condo unless they provide ample underground parking for all of its residents. While some of the redevelopment of this area has been great, there has been no thought to the increasingly difficult parking in this area. Ord 18-18 5/26/2018 2:11 PM 12   Against I live on Raymond and have been a customer of small businesses on Raymond. I'm against the development of 2330 Long Avenue into a large condo unless they provide ample underground parking for all of its residents. While some of the redevelopment of this area has been great, there has been no thought to the increasingly difficult parking in this area. +2 1 Ord 18-18 5/24/2018 9:24 PM Ginny Hayes   Against I oppose the rezoning from T2 to T3 in this neighborhood. I support small businesses and the residents of this quality neighborhood. This rezoning is a bad decision for both. Parking is already an on-going issue in this area. To move forward with this rezoning, allowing this new development to be built, would only make this problem greater, putting small businesses like Salon George at risk of losing customers and creating additional parking h***les for current residents. -1 Ord 18-17 5/23/2018 7:52 AM Patty George Ward 4   Against I forgot to mark AGAINST vote on my previous statement. Ord 18-17 5/23/2018 7:43 AM Patty George ward 4     I do not understand how any of this rezoning is acceptable when we were never notified with a rezoning postcard.? My business is across the street at 856 Raymond Ave, I never received notice of any neighborhood or city council meetings, until I happened upon them because of me inquiring about ORD 18-18. ORD 18-17 is still next to me and will affect my on street parking. So now my neighborhood that I planned on staying for 30-40years is cutoff, because developers decide they can think for others. This is another battle I do not have fight in any longer. Ord. 18-18 is big enough. Please recognize 6 story buildings next to 1 story or 2story houses that DO NOT BELONG. Put in development that is more in scale of our neighbor hood. We are not on University and North of Raymond and yet I cannot advertise on because I am out of the zoning. Tell me this is fair for the residents and businesses in our area? +1 -1 Ord 18-17 5/23/2018 7:40 AM Patty George ward 4     I do not understand how any of this rezoning is acceptable when we were never notified with a rezoning postcard.? My business is across the street at 856 Raymond Ave, I never received notice of any neighborhood or city council meetings, until I happened upon them because of me inquiring about ORD 18-18. ORD 18-17 is still next to me and will affect my on street parking. So now my neighborhood that I planned on staying for 30-40years is cutoff, because developers decide they can think for others. This is another battle I do not have fight in any longer. Ord. 18-18 is big enough. Please recognize 6 story buildings next to 1 story or 2story houses that DO NOT BELONG. Put in development that is more in scale of our neighbor hood. We are not on University and North of Raymond and yet I cannot advertise on because I am out of the zoning. Tell me this is fair even Rd. +1 Ord 18-17 5/23/2018 5:16 AM Raymond C. Bryan   Against ment to accept provisos that meet neighborhood goals like energy self-reliance, green space, landscaping, setback from streets or existing structures, building height/m***ing, exterior building material/esthetics treatments, environmental concerns (see the guidlines that SAPCC has drafted and is in process of dating/revising). Simply rezoning on speculation, throws away all such leverage before any developer or plans come forward. And this neighborhood has seen a whole lot of dashed hopes and broken promises by developers over the past 44 years. This neighborhood has been an "urban village" for many years maybe since the arrival of "heavy rail transit" to the area. It has been a mixed use neighborhood for all of my life and my residence at birth was walking distance from Les & Rod's Market on Raymond Ave just off campus. Don't remember that? In that era there were small grocery stores at intervals of 3 to 6 blocks all over St. Anthony Park. 4 of them between Long and University. +1 Ord 18-17 5/23/2018 4:47 AM Raymond C. Bryan   Against I have contest the city staff claim that this parcel was put forth as appropriate for T3 zoning. I was a representative from D12CC (SAPCC) to the station area plan process for Carlton and Westgate stations. The models that were done in that planning as I recall them, did not show 6 story buildings along Raymond Avenue north of Territorial and in fact the in conformance with our existing (and still in force plan of 2005 until the city ratifies recent changes) showed 6 story residential/commercial development along and either side of University to at most 1 block north or south of University except .5 miles from the station (Carlton to Pillsbury at University). Here is the humongous elephant in the room not being considered staff or commission; handing out a zoning change (or CUP to lesser extent) is meant to