JNS BLOG EDITORIAL: Gopher 94 Liquor License Denial Was A Victory For North Minneapolis, Not Merwin Liquors...

Photo and blog post by John Hoff

With the dust now settled over the issue of the Gopher 94 Liquor license denial, a matter reported in the Star Tribune and other media, it seems a good time to examine what happened with the issue and what DID NOT happen with the issue.

First, and most unfortunately, far too much attention was focused on the self-serving and hypocritical role of Merwin Liquors, a competitor, who not only expressed opposition to a liquor license for Gopher 94 but took things a step further: providing a bus to bring citizens to the city council meeting and distributing flyers like the one pictured above. Frankly, citizens and neighborhood activists could have won this battle on their own, just fine, without any...

...so-called "assistance" from Merwin Liquors, whose involvement actually detracted from the legitimate points made by ordinary citizens. In fact, Merwin might want to take a good hard look at many of the proposed rules that Gopher 94 was willing to live under and start imposing those standards on itself instead of actually pandering to chronic inebriates. If the folks behind Gopher 94 are upset, they have a right to be. But there's no sense painting Merwin Liquors as a powerful player in this drama. The City Council vote rejecting the license wasn't BECAUSE of Merwin Liquors raising its voice, but IN SPITE of Merwin.

As for the citizens who came on the Merwin-sponsored bus and spoke, WHO CARES how they arrived at city hall? If the Hawthorne Hawkman doesn't have a working vehicle and I give him a ride, that doesn't make the Hawthorne Hawkman my spokesmodel.

But now, with a liquor license denied for Gopher 94, we are left to ask "Where do we go from here?" What kind of project will reside at that corner?

Whatever it is, I hope it isn't "more of the same," by which I mean:

1. Liquor stores, particularly those selling "Mad Dog 20/20."

2. Housing projects that announce great hopes and dreams, but are likely to turn into a dystopian nightmare about as quickly as the carpeting loses its "new carpet smell." Click here for an example.

3. Any greasy food establishment with "Chicago" in the name. Seriously, the other day I saw a fried chicken place going up near Little Caeser's Pizza at Hawthorn (sic) Crossings strip mall, and I was ECSTATIC because at least it was Louisiana-style, not Chicago-style, and even though it was more fried food on West Broadway at least leaving "Chicago" out of the establishment name represents meaningful progress.

Here are some of my nominations for future development at the site of BJ's strip club:

1. A CVS Pharmacy.

2. A gas station.

3. A sit-down restaurant.

4. Nothing. Just tear the strip club down and leave the lot empty for the time being.

DENIED!!! Full Council Rejects Liquor License At Gopher 94 Development!

Stock photo and blog post by John Hoff

Word comes via a neighborhood listserv that the full City Council voted this morning and has denied a liquor license at Washington & Broadway in the proposed "Land Ho" development.

Previous information about the license being APPROVED, click here, was apparently not the final word.

JNS blog anticipates neighbors will be ecstatic. The fact competitor Merwin Liquors will also be ecstatic is the only fly in our revitalization ointment or, in this case, a worm in our tequila.

On another, more quirky note: the planned development at the strip club is known as "Land Ho?" Seriously?!

(Do Not Click "Read More")

Approval For Liquor Store At The Current BJ's Strip Club Site...

Photo and blog post by John Hoff

Despite outcries by a number of citizens in North Minneapolis, word reaches me the city council recently approved a liquor store at the current BJ's strip club located at the intersection of West Broadway and Washington Avenue North. The only bright spot in this news was surely the disappointment felt by Merwin Liquors, who actually...

...sponsored a bus to bring people to the city council hearing and distributed fliers saying, in so many words, "We don't need another liquor store in North Minneapolis."

Somehow this statement comes across as less-than-sincere when it comes from the lips of A COMPETING LIQUOR STORE. It's kind of like a strip club saying, "We don't need another strip club right down the street!" (Credit for this example goes to the Hawthorne Hawkman)

Despite this setback, neighbors are somewhat hopeful this project might be a high end liquor store and not another Merwin Liquors. Apparently specific promises have been made about not selling fortified wines and not allowing transactions made with nothing but coins. All the same, it's going to be tough to see a liquor store replacing a strip club as any kind of progress.

