Hello City Pages Readers!

We at NAP thought that we'd closed up shop, but with the City Pages article, we thought we'd provide a quick recap of our concerns regarding bringing Porky's to Central:

1. St. Paul Porky's had high levels of police calls, crime, and nuisance issues compared to comparable businesses. St. Paul police: "(Porky's) proved to be undependable."

2. Land use: the new Porky's neighbors single family homes and the drive thru exits 40 feet from the front door of the adjacent home.
Consider where new fast food restaurants are being built; typically, new fast food restaurants are situated away from homes to minimize the effects of high traffic level and loudspeakers.

3. Land use: the lot of the new Porky's is too small: 1/3 acre. The St. Paul Porky's has about an acre and most other fast food restaurants lots that are .75-1.25 acres.

4. Land use: The Porky's lot and neighboring public land needed to be rezoned to allow Porky's to develop. The zoning code is a contract between residents and the city, so both sides know what kind of development can occur. If a parcel of land is rezoned, it is normally agreed to by the residents and city. In this instance, the adjacent neighbors views were ignored. Who will be ignored next?

5. Inconsistent development principles: other businesses proposed uses for the site that required rezoning, but the city and council member quietly rebuffed the proposals. For the Porky's proposal, the city rezoned the adjacent public property to allow Porky's to build.

6. Near another problem fast food restaurant: neighbors regularly complain to the city regarding the Burger King 1 block south. Yet, the city has not adequately monitored that site. Can the city manager to monitor another fast food restaurant?

Those were our main thoughts. Clearly the city disagreed the city council approved Porky's 10-3 and included many conditions for building and operations.

Clearly, time will tell what kind of neighbor Porky's will be. We are hopeful Porky's will be a good neighbor.

NAP

Conditions?!?! What Conditions?

To gain permission to build the NE Porky's, Porky's agreed to 16 conditions for operating and constructing the business. During construction, at least 4 conditions were ignored:
1. Work with Public Works to "structurally direct traffic exiting from the site to turn left onto 19th Ave NE;
2. The applicant will work with Public Works to implement a curb bump-out at the corner of 19th and Central Avenues NE;
3. A masonry wall along the public alley shall be installed in order to buffer noise from the residential properties to the east;
4. All site improvements shall be completed by December 1, 2007.

What is the points of agreeing to conditions if a business just decides to ignore them? Is this a business that can be trusted?

Neighbors Against Porky's
--NeighborsAgainstPorkys@gmail.com--

NE Porky's Throws Ostrow Under the Bus

While tattling on the city on the Mischke Broadcast on Wednesday, the manager of NE Porky's singled CM Paul Ostrow out for forcing them to comply with the conditions Porky's agreed to follow.

Nice move Porky's! Ostrow was your strongest supporter and you decide to toss him aside. That's bizarre.

--Neighbors Against Porky's--
neighborsagainstporkys@gmail.com

Porky's Opens; Porky's Closes

The manager of the Northeast Porky's called into the Mischke Broadcast on AM 1500 yesterday (Dec 19th) to announce that the city of Minneapolis forced Porky's to shut its doors.

The city cited them for not adhering to the conditions of operations Porky's agreed to abide by. Specifically, Porky's did not construct the exit driveway to direct traffic turn left on 19th Ave NE (condition #7).

Porky's Minneapolis opened on Saturday December 15th. NAP is surprised that the city did not inspect Porky's prior to the opening.

--Neighbors Against Porky's--
neighborsagainstporkys@gmail.com

Court Ruling Emboldens Neighbors

On Friday, December 8th, a Hennepin District Judge ruled the city of Edina violated its ordinances when the city bypassed its Zoning board and granted variances to a development in the city.

This ruling's rulings precedent may be exactly what neighbors need as precedent if a lawsuit proceeds.

The Star Tribune published the following article:

Edina residents who challenged a 17-story condominium tower proposed for the city's Centennial Lakes development won their court case last week when a judge ruled that the city violated its own ordinances and state law in bypassing the Zoning Board of Appeals to grant variances.

Zoning boards would be "mere window dressing -- impotent to effect the ends they were established to serve" if cities could routinely bypass them, said Hennepin District Judge Harry S. Crump.

In response, City Council Member Scot Housh said the city followed procedures it has used in many similar cases. "I don't think we were doing anything inappropriate," he said Friday.

Over the objections of neighbors, the City Council voted 3-2 in May to approve the project, which would include stores and restaurants on the site of a defunct movie theater.