provide neighbors a lever to bring developers to the current stakeholders neighbors, residents, business owners and tenants to where these stakeholders get to persuade developme +2 Ord 18-17 5/23/2018 2:05 AM Linda Bryan   Against The neighboring homes and businesses feel this zoning change has been run through, without proper examination of the implications this T3 zoning will bring forth. We received notice after their other parcel had already been rezoned to T3, and other residents and businesses near Baker Court had nor received any notice of the change. If you polled the small businesses & residents within a two blocks radius of Baker Court, I think you’d find that most of them oppose these T3 rezonings. Especially at that corner, the increased building height would be out of character with the existing neighborhood, and more suited to a location on University Avenue. Developers are drawn to our neighborhood for its urban charm, but are then willing to destroy that charm to meet their development needs. +2 Ord 18-18 5/22/2018 4:39 PM Steven Garfield   Against This proposed project and change to T3 zoning does not fit the needs of the surrounding residents and businesses. Parking in particular has been a concern in the area for decades and yet the city continues to find ways to reduce available parking and now allows developers to byp*** traditional parking requirements which places more and more pressure on street parking. This will force the small businesses out and be a huge inconvenience for residents. Ord 18-18 5/22/2018 1:42 PM jordin shaw   Against I support small businesses & it wouldn’t be fair to customers & clients of this area & surrounding to have to park blocks away from their destination all because a developer is being selfish & won’t spend the money to build underground parking for his proposed housing plans.. I oppose this rezoning proposition.. Ord 18-18 5/22/2018 1:42 PM jordin shaw   Against I support small businesses & it wouldn’t be fair to customers & clients of this area & surrounding to have to park blocks away from their destination all because a developer is being selfish & won’t spend the money to build underground parking for his proposed housing plans.. I oppose this rezoning proposition.. Ord 18-18 5/21/2018 10:25 PM Linda Brooks   Against Please leave on street parking for all patrons of businesses in area. They depend on this. Ord 18-18 5/17/2018 2:19 PM Athena Nelson-Baker   Against I am a customer at Salon George. I am against the rezoning of 2330 Long Avenue because of the harmful impact it will have on Salon George, especially the parking options. +1 Ord 18-18 5/17/2018 12:22 PM Jennilyn Koonce   Against I have my business at Salongeorge and I oppose the the rezoning from a T2 to T3. Parking is already an issue for my clients and it will only get worse. My clients drive from all over and we need more parking spaces, not less! Ord 18-18 5/16/2018 8:22 PM Linda Hennum   Against I oppose the proposed rezoning and support the small local business owners who will suffer if this is approved. I’m in favor of increased density but all the components have to work to make it successful. If the developer cannot provide parking for the residents why should the businesses and their customers sacrifice for the developer’s benefit. Very few people who live in St Paul can make do without a car despite the green line. People who take public transit to work still need a car for groceries and other errands and where will these cars be left while a person is at work but taking up street parking that’s used by customers. A dense neighborhood where people don’t have cars requires needed amenities to be within a couple block radius. Where is the grocery store, hardware store, dry cleaners, zip car lot, etc within walking distance? The developer’s motive is profit. The developer will be here and gone leaving the neighborhood and it’s small businesses to suffer. +1 -1 Ord 18-18 5/16/2018 11:36 AM Michelle Hamilton   Against I live in St Anthony Park and am a customer at Salon George. I oppose this development--the area has already had several new developments that have dramatically increased density in the area. We moved from California, from an area we loved, but that was not zoned correctly and had been made almost impossible to live in because of high density and single family and small apt. buildings being replaced by larger condo/apt. buildings. It impacts quality of life dramatically. +1 Ord 18-18 5/16/2018 12:02 AM JoAnna Bourain   Against I am a resident of Long avenue and there is already parking issues. The street is not regularly plowed in winter and parking is a nightmare during the winter months. The height of the buildings will compromise the amount of daylight that filters into the area and will dramatically change the atmosphere of the neighborhood. My home will be isolated from the rest of the community and surrounded by apartments. Ord 18-18 5/15/2018 3:01 AM Elizabeth Pomroy   Against I walk my dog in this neighborhood, and today, I walked over to see for