Laserfiche WebLink
2 7l~8 <br />opposition and wished to have their names removed from <br />the original petition. He stated he wanted the people <br />to understand what they.. were turning down when they <br />signed petition in opposition and had obtained many <br />signatures for his petition in a very limited amount of <br />time; <br />It appears that people on Fairview Avenue are primarily <br />concerned with the additional traffic this would create. <br />Mr. Bureau stated that r1lr. Steak has a seating capacity <br />of 128, they serve meals at noon and at supper time. <br />At approximately 3 people per car about ~2 cars would be <br />involved and if there is a turnover twice, it would <br />involve 84 cars. He was of opinion that about 80~ <br />would arrive from Larpenteur Avenue and possib7;~ 20~ <br />from Fairview Avenue. Daytons going in on Hi~hv~ay 36 <br />will probably generate a lot of traffic down Fairview <br />but traffic to Mr. Steak wouldn't be great -_it <br />probably world be the same people who go to hido's or <br />Embers or House of Wong, and would for a change go to <br />Mr. Steak.. <br />Joe Bianchi, 1725 Fairview stated his objection was to <br />the re-zoning, not to a Mr. Steak Restaurant. He said <br />it is hard to know how people are reacting to this <br />depending on what is said to them. He feels that the <br />zoning should remain B1A for the time being and possibly <br />another study should be made, <br />Gerry Sullivan, attorney for Arden Hills Investment Co., <br />said that he obtained over one half. of the names on the <br />petition and in so doing he showed the people the notice <br />of public hearing and advised that Mr. Steak was similar <br />to Embers. He did not state it was similar to Bonanza - <br />although Bonanza is an excellent place to eat also. <br />He said placing a Mr. Steak on the proposed lot would: <br />conflict with everything around. It would be objection- <br />-- able to people in the area because they do not want that <br />type of facility. Majority of people, in his opinion, <br />do not want this rezoned and if they had their preference <br />they tivould take an apartment house to a restaurant. <br />There is no question but that traffic would be heavi er , <br />he claims - and if cars had to wait to get into the <br />parking lot, it would cause hazard on Larpenteur Ave. <br />Mr. Sullivan also thought petition for rezoning was <br />illegal inasmuch as it does not comply with Ordinance 6l~, <br />Sec. 16.6 which states that petition shall be made by <br />owner or owners. Even if Mr. Steak has earnest money <br />contract, no one 'has seen it and he is not record owner <br />of the property. Further, the petition is improper <br />because it refers to rezoning of one property to the <br />other, but does not refer to the P-]. zone, of which it <br />is a part. <br />Mrs. Julian Lee, after inquiry, stated that she been <br />single of record o~mer since 1955 and application to <br />rezone was made in her behalf with her knowledge, <br />