Laserfiche WebLink
'"� <br />�"� <br />window in support of a catering business, but it is clear that the B-lb zoning designation includes <br />Class II restaurants, even those without drive thrus, grouping them under the title of "Fast Food <br />Convenience" businesses. The proposed use of this business is clearly one of "convenience" <br />rather than destination. It would be a plain contradiction for the City to allow a convenience- �� ��rrv.v� <br />driven business, with business access through a residential street, when its Comprehensive Pl ��,,,;�� ',S <br />and own staff's recent statements emphasize the City's commitment to "destination" rather than �o�„P��, � <br />"convenience" zoning at the Lexington-Roselawn intersection. d-����,�.�a,� <br />There are a number of important other considerations that bear on this decision and these may be <br />advanced by neighborhood residents speaking as individual property holders, but let us <br />summarize the consensus view of Autumn Street residents: <br />✓ We strongly oppose any re-zoning that in the immediate or long-term effect would result <br />in any increase in traffic, via Autumn Street, to and from 1901 Lexington Avenue. <br />�'►� P�� <br />A,M�d�+..�.ti�- <br />d-�►�c�sst� c.bale <br />✓ We strongly oppose any changes or intensification of the south "Autumn Street side" of <br />the property that would allow patrons of the property to access the property via Autumn <br />Street as a convenience. It is a side yard, facing a , that under <br />the City's Code should be made to form an attractive barrier from the R-1 properties that <br />sit in plain view. �c.c�s c. s'k�-'�', doe,S n� re��,�` s ��eer� <br />✓ Following from the above, we strongly and unanimously oppose any take-out window, <br />service door, or similar modification to the Autumn Street side. <br />Accommodating these wishes is not only demanded by the City Code's own policy statement <br />that, "It shall be the stated policy of the City to maintain a harmonious and high standard of <br />residential development and to protect such areas from deleterious effects.... (see, City Code <br />1004.O1.F.1), and the Comprehensive Plan's concern for the low-traffic uses needed at the <br />Lexington-Roselawn intersection, but our views are in no way inconsistent with the productive <br />enjoyment and beneficial use of this property, given the generous size of the existing primary <br />parking lot on the north side of the building. We are confident and hopeful that a suitable <br />compromise between the neighborhood residents, the property owners, and the City can and will <br />be reached. § J Q 0 y.L7 l�' L� P�t-},�:�,n5 S Ptc', �;�.n.l I y �o �L re�aca�io�t <br />Sincerely, �� ho � S c5 <br />s P C c.�� -j� <br />The Residents of Autumn Street �1 '� S.�r;�-S . <br />(See attached signatures) <br />i,� �o f' P-Si � a-n i�0► � o�dtLlS ;�� a�atS ✓!D'� <br />co wt ►�►1u ca w L v se S i� a�,ACC.� �- J,�S�nts� <br />Appendix 1: Residents Joining in Our Expression of Concern <br />Appendix 2: Four Photos of Autumn Street and 1901 Lexington Avenue <br />Contact person for questions: Patrick Schmidt, 1140 Autumn Street, Roseville, MN 55113 <br />Tel: 651-488-2131; email: schmidtp@macalester.edu <br />