CR 92-77 Concept Review - RJ Johnson Property
\ \ y 0
, m
.y '"
o P \ ~
March 31, 1992 K Council Report 92-77
CONCEPT REVIEW - R.L. JOHNSON PROPERTY
Proposed Action.'
This is concept review which requires no formal action. Any
comments will be helpful to the applicant in preparing future
applications.
ov rview.
The subject site is owned by R.L. Johnson and was the former site
of the White Motors Company. The buildings were razed several
years ago and the site has since been vacant. The site is 13
acres in size and is currently zoned 1-2, General Industrial.
The applicant has submitted two alternate proposals. One
proposal has an 80,000 square foot grocery store and a mul ti-
tenant building with 40,000 square feet. The second proposal has
a 60,000 square foot grocery store and a multi-tenant building
with 65,000 square feet. The developer has not named the
proposed tenant of the grocery store facility.
The purpose of this item is to review the concept of placing a
grocery store and other retail on the R.L. Johnson site. Various
details of the preliminary plan may change with further study.
As a part of the review of the concept plan the City Council is
requested to consider the following:
o The impact and appropriateness of rezoning the
property from industrial to commercial
o Physical elements of the proposed site plan
The Planning Commission reviewed this proposal on March 31, 1992.
See attached notes from meeting. .
Primary Issues to Consider.
o What are the specifics of the site plan?
o How is the site designated in the comprehensive plan?
o will the site have to be rezoned?
o Will a traffic study need to be completed?
o What are the issues that will have to be considered in
the development of the site?
o What is the timing of the development?
o What is the status of 6th-8th Grocery Store Project?
o What is the staff recommendation?
SUDDorting Documents.
o Detailed Background
o Analysis of Issues
o site Plan
?/;;,~:ri~:!r'
CR92-77
Page 2
Primary Issu s to Consider.
0 What are the specifics of the site plan?
CONCEPT A
Grocery-ao,oOO square feetjMulti-tenant-40,000 square feet
This concept consists of a grocery store
of ao,ooo square feet
and 40,000 square feet of additional retail. The developer
has
stated that this space would be occupied by 2-3 large retailers.
The grocery sto~e is on the east side of the site and the major
tenants on the south.
CONCEPT B
Grocery- 60,000 square feetjmulti-tenant- 65,000 square feet
The concept is similar to the first concept,
except the multi-
tenant building stretches along most of the south property line.
Again, this concept as with the first one places the buildings on
the east and south sides of the property.
Fire Marshal's Comments
The Fire Marshal reviewed this preliminary plan
and noted that
the site will have to install hydrants.
Loading Dock Area
Both site plans show the loading docks for the grocery store on
the south side of the building. The loading docks would not be
visible from 11th Avenue or County Road 3.
Access
Both plans show access from County Road
3 and 11th Avenue.
However, the access on 11th Avenue differs
on each plan. The
access from County Road 3 is proposed to be from ath Avenue. The
access points would need to be studied further
thru a traffic
study.
Engineering Considerations
The Public Works Department has reviewed the
preliminary site
plan and noted the following:
- The rate of run-off from this site
would need to be
regulated to not exceed the rate previously
identified by
RCM. Furthermore retention ponds should be
developed on
this site for water quality purposes.
- A water main should be looped from our well site
along the
east and south property lines of this site and be tied into
the 11th Avenue water main. Looping the
line in this
fashion will provide adequate water supply
and fire
protection for this site as well as the
R.L. Johnson site
presently leased to Knox Lumber Company.
CR92-77
Page 3
- The sanitary sewer service should be provided
from 11th
Avenue and constructed with a manhole on 11th Avenue. Also,
the service should be designed in such
a manner as to
provide opportunities for the R. L. Johnson/Knox
site to
connect to the service.
- A traffic study is definitely needed to evaluate the impact
of this development on 11th Avenue. The study would have to
evaluate different alignments of access to
this property
with respect to 5th street South.
