Tuesday, October 21, 2014

Our Appeal Remarks

This was our opening statement to the City Council during our appeal of the Conditional Use Permit for a hotel at 344 Summit last week:

Madame President and Members of the Council — thank you for your time. I’m Bethany Gladhill, President of the Summit Avenue Residential Preservation Association.

SARPA was formed under Latimer administration in 1986, with a mission to “preserve the historic, residential, and urban park character of Summit Avenue.”

We are an all-volunteer group, with activities ranging from public gardens to lectures to historic preservation and land use.

I’m on SARPA because I own the home my parents bought for $20,000 in 1965. It’s the home I hope to leave to my daughter. In my day job, I’m a preservation planner (and non-profit consultant).

Summit is full of all kinds of people. Young families, retirees, bigger houses, condos, chicken-keepers, socialites, everything in between. What unites us is being a part of the longest intact Victorian boulevard remaining in the US.

Every town once had a Summit Avenue. What makes it unique NOW is that we have the only one left of its scale. Think of Park Avenue in Minneapolis, Detroit’s Grand Boulevard, or Meridian Street in Indianapolis. All have lost their original character, their special sense of place. We don’t want to — we can’t — let that happen to Summit.

SARPA does not oppose this property because we don’t like the developer, or because we are against people staying in hotels, or for any personal reasons, much as some might try to make the issue about that.

Nor do we compare it to the previous use, a CUP that has expired for a several-years-closed college. That’s not the case at hand.


We’re here because we — simply enough — oppose commercial development on Summit. We support the City PED staff who recommend denial of the permit in their reports, based on the fact that it is not an appropriate use in a residential RT-2 area. It may seem like a small issue, but it can quickly escalate to a bigger one, as we have all seen in the past. We believe that the Planning Commission erred in permitting the use. Please reverse the decision.

No comments: