^It really is so sad to see such pervasive insular thinking instead of a growth mindset in the residents of this neighborhood.
^ & ^^ I'll try those suggestions. Thanks.
^ & ^^ I'll try those suggestions. Thanks.
Here's his editorials regarding Fanning.
He complains about population loss, them blocks adding housing
StlToday - Michaud: Population loss and the future of St. Louis neighborhoods
https://www.stltoday.com/opinion/articl ... 3691b.html
StlToday - Letter: City Hall favors developers but ignores neighborhoods
https://www.stltoday.com/article_d203a0 ... f14ab.html
He complains that the Fanning project was railroaded through by Ald Green and city, ignoring neighbors, then complains that Ald Pihl is holding up development in the Grove, the stated purpose was to involve the community more in the process.
StlToday - Michaud: Aldermanic meddling warps development in St. Louis. A U.K. model does it better.
https://www.stltoday.com/opinion/column ... bd6ec.html
He complains about population loss, them blocks adding housing
StlToday - Michaud: Population loss and the future of St. Louis neighborhoods
https://www.stltoday.com/opinion/articl ... 3691b.html
StlToday - Letter: City Hall favors developers but ignores neighborhoods
https://www.stltoday.com/article_d203a0 ... f14ab.html
He complains that the Fanning project was railroaded through by Ald Green and city, ignoring neighbors, then complains that Ald Pihl is holding up development in the Grove, the stated purpose was to involve the community more in the process.
StlToday - Michaud: Aldermanic meddling warps development in St. Louis. A U.K. model does it better.
https://www.stltoday.com/opinion/column ... bd6ec.html
Further, the co-plaintiff who works at Beyond Housing, appears to have moved into their home in 2018 (data from Zillow). A "naturally-occurring affordable" 2-family converted to a luxury single-family, then sues to effectively block new affordable housing in Tower Grove South.
I'm not an anti-gentrification person, so I am not begrudging a person the ability to buy the home they want where they want, but for an affordable housing advocate to file suit to prevent more people (including low-moderate income families) from moving into the neighborhood is a hypocrisy that is certainly worth highlighting.
I'm not an anti-gentrification person, so I am not begrudging a person the ability to buy the home they want where they want, but for an affordable housing advocate to file suit to prevent more people (including low-moderate income families) from moving into the neighborhood is a hypocrisy that is certainly worth highlighting.
It gets more gross
A NEW COLLABORATION MAKES A TRANSFORMATIONAL INVESTMENT IN THIRTY-SIX NEW HOMES
A NEW COLLABORATION MAKES A TRANSFORMATIONAL INVESTMENT IN THIRTY-SIX NEW HOMES
https://www.onceandforall.org/a-new-par ... new-homes/“BJC is a new investment partner, and we are thrilled to have them making such a lasting impact in affordable housing development,” said Deb Dombar, Chief Operating Officer at Beyond Housing. “More housing equals more opportunity for families to live and thrive in a stable community.”
...
“Affordable housing is difficult to produce and takes time and resources, we must absolutely do all we can to provide a quality, healthy environment for our residents and to protect our natural resources,” Dombar said. Having partners like BJC who understand this reality and are willing to proceed despite the obstacles and unknowns is game-changing.
...
“While Beyond Housing having 509 units is a good milestone and has helped countless families, it’s a drop in the bucket where the need is concerned,” Dombar said. “The lack of affordable housing in our community is a real issue, and our ability to add more quality, affordable homes—and following their construction, to take a holistic approach to service delivery for residents—is as important as ever.”
- 2,419
I wonder what Beyond Housing would think about one of their employees torpedoing their stated goals.
Part of me wants to reach out to them to find outRockChalkSTL wrote: ↑Aug 02, 2023I wonder what Beyond Housing would think about one of their employees torpedoing their stated goals.
Pres Green said:
It’s going back to board of adjustment so they can better provide documentation. I’m sure they will sue again. This is a great project that the majority of TGS wants that I’ve been working on for several years
Blighting of the Fanning School is going before the Planning Commission Aug 9.
A Tower Grove development is up against a judge, neighbors. The city is moving forward regardless.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/bus ... -top-story
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/bus ... -top-story
- 2,623
One of these NIMBYs works for Beyond Housing, do they have no sense of irony?
They complain about parking but
A. Quick look on streetview shows ample street parking available around school.
B. This is an ideal location to live carfree in the city. Grand bus line + easy walk to 2 grocers, library, laundromat, and amenities on South Grand
They complain about parking but
A. Quick look on streetview shows ample street parking available around school.
B. This is an ideal location to live carfree in the city. Grand bus line + easy walk to 2 grocers, library, laundromat, and amenities on South Grand
At a minimum, properties should get some sort of parking credit for the amount of parkable street frontage at the property line. This property has 40-50 street parking spots along it's perimeter, without ever parking directly in front of a neighbor's house. Plus, if neighbors feel like the spaces directly in front of their houses are "theirs", then the street parking at the curb line of the school should be considered the school's. Just sayin'.
Classic NIMBY argument... "We're just concerned for the new residents of the development."
"The project would create a low-quality environment for the Fanning renters and others."
$480k building permit application submitted for a five-family at 4333 Connecticut. Will need zoning variance(s). Presumably the existing house is razed if approved.
$180k building permit application submitted for a new home at 4027 Winnebago
$0 zoning-only building permit application submitted for the Fanning School. Trying to get variances that will stand up to litigation.
Variances for the Fanning School rehab are on the agenda of the Oct 4 meeting of the Board of Adjustment. Should be a barn-burner. Testify!
Reminder that zoning variances for the conversion of Fanning School into apartments go before the Board of Adjustment tomorrow. Should be a barn burner. Testify!
The NIMBYs are out in force. It's clear we need zoning reform. The density and amount of parking id quite reasonable and should be within the range of by right.
Are residential density and parking the main arguments here?
Also, can someone explain the changes made to try and avoid the legal challenge.
Also, can someone explain the changes made to try and avoid the legal challenge.
That's what they're harping on. Though that's the levers they have to stop it with. And that they weren't listened to or engaged with enough.
The neighborhood had 2,000 more people in 1990, 16% more than today, and yet the neighbors that have lived there for decades complain about density in the Fanning proposal.
Looking at it again, the neighboring block to the west is almost as dense with about 24 residential structures, most originally built as 2 or 4 families and two small apartment buildings with at least 8 units each. Also, the on-street parking on the Fanning side of the street only around the perimeter could probably support 1 to 1 parking for the Fanning units without any on-site surface parking.