- Sidewalk and significant landscaping and buffer
areas are
needed on 11th Avenue and throughout the site.
Park Dedication
All property that is platted requires either land dedicated for
park purposes or cash. If this project were to proceed staff
would recommend a cash dedication.
0 How is the site designated in the comprehensive Plan?
.
The Comprehensive Plan has designated the site as Business Park.
The Comprehensive Plan would have to be amended
to reguide the
property from Business Park to Commercial in order to allow this
development to proceed.
0 will the site have to be rezoned?
The applicants proposal would require a rezoning of the property
from 1-2, General Industrial to B-3, General Business, P.U.D. or
perhaps some type of new commercial zoning designation.
0 What are the issues that would have to be considered in the
development of the site?
- traffic
In conjunction with this development a traffic study would have
to be completed. There have been several studies
done in the
past regarding difference scenarios on this site. A study would
have to be completed to take into consideration
the proposed
uses.
- impact of rezoning
The rezoning of this property is probably the
biggest issue
regarding this proposal. Once the property
is rezoned to a
business district, any use that is permitted
in the applicable
business district would be allowed. Some of
the issues that
should be considered with the rezoning are the following:
0 Is there a public need for additional land to be
rezoned for commercial purposes?
CR92-77
Page 4
0 If there is a public need for additional
land to be
zoned for commercial purposes, should the
rezoning be
done in the area proposed, or would
the community be
better served if the rezoning were done in a different
area of the City?
0 What will be the impact on other
commercial areas
inclu~ing Mainstreet?
0 What will be the impact to the surrounding area?
0 What will be the traffic impacts?
0 What will be the impact to the community?
0 What will be the impact on proposed CBD grocery store
project?
0 What is the timing of the development?
The developer has stated they are ready to proceed subsequent to
ci ty approval. Following this approval they would need to secure
final commitments from tenants.
0 What is the status of 6th-8th Grocery store Project?
The City Council recently held a public meeting and approved the
following:
- A resolution which details how neighborhood concerns will be
addressed if this project proceeds.
- An easement agreement for the use of 9th Avenue by Hennepin
County for LRT purposes.
- An agreement which details the leasing of the
County
property between 6th-8th Avenue.
Along with approval of the above items, the
City staff was
directed to proceed with securing County Board action
on the
lease and easement agreements. The County Board
is expected to
take action on the agreements during its meeting on April 7.
0 What is the staff recommendation?
Over the last several years staff has been working to secure
construction of a grocery store project within the CBD.
Recently, a proposal was submitted for a grocery store on the
pines site. This project does not appear to be proceeding at
this time. A proposal for a grocery/retail project has now been
submitted for the R.L. Johnson property.
As a result of the strategic Planning Task Force process, and
discussions which have taken place over the last several months
regarding the 6th to 8th site, it appears that the following
questions have been raised:
- What is the best location for a grocery store project
- What is the appropriate land use for some of the
remaining large developable parcels within the city,
(i.e. Pines, R.L. Johnson)
CR92-77
Page 5
- What can be done to mitigate negative impacts on
Mainstreet and other commercial areas if one or both of
these sites were rezoned and developed as retail
- What type and size of grocery store best serves the
market needs of the city
- Is there a market need as well as a potential benefit
to the City to have a large retail user in the City
(i.e. K-Mart, WalMart, etc.).
Because of the significant impact relating to both a new grocery
store project and any possible new retail zoned property, staff
feels that it is appropriate at this time to
look at both of
these issues in more detail. As a result staff is recommending
at this time that a study be undertaken which would address the
following items prior to any future decisions on either a grocery
store or significant retail project within the City:
0 Determine market needs in the City for a grocery store
project. The purpose of this part of the study would
be to look at both the type and
size of store which
would best serve the needs of the Hopkins market area.
0 Determine market and community needs for a large scale
retail outlet or other types of retail.
0 Examine various potential development/redevelopment
sites from both a market impact and land use standpoint
for either a grocery store or retail uses. The sites
would include the following:
0 6th to 8th Avenue
0 Existing Taits site
0 R.L. Johnson property
0 pines
0 Possibly Suburban Chevrolet site
0 Define both the positive and negative
impacts of the
various alternatives on the community,
existing
commer'cial areas and Mainstreet. Identify possible
actions to mitigate potential negative impacts.
0 Land use analysis. Review the various sites as relates
to the following information:
0 Existing land use goals/policies as
identified in the Comprehensive plan
0 Optimum building size
0 Urban design considerations
0 Access/traffic issues
0 Ranking of sites as relates to retail/grocery
store development
0 Identification of most appropriate use from a
land use standpoint. It should be noted that
the analysis of the various sites would be
CR92-77
Page 6
viewed in the context of how these sites,
from a land use perspective, would relate
and impact the rest of the community.
It is assumed by staff that in order to secure the information as
detailed above, both a market and land use consultant would be
necessary. Staff would anticipate the study to start around May
1, if approved, with completion in approximately 60 days. The
anticipated cost of a study of this type will be approximately
$15,000 to $20,000. Although this cost is fairly significant,
staff views this study as a very critical analysis and feels the
information provided from this study should hopefully provide a
good basis for a consensus on how these areas and parcels should
be developed.
If the City Council is interested in pursuing staff's
recommendation, it is suggested that the Council direct staff to
return to the April 21 City Council meeting with a detailed work
plan for the study which the City Council may then review and
authorize staff to undertake.
In reviewing the action as proposed by staff, the city Council
needs to be aware that this study is opening a new area of
discussion. The two largest parcels that would be looked at in
this study, R.L.. Johnson and the Pines, have previously been
identified by the Council for uses other than retail. In the
past the City has been unwilling to formally consider retail on
these sites, and in particular the R.L. Johnson site. The study
as proposed by staff would now be examining the sites to
determine if retail development is appropriate. However, this
study may find that a retail project on these site(s) has merit.
No matter what the results of this study should be, the City
Council will still have final control through the Comprehensive
Plan and Zoning Ordinance to determine what type of development
will take place.
Alternatives
It would appear that the alternatives available to the Council,
other than the staff recommendation, are as follows:
- Determine that nothing has changed to warrant
considering possible land use change for the Pines or
R.L. Johnson property and therefore a study is not
necessary. If a grocery store cannot be built on the
6th to 8th site, look for a new site in the CBD or do
nothing at this time to facilitate the construction of
a new grocery store.
- Determine that due to market/land use changes a
rezoning of the pines or R.L. Johnson property is
warranted and that a study is not necessary.
CR92-77
Page 7
PLANNING COMMISSION NOTES
Staff reviewed the proposal and the staff recommendations with
the applicant. Brad Hoyt, the applicant appeared before the
Commission. Mr. Hoyt stated that he was now interested in
developing only the 60,000 square foot grocery store and the
65,000 square feet of retail. Mr. Hoyt reviewed the proposal
with the Commission and discussed the pros and cons of the
various other sites discussed for a grocery store. Mr. Hoyt
stated that he has had discussions with Franks Nursery and
Fashion Bug as possible tenants. The retail tenants will have a
ten year lease and the grocery store will have a 20 year lease.
Bob Miller appeared before the Commission. Mr. Miller was
concerned about the impact to the downtown. Hopkins has a
downtown - an identity. Once you change the character of
Hopkins, you don't go back.
Jim Justus appeared before the Commission. Mr. Justus was
concerned about traffic on 11th Avenue. Mr. Justus stated that
we need something to draw people into Hopkins.
The following are the final comments from the Planning Commission
on the proposed development.
David Day - We have put time and money into Downtown. There is
not enough space to develop a grocery store in downtown. Haven't
seen anything work to draw people into the downtown. Maybe this
development will pull outsiders in.
John Hutchison - It is hard to come up with anything at this
time. What is the best use? I don't know. Have the study done
and look at changing the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive
Plan should be looked at closely. Not ready to say whether this
is good or bad.
Neal Chapman - 6th to 8th site is dead. This is a well thought
out plan. Am in support of commercial zoning on the site, but it
does not have to be this project. Does not feel a study is
necessary. 8th to 11th linkages are important. Need to look at
both R.L. Johnson sites.
Mike Winship - Wanted to see 40,000 square foot tenant and
grocery store. Don't like strip retail. Concerned for local
businesses, wants Taits involved. Need more information on
downtown business, need some level of comfort of the effect on
downtown.
Pat Reuter - Want retail on the site. There is still a place for
the Central Business District. The reality is the old days are
over. The people that still shop in the downtown also go to
other areas to shop. Why not bring some of those stores to our
community also, so they will shop here instead of somewhere else?
How are we going to meet the Senior's concerns? study could be
CR92-77
Page 8
beneficial. Concern is that there should be a time line for the
study. Don't want to miss opportunities!
Rick Pavelka - Won't support using City money for development.
The proposal creates a confusing commercial district. Want to
settle where the commercial district should be. Glad to see a
proposal for the entire parcel. Large grocery store will not fit
in the CBD. If 6th to 8th does not go through, there is no other
place for a grocery store. A study with time constraints makes
sense. The project has some merits.
.
.,
~ ( Location Map l
. (2)
~(
(4)
LOT I
I ( I
I
~
I
I<)
1
\~\6 () :o~\
. . (10) ~ E.~~
E
S~ S\ \
~O. ~e -oJ \ I LOT"
(I) Q\ I
u~ :
~ ~. I
I
~
I
~ .C) I
"(\:j- .
L
,
~ 'S
O~ I
(9)
~ \ (5) \()
--
\:j-
,
LOT 3
;t
K
.........
.........
. "REET -SO- - 23
~7j 1106 1102 3
1110
22
I.
I (118 )
I I
21 I
I. \. 3
I I
20
I I
1 ., 4
19 I I I
:>1 5
I I I
I
18 I I I
I 6
I <::,0 /_ 7
I I I .
9 I I I
~v~ ~~ f n:=~
11052 : I I
II II
I I I
. <..:..0-.4 r- -54 1311
12 I T
' ,-L I 4
I ~ ')11
'/9 l______
5 ~for;~~ ~82@ ~ 8001
( - -(T3Of 5
I
. 0' \. 8 J I __
,'f;. I - - - - . I 6." 11
920-93Q9
. -1 I 7 I i
'/ I . H 91 I~
6~ '-'IJLlIJ" t
,
I'
r
f
/'/ ')
/' y:- /f I
,/ '<l'l', ,,//!
/ '() ') /-~. I '
, '/ ", .
,,,// _.,- '
~~. ' // ,"', /~..;."-. '. -""\
. ' / ~ /.; . ,
, ; //' ' / ~,. ", " I
, ~.'
i ., /" ' /;/
./ ' ,/'. .
/' '> //
// I> /"/"
/ " " Cl!:i
/''' U1-
" -'\ /"., b ~ -:::
/ '" om >'
/ . /' OZ ~
/' 6 //"> \,
/ ,~ .~ p j
/' , 1 ;/. / ,/ i,"
, ' ~ / ,eX V '/
, 1 ,/ ' '
/ /' "
I ' " ;'::// . /..? ,:C( · :,
-.d tl' 'I i'/ ,/ /,~ cO, ' "~I
,/ ' ~, '
( /" /:;::::. .. '
, /, ' I
~ . ~~ '
/ \ p" . ',," ~ '.' J ,
,_ \ \, \ ,"', b !?? / , "-"" '" · il
" I' ,,'" / ~;;:= =.
