SUBD 92-02 CITY OF HOPKINS
°"'� ZONING APPLICATION
SUMMARY FORM
' Application Number C�� � ���.��- Z
P . I .D .�:
Applicant ' s Name ( Last , First) Owner ( if other than applicant )
HOPKINS COMr�ERCE CENTER
Mailing Address (Street , City , State , Zip Code )
9715 James Avenue S. , Eloomington, Minnesota 55431
Phone Number: (Day) 888-3590 (Evening)_ _
Property Address Corner of Blake Road and Excelsior Avenue
APPLICABLE CURRENT ZONING DISTRICT(S) TYPE OF ZONING REQUEST
[ ] R-1-A [ ] R-2 [ ] B-1 [ ] Concept Review
( ] R-1-B [ ] R-3 [ ] B-2 [ ] Conditional Use Permit
[ ] R-1 -C [ ] R-4 [ X] B-3 [ ] Variance
[= . L-1 -D [ ] R-5 [ X] I-1 [ ] Zonin District Chan n
[ •1 -E [ ] R-6 [ ] I-2 [j.] Subdivision Approvalg�YlC�c�
[ ] Ordinance Amendment
[ ] Other
I hereby certify with my signature that all data
contained herein as well as all supporting data
are true and correct to the best of my knowledge: HOPKINS COMMERCE CEPdTER
Appl ' ca ts Signa ure Date
B ��3 �
Owners Signa ure Date
tfL1111V1S1D[f11YTL Ltilll ST����!AP,Y
[ ] Proper addendum to application Application received : ��t ���"" ��
[ ] Detailed plans submitted
[ ] Written project description submitted Fee Paid : � �(���, ��
Referred to City
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Engineer:
Approved : without modifications Referred to City
[ ] with modifications Attorney
Denied [ ] Referred to Watershed
T /� District
Date : `..11.�11J a�, �'"[�•L Date of Public .�%IL� — L
^ Hearing Notice Z.-
��_ COUNCIL ACTION Date of Public \�� �Ua�� 1�1�1 .�
n�. �ed : without modifications Hearing �
[ ] with modifications
Denied : [ ]
Date: I ���L�I � 1(, I� 1 Z RESOLUTION N0: � ��C� �n
\ t Y O
G �`
i�
ti 5
June 22 , 1992 ° P K � � Planning Report Subd 92-2
FINAL PLAT - HOPRINS COMMERCE CENTER
Proposed Action.
Staff recommends the following motion: Move to apt�rove
Resolution RZ92-16 recommending approval of the final plat
for the shopping center at the northwest corner of Blake
Road and County Road 3.
overview.
The applicant owns the shopping center on the northwest
corner of County Road 3 and Blake Road and is proposing to
construct an addition to the west side of the southerly most
building abutting Pierce. Along with this vacation, the
staff has recommended that the entire shopping center be re-
platted to eliminate several problems with setbacks.
The existing property has 19 lots and in several cases lot
lines going through buildings. The re-platting of the
property will create 3 lots and clean up much of the setback
problems.
--� The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council on
June 2nd.
Primary Issues to Consider.
o Why is the staff recommending the re-platting of
the site?
o What is the zoning of the property?
o What are the surrounding uses?
o Do the lots meet the minimum requirements?
o Will easements be required for the new lots?
o Will the access change?
o Has Hennepin County reviewed the plat?
o Has the final plat changed?
supportinq Documents.
o Analysis of Issues
o Final Plat
o Resolution RZ92-16
� f % r
Nancy . Anderson
Plann�
r\
Subd 92-2
� Page 2
Primary Issues to Consider.
o Why is the staff recommendinq the re-plattinq of the
site?
The staff has recommended a re-platting of the property
because the applicants property currently consists of 19
lots. Many of the lot lines go through buildings. The re-
platting of this property will solve many of the zoning and
setback problems on the site.
o �hat is the zoninq of the property?
Part of the property is zoned B-3 and part is zoned I-1.
The Goodwill building is zoned I-1 and part of the easterly
most retail building is partly located in the I-1 district.
There is a zoning line running through proposed Lot 3 . The
westerly part of Lot 3 is zoned I-1 and the easterly part is
zoned B-3 . This line runs approximately 100 feet into Lot
3 . This zoning line divides the existing retail building in
two. The Zoning Ordinance allows that if a zoning line runs
-- through a lot, either zone can be used for the lot. The
only problem is that the use of either zone is only allowed
for 50 feet on either side of the zoning line. In this case
the zoning line is 100 feet in Lot 3 .
