Cond. Use Permit-R.L. Johnson•
Issues to Consider.
0
Supporting Documents.
o Site Plan
Nancy . • Anderson
Commu ty Development
Analyst
0
May 24, 1988 Planning Report: CUP88 -8
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - R.L. JOHNSON
11th Avenue South & County Road #3 -
Proposed Action.
Staff recommends the following motion: That the request by R.L.Johnson
to construct a retail strip center is approved by Resolution No: 88-
43.
Approval of this motion will allow the applicant to construct the
proposed retail strip center.
Overview.
R.L. Johnson is proposing to construct an 18,800 sq.ft. retail strip
center on the southeast corner of County Road #3 and 11th Avenue
South. This development will be for a restaurant with a seating
capacity of 150 and small retail stores and /or professional offices.
The restaurant will be applying for a liquor license. The site
presently zoned B -3. The applicant wants to start construction July 1
and open in November.
What is the impact on the surrounding area?
How does this proposal affect future transportation
issues?
o Location Map o Site Proposal
o Resolution
•
•
CUP88 -8
Page 2
Site Proposal.
The following is a list of the ordinance requirements and the proposed
project:
B -3 Proposed
Front Yard 1' Approx. 56'
Rear Yard 15' 60'
Side Yard N 10' N 110'
s 0' 3 33'
Height 45' 1 story
Parking * 114 150'
* This requirement is based on the building being a
restaurant with a seating capacity of 150 and the rest of
the building being 100% office at a ratio of 1 space to 200
sq.ft. of gross floor area.
Signage.
The applicant is proposing a sign at the corner of 11th Avenue South &
County Road #3. In addition to this sign, each tenant will have a
1111 sign on the building. The signage will be similar to the Auto Mall
signage.
Exterior.
The exterior will consist of brick and a painted metal exterior. The
color of the metal is not decided as of yet. The brick is proposed to
be gray.
Land Exchanges.
This project will involve the exchange and sale of land. The
intersection at 11th Avenue and County Road 3 will be widened in the
near future. The land along 11th Avenue South is owned by the
applicant, but needed for the widening of 11th Avenue. The land along
County Road #3 is owned by the City, but needed for parking in this
project. The City is proposing to exchange the land along 11th Avenue
for land along County Road #3 and then sell additional land to the
applicant along County Road #3. The site plan reflects the new lot
lines.
Traffic Flow.
There will be two egress /ingress points, one from 11th Avenue and a
second from County Road #3. The access from County Road #3 will be at
the approximate area of 8th Avenue. The egress /ingress on 11th Avenue
will be aligned with an egress /ingress on the west side of 11th
Avenue. Access to the City water tower will be from County Road 13.
The access point from 8th Avenue will have to be upgraded. We will be
working the applicant to design a road which will serve both the
City's and the applicants needs.
•
CUP88 -8
page 3
Landscaping.
The applicant has submitted a landscape plan. The site is required to
have 33 trees; the plan shows 15 trees. The applicant has stated that
they will try to add a few more trees within the parking lot.
However, in order to meet the landscape requirements, parking spaces
would have to be used. The applicant does have extra parking but the
staff feels that the parking is needed rather than the landscaping.
The plan shows additional landscaping that does not count for the
ordinance requirements. Sidewalk will be constructed along 11th Avenue
and County Road 3.
Drainage.
The Director of Engineering has reviewed the plans and found them
acceptable The applicant is doing a EAW. This EAW has been started.
It should be noted there are several easements which are on the site.
Fire.
The Fire Marshall has reviewed the plans and recommended that another
fire hydrant be added to the east end of the site.
Temporary Parking.
Part of the City owned land will be used as parking during the
construction of the parking ramp. Approximately 30 spaces will be
needed. This area will be on the east side of the site and should not
create a problem.
CCDC.
CCDC has the plans to the proposed development. As of the date of
this report they had not reviewed them.
ANALYSIS.
- How does this proposal affect future transporation?