~\ 0 ~ __;-"""cf' ' ~,
, 1 //=-- /~ .
~\~ ,~~ ~~yc~/~ /~'J "'\-/11 ~
,\ 0 ~ <f'" ,'~ ' <
,00 ///. 1m
o Il -",/" ~ d ~
\!'l:ll \~"~ g~ -41 m
, ~ <" > /' //' oV \
\' ' \ "-"'./ '
. . . ,---" ~ \
'\ ... /~ ~,,~~~~ \'
\"..~ ,~ /~
'\ (\.:,~ ~-:.;...;:::::::-.~~~~~~
,. ",/~
~\ ' ~--.:::----- -
\, " ----~-~
I~~~ ".
,~;;..;#f~' ,"' ' 1 ,/,------
~ -.::-- ' "'" 1 ' ,/' - ,/
~' ...__,/ I " " 0 ' ,/"
~' . . 0 0 ,...--'------
~ <t !!? ..----- ~-------
Jil ,,~"' ------
." ~
~.,." ' m "
, ___ .." '.. !!l 0
~ ~ ~, " > ;;:
.', ;;:~Z
. -. ~ ~
~ Z'
V ~r
--.----.-- - >---- ---
~,-::-~~~=.----.----- E aliO
__,-~--".~LNnoo -. -. ,- ~
_/ ------- - --~~~-=--
,-------- ~-
-
~....:..:__ . ~:&:i~:t!7~o~;-.:~.., t'.....,.,~'jI.
~~ Hoyt Develo.p'm- "t ,. ----- "
u uti..., en Com "'=-
:!lO~ "",-"""'.... " pany -- - ...."-..." ......
~~Pi~~s~:ip:-':-ciN~~=~~:~~:_'--
-_. ----.
//
// ~
,,- \
/ '\
'"
,,-
.~: /'
" r-
t ~. '" m ,
'" /'
~(p '" -.
~~
;m ,.
'" '"
'11 '" ":
lir '. .:
oJ>
Z
,. .
/ I>
'<l
',<
-- ' -~\l
.-
r,
----....~
,,- ----
--
I
-4 \-l' .....
.....
-<
:l:
;p
I <
m
!"l~ z
c
m
\ ~ ,
I
1
"\ ~~;
/~
~
:a
~ m"D
VI.O
-1-1
VI>m
:;cz
m:a-l
>-
z> I
.-1 r ~ -
,
~/ .1
,.. ,
/' /'
-- -- ,- .:....
---- - ----- C OVOl:! Al.NnOO
.' _~_-- M__'~~_______' - --- ~- ~"":: "'~_.,_~,_. ,.. ,_-=:::....~_.-;.:.-:.:..==-....::..==-=~.~.~..1
.-.' ..__ _.._.________4.__..__
-.......
-,------_.-_.~-- .-, '---.. ---. _. . -~ .' --.--.,. --- . .--" - --- . -- ", ......
------ " "
",
(1@'\gJ
=~
c:1lUiiil ~''E''':'I.:..O-~~~'' I ('o.~"!-:!~ I "![l~""~'_'PO'''.''J,.t/'': .....,. -.'. ' .-
1iiiiJ~ = :- Hoyl Development Company 0Il_, . - ---.- Architecls Professional Association
- ---. -- -_.- -.--
'i2J~ -.--'---'-- ,..---.
-~---------
iIIr'lutfMl:Q,wnr...IlQttJ.N;............II1Il~ -..---.------.--.- .--- - .
~F::g ____.R .___"..~_~__. -,., UK tlIJUI'" ~ 1!JO l'lIuo.t.. lM"l!lllTJ ....... _= ta.o",,"
~ ~~]:~!~a~~o p. ern~: ~EN~T~iE~'~'~.::: -.:'::-~!:':.~:~~:::.~::~~~;~~~~~~~.~~::~~~~~~;~;;:~~..
o ~:w
::!:J::g~
" I