myself what this site looked like. I was amazed at the small size of this plot of land. Even without the obvious problem of changing the traditional neighborhood with a large complex, the size of the property is simply to small to consider for such a project. It appears to be a project without much practical though behind it. Ord 18-18 5/13/2018 2:49 PM Julia Comer   Against Please do not take away the street parking for Salongeorge! There are already limited spaces; don’t we want to be part of a community that supports small business?? Ord 18-18 5/12/2018 5:02 PM Joanne George   Against Zoning Committee St. Paul, Mn. May 12, 2018 Zoning Committee, I am a long time client of Salongeorge, at 856 Raymond Ave., and am opposed to this neighborhood changing zoning. This will adversely affect the parking situation, which is already a limited situation. Since Raymond Ave was redone, parking was cut in half. Being a senior woman who has disabilities, I count on close parking availability. Parking is even more difficult in the winter for seniors to support local businesses. With all these redevelopments, these quaint neighborhood businesses will be pushed out for big condos that are not putting in enough off-street parking for their residents. This business, Salongeorge, bought into a neighborhood for a long term commitment to this community. Please keep the T2 zoning so small, Ethnic, Women run, family businesses have a piece of the American dream too. Big developers are taking over in this city, at what cost do we loss neighborhood gem's like this one? +2 -1 2 Ord 18-18 5/12/2018 5:37 AM Linda Bryan   Against How ironic that this parcel of land was sold to the Carpenters Union because the city saw the need for more parking, & now that parking is being taken away, for a development that will worsen that problem. A stipulation of the original agreement was that the union must create green space on the rest of the parcel, for the neighbors’ benefit. What happened that all of these lofty goals have been tossed out of the window in favor of high density, high-rise construction? The immediate neighbors are opposed to this whole development, and feel that the city has allowed an inappropriate proposal to move forward, believing that it suits the goal of affordable housing near the light rail. There is no design plan in place for this development, and I believe,when there is, it will not meet the criteria of any of the city’s goals. +2 Ord 18-18 5/12/2018 5:03 AM Patty George   Against Salongeorge, my business, and the other business owners at 856 Raymond Ave did not receive a rezoning postcard before the Baker East, 842 Raymond, or 2330 Long projects went before the Zoning Committee. I have talked with my neighbors and many did not know about the scale of this project at 2330 Long Ave. and were not informed about the rezoning. How many more didn't get the postcard? At what cost does St. Paul push out the small, family, women-run, minority businesses? I am all of the above. The St. Anthony Park neighborhood does not know what is coming. We need a voice and help to keep the zoning to T2. This will allow builds to scale of the neighborhood. My fellow business owners and I oppose the scale of these developments. We realize there is a need for housing, T2 is still viable. We have already lost half of our parking when bike lanes went in w/Raymond reconstruction. Parking is badly needed. Please save the small businesses and residential parking that's already @ a premium. +1 Ord 18-18 5/11/2018 10:49 PM Ahna Brandvik   Against Please support the local businesses in St. Paul. Salon George is a wonderful, small business offering a valuable service to many, many people. When a large development is planned in a lovely residential area such as this, it harms both the small, local businesses and the residents already living in the area. Do not rezone this area! Ord 18-18 5/11/2018 8:58 PM Cindy Bevier   Against Do not allow this change in parking at the cost of more small businesses. St Paul has the deserved reputation of selling out small businesses. St. Paul Mayor Melvin Cartet ran defending small businesses and he would find this outrageous. I am an older, somewhat handicap person who uses SalonGeorge an Skon Chiropractic and need to park close to the building. Have some comp***ion here and tell the big high rise to change their plans, don’t destroy these businesses. Ord 18-18 5/11/2018 3:17 PM Betsy Sabanjo   Against I have been going to Salon George for 10 years as a regular customer every 6 wks to this Salon.Please do not take away the already limited parking availability.This will only negatively impact this Salon and Patty George has,worked so hard to be sucessful. -1 Ord 18-18 5/11/2018 3:07 PM Deborah Sjerven   Against Though I do not live in St Paul, I am a customer of Salon George and parking can already be difficult for their customers as well as those of neighboring small businesses. Do not push out small businesses for the benefit of large developers. Small businesses are the backbone of our economy. +2 -2