At least there's no anecdotal evidence of liquor store clerks becoming straw buyers in North Minneapolis mortgage fraud schemes, unlike strippers. Click here for an example.

Master Engineering To Be Involved In BJ's Replacement Project, Here Are Other Examples Of Their Work

Photos and blog post by John Hoff

Excitement has been building, and discussion growing about the plan to replace the unsightly and tawdry B.J.'s strip club with a bakery and liquor store, hopefully both of the high-end variety. Click here for a blog post announcing the plan to replace B.J.'s, and click here for more discussion.

Clearly, the last thing we need in North Minneapolis would be more liquor stores going out of their way to market to chronic inebriates. Though my position is I would be in favor of a taco stand instead of B.J.'s, (did I mention a vacant lot would satisfy me, too?) But I'm keeping my fingers crossed that "liquor store" means something high-end, with a selection of gourmet foods and NO ATTEMPTS MADE TO CAPTURE THE CHRONIC INEBRIATE MARKET BY, FOR EXAMPLE, SELLING SINGLE PLASTIC CUPS.

As part of this discussion about replacing B.J.'s, I thought it would be good to show...

...examples of two other buildings which show the gorgeous handiwork of Master Engineers. Both of these buildings are quite near the proposed B.J.'s development. The top picture shows one building that houses a legal clinic, the bottom three pictures are all the same building.

Hawkman's Different Angle on the BJ's Proposal

Commentary post by the Hawthorne Hawkman, photo by Johnny Northside

After reading a previous post about potential development at the BJ's site and the developer's requests for multiple variances, I have my own reaction to the proposal. Those reactions wouldn't fit well under a comment section, so they get their own blog post.

I should note that my personal position as a resident of north Minneapolis is different than what has been articulated. For instance...

...I don't consider BJ's to be a "problem property" or "problem business" in the way that such places have been defined on this blog. They operate legally, with the proper licenses, and whatever happens there stays there. I haven't seen illegal activities coming and going from the place. (Unlike Absolute Tire across the street, where residents have reported drug dealing taking place among the patrons on site.) It's kind of like our own version of Las Vegas. A cheaper, far less glamorous Las Vegas.

My only issue with BJ's is that I do not want a strip club to be located in a gateway to north Minneapolis. I don't care if it's a "gentleman's club" or some supposedly higher class of strippers and clientele, this corner is the wrong place for such a business precisely because of the impression it leaves on people passing by.

Also, I really, REALLY want to see a Surdyk's-style liquor store and a French Meadows-style restaurant/bakery on the site. I absolutely love those two places and would be proud to claim them as part of my community - especially Surdyk's, one of the few places that carries bison grass vodka.

BUT

I added the "-style" suffix because at this time I don't believe either Surdyk's or French Meadows has committed to relocating or expanding to this site. Those are only two POSSIBLE tenants (or styles of tenants) that have been bandied about.

The current proposal asks for far too much in the way of variances and exceptions from the West Broadway Alive plan. Page six of the staff report states that the "building on this block face, at 201 West Broadway, is a single story office building. Allowing this pattern to continue would create a development pattern that is not consistent with the policy for this area."

Given Master Construction's ties to 201 West Broadway and the proposal in question, giving them leeway to construct a one-story building on the first new construction after the implementation of a comprehensive plan would smack of insider baseball politics. And there definitely needs to be more curb appeal for the side of the building facing West Broadway.

Regarding the request for a one-story variance, the staff report goes on to state: "Furthermore, the proposed single-story building results in an underutilization of the site....Underdeveloped sites are detrimental to the long-term vitality of West Broadway. Low intensity commercial developments spread the commercial district and increase the distance between commercial establishments. This makes the commercial district less attractive because it is not as convenient to come to the district and pick up goods and services from multiple businesses. For this reason, mechanisms should be put in place to deter new low intensity development, and particularly single story commercial developments." (emphasis mine)

One of the reasons the proposal has requested such a variance was because of their claim to need more parking spaces than the bare minimum. While they are significantly below the maximum number of parking spaces allowed, the staff report makes it clear that they have the option of reducing some parking to create a two-story structure that complies with the West Broadway Alive plan.

While we ought to vigorously defend the WBA Plan, I do think there is room for some degree of flexibility here. However, I agree with the staff report that this is a new construction proposal, so the requested variances are entirely of the making of Land Ho - not based on pre-existing conditions. And although I would not want to corner a developer into a plan with little chance of success, I'm not yet convinced that their proposed differences from the Plan are necessary.