The applicant has applied for a rezoning of the this area.
However, because the area to be rezoned involves a difficult
legal description it has been decided to rezone the property
after the area has been platted. The legal description
after the platting will be a simple block and lot
description.
o Do the lots meet the minimum requirements?
Lot 1 Zoned I-1
required proposed
lot size 10, 000 sq ft appr. 158, 029 sq ft
lot width 100 feet 344 feet
front yard 20 feet 111 feet
side yard west 20 feet 59.8 feet
side yard east 20 feet 45.4 feet
rear yard 20 feet 61.7 feet
�
Subd 92-2
^ Page 3
Lot 2 Zoned B-3
required proposed
lot size 3000 sq ft appr 73 , 273 sq ft
lot width 25 feet 407 .91 feet
front yard 20 feet 25.7 feet
side yard west 0 54. 3 feet
side yard east 0 5.6 feet
rear yard 10 feet 58 feet
Lot 3 Zoned B-3/I-1
required proposed
lot size 3000/10, 000 sq ft appr 110, 000 sq ft
lot width 25 feet appr 300 feet
front yard 20 feet appr 153 feet
side yard west 20 feet 19.8 feet
side yard east 10 feet 12 .9 feet
rear yard 20/10 feet 9. 5 feet
The new lots meet the minimum size for the district in which
they are located. A few of the setbacks do not meet the
minimum setbacks, in this case all but one are existing
^ setbacks and the new lot lines do not affect the setbacks.
The only new setback that does not meet the minimum setback
is the west setback on the easterly retail building. This
area is zoned I-1 which requires a 20 foot setback, the
preliminary plat shows a 19:8 setback. However, staff is
recommending that this area is rezoned to a B-3 zoning
district. If this area was zoned B-3 , the setback is 0.
The applicant has applied for a re-zoning of this area.
o What are the surroundinq uses?
The following are the surrounding uses:
East - retail and Westside Village Apartments
West - Edco and Boat sales
South - Blake Schools
North - Soo Line Railroad and retail
o Will easements be required for the new lots?
The applicant will provide for cross easements for parking,
utilities and access for all the lots.
o Will the access chanqe?
The access points on the site will remain the same.
�
Subd 92-2
� Page 4
o Has Hennepin County reviewed the plat?
As required by State Statute City staff has sent a copy of
the plat to Hennepin County. The County has up to 30 days
to provide comments. The City did not receive any comments
from the County regarding the plat.
o Has the final plat chanqed from the preliminary plat?
The only change with the final plat is that Pierce Avenue
has been removed on the plat. The applicant has withdrawn
their request to vacate Pierce Avenue. The City may proceed
with the vacation of Pierce Avenue in the future.
One condition of the preliminary plat was to have the
rezoning of the area take place at the time of the final
plat. Because of the difficult legal description involved
the rezoning will be done at the July meeting. The
applicant has applied for the rezoning.
Alternatives.
--� 1. Recommend approval of the final plat. By recommending
approval of the plat, the City Council will consider a
recommendation to approve the final plat for the
Hopkins Commerce Center.
2 . Recommend denial of the final plat. By recommending
denial of the plat, the City Council will consider a
recommendation to deny the final plat for the Hopkins
Commerce Center.
3 . Continue for further information. If the Planning
Commission indicates that further information is
needed, the item should be continued.
--�
o
Ml
lk
1, 'o
Mz
8..
— ---
---- ------
o
�
CITY OF HOPKINS
Hennepin County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO: RZ92-16
RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR A FINAL PLAT
WHEREAS, an application for a final plat entitled SUBD 92-2 made
by the Hopkins Commerce Center is recommended for
approval.
WHEREAS, the procedural history of the application is as
follows:
1. That an application for a final plat SUBD 92-2
was filed with the City of Hopkins on June 16,
1992 .
2 . That the Hopkins Planning Commission reviewed such
application on June 30, 1992 .
3 . That the Hopkins Planning Commission, pursuant to
mailed notice, held a hearing on June 30, 1992 ;
all persons present at the hearing were given an
^ opportunity to be heard.
4 . That the written comments and analysis of the City
Staff and the Planning Commission were considered.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that application for SUBD 92-2 is
hereby recommended for approval based on the following
Findings of Fact:
1. That the new lots meet the minumum lot size for the
zoning district.
2 . That the final plat meets the requirements for a final
plat.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that application for SUBD 92-2 is hereby
recommended for approval based on the following
conditions:
1. That the applicant furnish the City with a copy of the
parking, access, maintenance and utility easements.