One of the staff's concerns with this site is the impact on the
intersection. There will be a traffic study done by Benshoof in the
very near future and this should tell us the timing of when to begin
improvements. We know improvements will have to be made at the
intersection we just do not know the timing. The Capital
Improvements Program has budgeted money for the upgrading of the
intersection.
The access road to the development from 8th Avenue will have to be
upgraded also. This access road to the development will be coordinated
the Park and Ride. This access point in the future will also serve
the development to the south, what ever that maybe. The staff will be
working with the applicant to determine the best way to utilize this
1111 area both for the proposed development and the future development to
the south. For this development the roadway will be 25 feet in width,
but the development of the 13 acre site to to south will dictate the
need for a improved road.
CUP88 -8
page 4
One of the proposed routes for the LRT is on 9th Avenue. This route
will be to the east of the proposed developement and should not have
an impact on this project.
- What is the impact on the surrounding area?
The site plan provides access to the 13 acre site to the south. The
exact design of the roadway into the site has not been determined as
of yet, but we know that an improved road will be needed.
The Public Works has reviewed the plan and found it acceptable.
There will be access to the water tower and the proposed building is
the required 75 feet away from the water tower.
The directional sign on the corner of County Road 3 and 11th Avenue
will remain until the improvements are made to the intersection.
The staff finds the aestetics acceptable.
Alternatives.
1. Approve the Conditional Use Permit to construct the strip
center with conditions. If the Commission approves the
Conditional Use Permit the applicant will be able to
construct the proposed development.
2. Deny the Conditional Use Permit. The applicant will not
be able to construct the strip center as proposed. If
the Commission chooses this alternative they will have to
identify Findings of Fact to support their denial.
Continue for further information. If the Commission
feels that further information is needed, the item should
be continued.
-- 134.31 - ••
.r.•;•• • . , :."4" "'
; • y
• • ; I
goo 40 • * ••
HENNEpIN c °um 5 ra r E ASO
r
1.
4. 5.yr, mr-k.•.
tz, •• ..:••••••
t
r ,
44. "3•M
Z.;
Lir
8 U •
• • •
t i .• ....::::,:''
401
F3.3 ,rLCMC4 C.4./.C
4 ar4.00 3.4s0J e,
3 40rm0s C.
041t4 tflflt
• J. C.A/rAf.triy
• G./..rnt• A. .2 f (4.4'01431 4"
190.00
•-• • „... T
110
. - • ta..
_....! .. i.,,..•,...., ,,... w ra.s..,...4 s..„ - c.. . 1„. • ' 0‘ ' I f , • : - : 14,.?Zo.i.0■21‘CII■,:ri.
SC* C '
Y . •
04,r, .,..... ., 1 tit . $.1 . r.I4Pr! 1 i i '
. I JO Li .. I !I or .L211-4±„...KH:...i.,..: . E__ ._ _._, % ''
.0, ' 4,2'0 •• 4.2.00 • ' ' '''' :----'-----(..: 1
%. Ilipil
...... a ., , . .. 0' - i
.' "t,
tr: vj
3600 Si. s A
' Se
G 0 '
tf.
LCIAONG
•J444,1.Y.43'
o
v. 0
••
2EI KLINEFELTER LANOSCAPES, INC.
7300 1.•XEL.0 4100801, •ROOKLIM 1.110, MN 55434
11121 414.31770
HIGHWAY Ha 3
• ••
. —
04.00,0 110.4 *061
7004.5 're* st•••••40.4••••
3.44.444b • sp..* 400.0
41.37.• M. V • 1
r.A.T - 1 , -VICr•AD
b4e34174 fl74"I/3
VAISW040'1 /11 4,4.1.44,
2
Y
W .1400
4.• 30
tie avr
•
SITIACtr alt.ttrommENts 3 ostitror
CFCM'Wo orni•rut
=WO AY caR13 left
REM *so
T.
1 i
1 .
SCALE: I • 50'
0
• I
!..1
11;■
i fi!!
7 ■.fr
1
4
6
9
10
1
1
FLOOR PLAN
III••
STRIP CENTER
CO.RD. 3 1 11TH AVE.
HOPKINS, MINNESOTA
YID
1 CO,, INC.
1: loam
11C 10?