There is a very real danger in deviating too far from the original plan. The sentiment for allowing variances at this site appears to stem largely from the hope that we can transform BJ's into something as cool as a French Meadows/Surdyk's combination. But now that the world's largest YWCA isn't coming to Broadway, we need proposals for what to do along Broadway and Aldrich. Who knows what the current or eventual owners will propose for that vacant lot now? What if it's a one-story fried food shack/payday loan/stolen cell phone/used furniture/dice-throwing strip mall, modeled to be consistent with both Hawthorn Crossings and the exceptions granted to Land Ho?

The criteria that the city uses to grant or deny such variance requests can rarely (if ever) take into account that some people like one business but not another. They can, and often must, consider similar variances granted elsewhere. Olympic Cafe's expanded hours is a very recent example of exactly that. If we weaken the West Broadway Alive plan right out of the gates, the whole thing risks being shot to sunshine.

The Land Ho proposal also has major shortfalls in the area of landscaping. I'd go into more detail about that, but this post is already dry enough. Still that's just one more area where this could use more improvement.

The other potentially significant concern with the proposal as I read it is the emphasis of "North Loop" over "Near North" or north Minneapolis as the community identifier. North Loop references outnumber north Minneapolis references at a rate of 11 to 1.

The North Loop neighborhood is just as far away from the site as the St. Anthony East neighborhood. Why not call the project the St. Anthony East gateway while we're at it?

For those readers whose sensibilities are so offended by the presence of BJ's that you want just about ANYTHING different at the site, I submit that the designation of the proposal as the "North Loop Gateway" should be downright offensive. We in north Minneapolis have endured the blight of BJ's for DECADES. And now, just as something truly exciting comes along, something that will quite literally change the face of our community, the project is named after a neighborhood several blocks away. NOT ACCEPTABLE. Even "Ya Baby" is better than this.

If "North Loop Gateway" appears only on some site plans that hardly anybody will read five years from now, then this is really a non-issue. But if the design of the building (and any signage) points people away from north Minneapolis and towards other neighborhoods, that's when we need to stand up and demand that our community receive our share of the benefits such an exciting development will bring.

I want to see BJ's replaced with the proposed businesses, and I hope Land Ho and Master Construction continue with their plan. However, based on the proposal put forward, and my understanding of it, I cannot support it at this time. We deserve better in NoMi.

BJ's Strip Club On West Broadway May Soon GO AWAY FOREVER (And Good Riddance)

Photo and blog post by John Hoff

Word comes that BJ's strip club--which squats in all its sad, neon squalor at the intersection of Washington Avenue and West Broadway--may soon GO AWAY FOREVER. There is a proposal before the City Council to replace BJ's with a French Meadow bakery and a "Surdyk's style" liquor store.

I assume "Surdyk's style" means the store would sell high-end gourmet products such as assorted cheeses, not just liquor.

For a copy of all the details of the proposal, click here.

It should be noted that even though Northside neighbors are nearly giddy about the possibility of the nasty strip club going away (there are persistent rumors of a stripper with an old bullet wound in her rear end, and the fact their marque sign persistently says NO COVER reveals far too much about the quality of the establishment) there are already doubts and objections about the plans, most of which center on the fact the proposed building is NOT two stories high.

The West Broadway Alive! plan (note objectionable mid-point punctuation, I've gone on about this issue recently, click here) specifies that new buildings on West Broadway should be...

...at least two stories. And the proposed development is NOT two stories.

My guest contributors are free to take another position on the matter, but for myself my position is clear: anything to get rid of BJ's strip club. This establishment lends a tawdry, vice-ridden, depressing air to an area which is the gateway to North Minneapolis. Honestly, if somebody wanted to bulldoze BJ's and put in a small trailer house selling tacos, I would get behind that idea. ANYTHING TO GET RID OF BJ's.

Naturally, there will be other positions articulated about this important matter of development--and I'm happy to sponsor that vital discussion on this blog--but I don't see my position shifting on this matter one little bit:

Two stories is a fine goal, but there are times one needs to compromise for the greater good. Getting rid of this slummy, low-end strip club is precisely that kind of moment.