Original editor’s note: The Paper hopes that by printing the letter to the editor submitted by those in opposition to the restaurant and the responses to those objections in this article it has served what the staff deems a significant function: to provide a forum for examining all sides of issues which directly affect the Skinker-DeBaliviere neighborhood.
At the Rosedale Neighbors meeting on October 20 some residents expressed concern about the Mexican restaurant proposed for the ground floor of the Sherman apartment building at 354 Skinker (at McPherson).
A few residents of the 6100 block of McPherson were later interviewed to determine their concerns or objections. I then spoke with Rev. Robert Gordon since Grace Methodist church has supported the restaurant in its petition for a liquor license and also with Alan Hamilton, part owner of the building and partner in the proposed restaurant operation. since that time, the interviewed McPherson residents and some of their neighbors have submitted a letter which details their complaints and is published on page 2 of this issue. Therefore, this article will deal only with the responses to those itemized objections.
According to current projections, the restaurant is to use roughly half of the vacant commercial space (where the antique store had been at the south end of the building). Plans call for seating for 80, a full service bar for diners (no separate bar trade), and dinner hours from 5:30-10:00 p.m. with the intention of expansion to lunch service later on. There will be no carry-out service.
For parking space, the restaurant has made arrangements to use the Grace Methodist lot on McPherson and is negotiating for use of the Sinclair station lot.
In order to be granted a liquor license by the Excise Commissioner it is necessary for a petitioner to get the written consent of one-half of the property owners and first floor tenants within approximately a 200 foot radius. Because of local law, any church within this boundry would by itself have the authority to deny the petition, an ultimate veto in effect. Grace Methodist Church lies within this boundary.
Rev. Gordon had preliminary talks with Lou and Alan Hamilton, then the brothers and their architect made their presentation to the Administrative Board, the final decision-making body of the Church. On July 8 the Board decided (by written ballot) 37 to 7 in favor of supporting the petition.
Rev. Gordon said that there were two reasons why the Board strongly backed the restaurant effort. The first was that they were convinced by the Hamiltons’ presentation and responses to questions that the restaurant would be a “quality operation.” The second was the additional security that would be provided. by a commercial venture being open at night, in contrast to the present rather deserted appearance of that corner after dark.
As to the use of the Church lot for parking.
Rev. Gordon said that the Board did not consider the present use of the space for neighborhood play as a major factor in their decision since such play is often precluded by the manner in which residents’ cars use that lot and that “parking ought to be of as much concern to Lou [and Alan Hamilton] in terms of drawing customers as it is to residents.”
According to Alan Hamilton, in figuring the number of persons served at any one time, the full seating figure (80) is divided by ⅔ which in this case gives 53 people. (Restaurants do not operate to capacity even at peak times since one or two diners may be seated at a table that can accommodate four.) It is estimated that an average of 2.2 people arrive per auto. This means that no more than 24 car spaces should be required at any given time.
The Church lot at McPherson has a capacity of 29 and the restaurant architect thinks that by restriping the lot another 10 spaces can be added. In addition, the restaurant hopes to lease about 13 slots from the gas station on Skinker. There is also limited on-street parking on Skinker.
The Hamiltons also expect that a significant portion of their trade will be walk-in. He said, “We would do whatever we can to discourage street parking— monitor the lot if necessary. When the street parking is already crowded it is easier for patrons to use the lots anyway.”
Alan Hamilton says that use of the church lot for basketball would only be reduced in the summer months. Even after the restaurant expands to lunch service, the lot would not be in use for parking from the time of school recess until the dinner hour.
The Hamiltons do not believe traffic on the 6100 blocks of McPherson and Kingsbury will be increased significantly, if at all. Restaurant patrons will enter the parking areas off the west end of McPherson and exit through the alley onto Skinker. Signs to this effect will be posted.
Alan and Kathleen Hamilton and Steve and Lecil Sailer purchased the building two years ago when it was going into bankruptcy for the second time in four years.
According to Alan they concentrated on the residential units which are now at 100% occupancy. Ed Stout, one of the residents opposed to the restaurant, said, “People need to know that the Hamiltons and Sailers have done an excellent job with the building.”
Alan said that in an informal survey neighbors stated that a drugstore was what they most wanted in the commercial space. Local drug stores were contacted, advertisements were taken in two pharmaceutical magazines and notices were posted at the school of pharmacy in the Barnes Medical Complex. The property was listed with a realtor as drugstore space and received not a single inquiry.
From their efforts Alan deduces that the small owner-operated drugstores are cherished relics that cannot compete with the security of working for a chain.
According to his informal survey, also high on the priority list for the neighborhood was a quality family-type restaurant. Alan feels that people should be aware that the two commercial spaces have remained vacant and therefore financially unremunerative for the past two years.
The Hamiltons and Sailers have turned down three different parties who wanted to open package liquor stores. two small concerns that would deal largely in confectionaries drawing school children, a teenage disco which would have required no license as it did not seek to serve liquor (“that would have been the most lucrative as it would have occupied both commercial spaces”), and most recently a carryout Chinese food venture. Alan says that these businesses were rejected because they felt them not in keeping with what residents wanted.
On the subject of noise, Alan says that the cast concrete construction should prevent any sound escaping to the street and the noise of patrons coming and going should be well muffled by the normal din of Skinker.
When asked about the problem of odor emanating from the restaurant, he said that he didn’t expect that to be a problem but would check further. He called later to say that under city ordinance any smells coming from the restaurant would be a violation of code (BOCA) and that the kitchen would be designed to eliminate such problems.
Alan thinks that residents should be aware that the restaurant will hire between 18 and 22 people and that their hope is to fill these positions with neighborhood teenagers.
On November 14 Alan met with some residents of the 6100 block of McPherson to discuss the restaurant. Though it produced no resolution, the amicable nature of the meeting was underscored by all parties.
Currently the Hamiltons’ architect is drawing up the detailed plans. The brothers would like to open the restaurant in the coming spring; first they must secure the liquor license and then raise the necessary money.
A protest hearing (against the granting of the license) has been scheduled for November 30 (after this issue of The Paper goes to press).
At the first hearing signatures of supporters and protestors of the petition are submitted. Approximately three weeks are given the investigators for the office of the Excise Commissioner to verify the signatures. Then the second hearing is held which determines the granting or refusal of the license.
Originally published in The Paper, December 1979.
Read this article in the original newspaper issue.
Archival transcription note: The source says 80 seats “divided by ⅔” gives 53. Printed wording and calculation are retained rather than changed to multiplication.
Original source: SD_Times1979_12.pdf, printed page(s) 1; PDF page(s) 1.