SOUX11 V01011 11 01140
Adopted this 5 day of July, 1988.
CITY OF HOPKINS
Hennepin County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO: 88 -43
RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND APPROVING
APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP88 -8
WHEREAS, an application for a Conditional Use Permit
CUP88 -8 has been made by R. L. Johnson Investments to construct a
strip mall with a restaurant and six commercial /business spaces
at the southeast corner of County Road #3 and llth Avenue South
be approved with Conditions.
WHEREAS, the procedural history of the application is
as follows:
1. That an application for Conditional Use Permit
CUP88 -8 was filed with the City of Hopkins on May 6,
1988,
2. That the Hopkins Planning Commission reviewed such
application on May 31, 1988.
3. That the Hopkins Planning Commission, pursuant to
published and mailed notices, held a public hearing
on May 31, 1988; 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 the Hopkins City
Council makes the following Findings of Fact in respect to
Conditional Use Permit CUP88 -8:
1. That the proposed building meets the requirements
for a B -3 district.
2. That the proposed uses are permitted in a B -3
district.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that application for
Conditional Use Permit CUP88 -8 is hereby approved subject to the
following conditions:
1. That temporary parking is allowed on the site for
the ramp construction workers.
2. That the City and the applicant arrange for the
transfer of property.
3. That the EAW is found acceptable.
4. That the landscaping is increased with a plan
acceptable to the staff.
5. That an adequate roadway to 8th is constructed.
6. That the access on llth Avenue will be determined
when the design of the intersection is finalized.
Donald J. Milbert, Mayor
�' CENTER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
I
•
HOPKINS MINNESOTA
June 27, 1988
The Honorable Mayor Donald Milbert
City Council Members
Zoning and Planning Commission Members
Hopkins City Hall
1010 First Street South
Hopkins, MN 55343
Re: Proposed R. L. Johnson Investments Development
at the Southeast Corner of County Road #3 and
11th Avenue South
Dear Mayor Milbert, Council Members and Commissioners:
On June 23rd a group of business persons including the City
Center Development Corporation and the Hopkins Task Force
considered the R. L. Johnson proposal. Presentations were made
by representatives of the developer and Steven Mielke on behalf
of the City. Written reports were also presented on behalf of
Laventhol & Horwath regarding the impact on the market analysis
and by Benshoof & Associates, Inc., regarding traffic
considerations. The motion adopted by the group contained three
points:
1. The group does not object
concept.
COMMENTS:
the proposed development
The proposal was generally considered to contribute to the
critical mass described in the market analysis. Suggestions
in the L. & H. letter dated June 20, 1988 to "ensure that
the development is beneficial to downtown businesses" were
rejected as unrealistic; however, the developer should be
asked to propose and incorporate ideas on identifying the
design and name with the downtown business area.
2. The City should not negotiate, change zoning or make City
owned property available for the proposal until the
development of the entire property under control of R. L.
Johnson is determined through a development agreement or
PUD.
VOLUNTA PR.cca me TOWARDSt ccsammvm7r DEVELOPMENT
•
Page 2 of 2
June 27, 1988
COMMENTS:
3. Any action by the City must include a determination of the
traffic needs and concerns for the entire area both West and
East of 11th Avenue South.
COMMENTS:
The concerns of the overall City, the downtown business
community, the existing businesses in the immediate area,
and the proposed businesses must all be weighed. The City
should begin working with the existing businesses which will
be affected by the upgrading of 11th Avenue and the
intersection.
The business community appreciates this opportunity to
participate in the development process. The cooperation and
input of all parties can be beneficial to overall development
goals and accomplishments.
Sincerely,
Nelson W. Berg
CCDC Acting President
Hopkins Task Force Chair
NWB /lb
The City should follow a plan rather than react to each step
presented by the developer. The entire site is critical in
establishing an employment base necessary for a strong
retail /service business community. The City should not be
reluctant to place conditions on the sale of its strip of
land to get the best project on both this site and the
adjacent thirteen acre site. On the other hand, the
developer has a right to develope the land which it fully
controls if no City land or concessions are required.