John E. Bohan and his wife, Janet, who live at Centennial Lakes, took the city to court over the proposed building at 7311 France Av. S.

John Bohan said people who buy property in Edina should be able to depend on the city code's requirements. "To grant a variance for a 17-story building in an area that in effect is limited to four or five stories is slapping the homeowners in the area in the face," he said.

Minneapolis attorney Steven Champlin, who represents the developer, Dallas-based Cypress Equities, said no decision on whether to appeal has been made. And because the judge's ruling was based on city procedures, not the merits of the case, the developer could reapply and go through city processes again, he said.

Bohan said that other high-rise buildings in the works in Edina concern him. "The city is now, I presume, going to comply with the code," he said. "If they don't, they'll be back in court."

Donna Halvorsen • 612-673-1709 • dhalvorsen@startribune.com


--Neighbors Against Porky's--
neighborsagainstporkys@gmail.com

Local "Pork Tenderloin" Blogger Says Porky's Disappoints

A local Twin Cities blogger who focuses on the Twin Cities food scene declares that Porky's will disappoint Northeast Minneapolis.

His post is below or here:


A New Porky’s?

Last Friday (12-1-2006) the Minneapolis City Council paved the way for a new Porky’s to be built in northeast Minneapolis through re-zoning over the objections of a strong neighborhood action group. The existing Porky’s is on University Avenue in St. Paul. We visited Porky’s in St. Paul last April and tried their pork tenderloin sandwich as captioned above. Porky’s is a drive-in that is really no longer a drive-in in that there is no car service with trays. It is now strictly a drive-through window or inside lobby pickup place. You can choose to sit in your car and eat but it would and should be considered a take-out service not much different than a pizza take-out shop. Since it was built in 1953 at the height of the cruising era it is considered the place for classic cars to cruise.

Potential classic car cruising seemed to be the most objectionable aspect of the new Porky’s. It should be just as accessible as the University Avenue Porky’s to the 10,000 Back to the 50s classic cars that congregate every June at the Minnesota State Fair Grounds. No doubt Central Avenue could jamb up over that weekend.

Now my take. Porky’s is living off nostalgia. It is not the place it used to be. As recently as 2002 it received a City Pages best drive-in award despite the fact it was not a drive-in anymore. There are more deserving places such as the Minnetonka Drive-in in Spring Park and the Peppermint Twist in Delano. However, nostalgia is evidently strong. It might serve the University Avenue Porky’s well. But the truth is they serve a lower tier breaded pork tenderloin sandwiches and onion rings. On the day we were there the tenderloin and onion rings tasted as if the oil had been way over used. The onion rings stuck together in a very gnarly presentation. The service was slow, uninspiring and indifferent. My second opinion taster, my wife, says it is the worst we’ve had. I was asked if there was a monster lurking in those onion rings on one message board. The tenderloin was not a classic and was served on toast and probably was a food service company pre-prepared meat ready to plop in the fryer. The existing Porky’s is a tired place living off its past--being milked for all its worth. If you find current comments and blogs about Porky’s Drive-in online, other than mine, it would seem nostalgia is enough. It is not for me. I’ve had too many good pork tenderloin sandwiches to know better.

So what is the deal with the new Porky’s? It will not have the nostalgia game to live off of. It is supposed to have seating for 30 with only 9 parking stalls. They will depend on neighborhood walk-in for those same neighbors so adamantly against it. It will not be a drive-in. So that gambit is out for cruisers. If the service and offering turns out to be the same as the University Avenue Porky’s it will not be well received. Let’s hope Porky’s revamps its food and service. This is a chance to make a destination place for a pork tenderloin sandwich with the classic name of Porky’s. But if they don’t improve, I suggest you go six blocks up the street to Sully’s Pub & Restaurant.

--Neighbors Against Porky's--
neighborsagainstporkys@gmail.com

Letter of the Day

A neighbor concerned about the Porky's process sent this letter to Mayor Rybak:

Mayor Rybak,

Your position is to represent the people of this city and their wishes. The residents of both Windom Park and Holland Neighborhoods have stated that they do not wish for this establishment as a drive thru in their neighborhoods on Central Ave. There have been twenty-five meetings in the last fifteen months put on by the neighborhoods. The feed back has been a resounding "No" to Porky's. Our council member, Paul Ostrow, did not like this answer and held his own meeting in the low income highrise on Central. Even at this meeting, the majority did not want Porky's. The voice of the populace here in Northeast is being ignored. It is not the first time that city politicians held their own meetings to get the feedback that they wanted.