Adopted this 30th day of June, 1992 .
--�
Richard Pavelka, Chairman
� t Y O
G �
�� �
ti 5
July 1, 1992 � P K � `' Council Report 92-143
FINAL PLAT - HOPRINS COMMERCE CENTER
Proposed Action.
Staff recommends the following motion: Move to approve Resolution 92-
56 approvincr the final plat for the shopping center at the northwest
corner of Blake Road and County Road 3
Mr. Winship moved and Mrs. Reuter seconded a motion to approve
Resolution RZ92-16 recommending approval of the final plat for the
Hopkins Commerce Center. The motion passed unanimously.
overview. � �
The applicant owns the shopping center on the northwest corner of
County Road 3 and Blake Road and is proposing to construct an addition
to the west side of the southerly most building abutting Pierce. The
staff has recommended that the entire shopping center be re-platted to
elimi.nate several problems with setbacks.
The existing property has 19 lots and in several cases lot lines going
through buildings. The re-platting of the property will create 3 lots
and clean up much of the setback problems.
� The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council on June 2nd.
Staff reviewed the final plat with the Planning Commission. The only
change from the preliminary plat is that Pierce Avenue was removed
from the final plat. Mr. Newman, the applicant, appeared before the
Commission. Mr. Newman stated that because Pierce Avenue will not be
vacated they may not construct their addition. There was little
discussion on this item.
Primary Issues to Consider.
o Why is the staff recommending the re-platting of the site?
o What is the zoning of the �property?
o What are the surrounding uses?
o Do the lots meet the minimum requirements?
o Will easements be required for the new lots?
o Will the access change?
o Has Hennepin County reviewed the plat?
o Has the final plat changed?
suoportinq Documents.
o Analysis of Issues
o Final Plat
o Resolution 92-56
--� 1,n' 'f� ��� '%` `�:1�
Nancy; , . Anderson
Plann �
CR 92-143
^ Page 2
Primary Issues to Consider.
o Why is the staff recommending the re-plattinq of the site?
The staff has recommended a re-platting of the property because the
applicant's property currently consists of 19 lots. Many of the lot
lines go through buildings. The re-platting of this property will
solve many of the zoning and setback problems on the site.
o What is the zoning of the property?
Part of the property is zoned B-3 and part is zoned I-1. The Goodwill
building is zoned I-1 and part of the easterly most retail building is
partly located in the I-1 district.
There is a zoning line running through proposed Lot 3 . The westerly
part of Lot 3 is zoned I-1 and the easterly part is zoned B-3 . This
line runs approximately 100 feet into Lot 3 . This zoning line divides
the existing retail building in two. The Zoning Ordinance allows that
if a zoning line runs through a lot, either zone can be used for the
lot. The only problem is that the use of either zone is only allowed
for 50 feet on either side of the zoning line. In this case the
zoning line is 100 feet in Lot 3 .
—� The applicant has applied for a rezoning of this area. However,
because the area to be rezoned involves a difficult legal description
it has been decided to rezone the property after the area has been
platted. The legal description after the platting will be a simple
block and lot description.
o Do the lots meet the minimwn requirements?
Lot 1 Zoned I-1
Required Proposed
Lot size 10, 000 sq ft appr. 158, 029 sq ft
Lot width 100 feet 344 feet
Front yard 20 feet 111 feet
Side yard west 20 feet 59.8 feet
Side yard east 20 feet 45.4 feet
Rear yard 20 feet 61. 7 feet
Lot 2 Zoned B-3
Required Proposed
Lot size 3000 sq ft appr 73 ,273 sq ft
Lot width 25 feet 407.91 feet
Front yard 20 feet 25.7 feet
Side yard west 0 54 .3 feet
-1 Side yard east 0 5. 6 feet
'�ear yard 10 feet 58 feet
CR 92-143
^ Page 3
Lot 3 Zoned B-3/I-1
Required Proposed
Lot size 3000/10, 000 sq ft appr 110, 000 sq ft
Lot width 25 feet appr 300 feet
Front yard 20 feet appr 153 feet
Side yard west 20 feet , 19. 8 feet
Side yard east 10 feet 12 . 9 feet
Rear yard 20/10 feet 9. 5 feet
The new lots meet the minimum size for the district in which they are
located. A few of the setbacks do not meet the minimum setbacks, in
this case all but one are existing setbacks and the new lot lines do
not affect the setbacks. The only new setback that does not meet the
minimum setback is the west setback on the easterly retail building.
