Neighborhood residents opposed to a new Division I athletics arena at the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul are seeking the equivalent of a legal restraining order against the city and the university, with the goal of stopping construction already well underway off Grand, Cretin and Summit avenues.

The Advocates for Responsible Development filed a motion in the Minnesota Court of Appeals late Monday afternoon seeking to enjoin the university from continuing construction — and the city from allowing construction — of the Lee and Penny Anderson Multipurpose Arena, a 5,500-seat sports facility that will be dedicated to DI hockey and basketball.

On June 8, the Court of Appeals determined that the city had prematurely accepted an environmental review known as an Environmental Assessment Worksheet, without considering the cumulative impacts of other construction projects on campus, namely the new Schoenecker Center, which is located next to the arena and hosts its own recital hall. The court also found that the arena’s approved EAW largely failed to include active mitigation measures for parking, traffic and greenhouse gas emissions beyond passive approaches such as monitoring traffic levels for two years.

“Unfortunately, the City and UST have chosen to ignore this court’s opinion,” reads the homeowner group’s 15-page legal memorandum in support of their motion for injunctive relief.

The Court of Appeals left it up to the city to oversee the publication of a new EAW, but St. Thomas officials said they would proceed with construction anyway while the university simultaneously works on a new document and appeals the court decision. The city has argued that the court order did not explicitly order construction halted, and that during an appeals process, a final court judgment is effectively put on hold, anyway.

“The City is working on addressing the issues identified in the Court of Appeals opinion and will complete an amended EAW that complies with the court’s directions,” the mayor’s office said in a statement last week. “The Court of Appeals has not directed the Building Official or the city to issue a stop work order, therefore an order has not been issued.”

In their latest motion, the homeowners maintain that the city has no right to approve a site plan and permit construction without an EAW — a key step toward determining if a more intensive Environmental Impact Statement should be required — and the university has no right to continue construction without one.

“The court’s invalidation of the old EAW stripped UST of any approved site plan and building permits,” reads a statement from Advocates for Responsible Development president Dan Kennedy and spokesman Donn Waage. “Nonetheless, UST has brazenly … intensified its construction work while the city has refused to enforce the court’s order. … St. Thomas lost that lawsuit, and now defies the court by continuing construction of an enormous arena despite the court’s ruling.”

Related Articles

St. Paul: University of St. Thomas to appeal ruling over D-I sports arena

Raj Beekie: I was born and raised in Guyana. Today, home for me is America.

MN Court of Appeals demands new environmental review of St. Thomas arena

Schlossman: Why the NCHC expedited St. Thomas’ application

Joe Soucheray: St. Thomas arena? It’s hard to pick a winner in this first-world problem