This area is zoned I-1 which requires a 20 foot setback, the
preliminary plat shows a 19.8 setback. However, staff is recommending
that this area is rezoned to a B-3 zoning district. If this area was
zoned B-3, the setback is 0. The applicant has applied for a re-
zoning of this area.
o What are the surrounding uses?
� The following are the surrounding uses:
East - retail and Westside Village Apartments
West - Edco and Boat sales
South - Blake Schools
North - Soo Line Railroad and retail
o Will easements be required for the new lots?
The applicant will provide for cross easements for parking, utilities
and access for all the lots.
o Will the access chanqe?
The access points on the site will remain the same.
o Has Hennepin County reviewed the plat?
As required by State Statute City staff has sent a copy of the plat to
Hennepin County. The County has up to 30 days to provide comments.
The City did not receive any comments from the County regarding the
plat.
o Has the final plat chanqed from the preliminary plat?
The only change with the final plat is that Pierce Avenue has been
-� removed on the plat. The applicant has withdrawn their request to
vacate Pierce Avenue. The City may proceed with the vacation of
Pierce Avenue in the future. •
CR 92-143
^ Page 4
The final plat will also be changed by removing the 10 foot drainage
and utility easement abutting Pierce.
One condition of the preliminary plat was to have the rezoning of the
area take place at the time of the final plat. Because of the
difficult legal description involved the rezoning will be done at the
July meeting. The applicant has applied for the rezoning.
Alternatives.
1. Approve the final plat. By approving the plat, the applicant
will be able to plat the subject property.
2 . Deny the final plat. By denying the plat, the applicant will not
be able to plat the subject property.
3 . Continue for further information. If the City Council indicates
that further information is needed, the item should be continued.
��
�
;z
2-d
O ,V
00
W;h.2
niH
50
8" og
1 6
h
K6
H
L.0
Lli
4j
C al
ww
DoW
"Well
LL
41
i
i
I
I
i
I
39V„/A 90/S1S3M ib3NM0 I
---0 Z--40- N aeo2
I -,r
{
BN/19 ki �( S1l1M J. 3JStlB.b7NM0
8SN YJdObd � � AVI0,lA9 eN/18lMi uv
m31LSM WSNAtl I 'M.M.�n nn'e_
II 99Y77/A 3015 S4pM �b3NM0 / I I ii°
a v
i n '
e
r.
s
'-
ca
I ...............
.SCd y 1
—A m,amrN>lm :mmao
`Y
a
y
O
ou \,
Sad021d�,.
a` MY \ `
HO
9$
11V
�1$
gFg
yyPE
$E
o��9g0
g$
$g
2
Nv�ixry
=
$
R
oggga,"n
,Ii
`-n°
� n$g
"88
fig
g'
SY
€
i
i
I
I
i
I
39V„/A 90/S1S3M ib3NM0 I
---0 Z--40- N aeo2
I -,r
{
BN/19 ki �( S1l1M J. 3JStlB.b7NM0
8SN YJdObd � � AVI0,lA9 eN/18lMi uv
m31LSM WSNAtl I 'M.M.�n nn'e_
II 99Y77/A 3015 S4pM �b3NM0 / I I ii°
a v
i n '
e
r.
s
'-
ca
I ...............
.SCd y 1
—A m,amrN>lm :mmao
`Y
a
y
O
ou \,
Sad021d�,.
a` MY \ `
CITY OF HOPKINS
Hennepin County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO: 92-56
RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND
APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A FINAL PLAT
WHEREAS, an application for a final plat entitled SUBD 92-2 made by
the Hopkins Commerce Center is approved.
WHEREAS, the procedural history of the application is as follows:
l. That an application for a final plat SUBD 92-2 was
filed with the City of Hopkins on June 16, 1992 .
2 . That the Hopkins Planning Commission reviewed such
application on June 30, 1992 .
3 . That the Hopkins Planning Commission, pursuant to
mailed notice, held a hearing on June 30, 1992; all
persons present at the hearing were given an
opportunity to be heard.
4 . That the written comments and analysis of the City
,�-�,
Staff and the Planning Commission were considered.
10W THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that application for SUBD 92-2 is hereby
approved based on the following Findings of Fact:
1. That the new lots meet the minumum lot size for the zoning
district.
2. That the final plat meets the requirements for a final plat.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that application for SUBD 92-2 is hereby
approved based on the following conditions:
l. That the applicant furnish the City with a copy of the
parking, access, maintenance and utility easements.
Adopted this 7th day of July, 1992 .
Nelson W. Berg, Mayor
ATTEST:
, James A. Genellie, City Clerk