When all these meetings are combine with the way that the zoning was changed for this vacant lot, it seems that the City of Minneapolis' position does not smell like roses. The City of Minneapolis did not respond within the state required sixty days to its own request. Therefore, the request for the zoning change becomes automatic. Mayor Rybak, how does this sound to you? Do we have a breakdown in city admin? Or are we just giving lip service to the old phrase of "I want to represent the people of this great city".

A drive thru also does not follow the Central Avenue Plan of being pedestrian friendly. Councilman Ostrow would not let CVS be built set back from the street because it had to be "pedestrian friendly". Residents were suppose to feel safer walking to CVS. Minneapolis has set a precident here. I know you have fond memories of riding your bike to Porky's. Those days have disappeared. It is no longer safe to let your child ride on Central Ave. Only last week we had a double shooting, with one individual losing his life, within a few blocks of this proposed business.

As an active resident of Northeast Minneapolis, I am asking you to reconsider what the role of your position as Mayor is. You do not wear a crown. Many of my neighbors and I are watching to see what you do. Will you lead by the wishes of the people of this part of the city or lead by your own wishes?

A very concerned citizen


--Neighbors Against Porky's--neighborsagainstporkys@gmail.com

Rezoning based on Error, Nostalgia, & Onion Rings

CM Gary Schiff stated that the Porky's rezoning was based on staff error & "nostalgia and onion rings."

Detailed in a Star Tribune article, Schiff shared that "issue should have never come forward."

Why not? For every consideration of rezoning, the city uses the following statement for guidance to determine if a rezoning application should be considered:
"Whether the amendment is in the public interest and is not solely for the interest of a single property owner."

Both CM Ostrow and Mayor admitted that the appeal of this fast-food drive-thru is happy memories created from biking to Porky's years ago. As a letter to the editor in the Star Tribune stated, this kind of fascination with Porky's is bizarre: especially with all the other issues facing Minneapolis.

What is next? Upcoming posts will detail what Neighbors Against Porky's is hearing.

--Neighbors Against Porky's--
neighborsagainstporkys@gmail.com

City Council Approves Porky's Rezoning

In a 10-3 vote, the city council approved the rezoning, conditional use permit, and land use plan for 1851 Central Avenue.

Council Members Gary Schiff, Robert Lillegren, and Cam Gordon cast the three vote supporting neighbors.

Gary Schiff laid out a clear argument that this rezoning sets a precedent that should give the city pause. The city no longer examines land use when consider rezoning; instead it looks at nostalga and onion rings.

More analysis of this action will be coming soon.

--Neighbors Against Porky's--
neighborsagainstporkys@gmail.com

City puts Unprecedented Number of Conditions on Porky's

The city council's zoning and planning committee attached an unprecedented number of conditions to Porky's proposal on Monday November 27. With 16 conditions, no other development has been approved by Z&P with so many conditions this year. Even the highly discussed DeLaSalle football field on Nicollet Island had less conditions attached to it's approval: 12.

The question then becomes, if a fast-food drive-thru on a tiny lot needs 16 conditions, how can this really be a good proposal? And, who will monitor enforcement of the conditions? NAP somehow doubts that Alderman Ostrow will be stopping by twice a day to ensure that Porky's is picking up trash as condition 2 states, "The applicant will arrange for trash and litter pickup on and around the Porky’s premises each evening and each morning before noon."

The full city council will act on the Porky's proposal December 1 at 9:30.

--Neighbors Against Porky's--
neighborsagainstporkys@gmail.com

City Committee Overturns Porky's Denial

Through a condition laden motion, the Zoning and Planning Committee on the Minneapolis City Council voted to overturn Minneapolis staff recommendations and the Zoning Commissions repeated denials of Porky's application for a fast food drive-thru on Central Avenue.

CM Don Samuels made two motions supporting the rezoning of the 1851 Central (Porky's site) and the conditional use permit and land use plan. The rezoning passed 4-2 with Samuels, Goodman, Colvin Roy, and Remington in support; Schiff and Gordon voted against the rezoning. The second vote regarding the conditional use permit and land use plan passed 5-1 with only CM Schiff voting against the motion.

The full council will consider the matter on Friday at 9:30 am.

--Neighbors Against Porky's--neighborsagainstporkys@gmail.com

Contact City Hall Now!

The city council will review Porky's applications on November 27th and December 1st.

Please pick four city council members listed below and contact them about your concerns with Porky's. Mention the 159 police calls to the St. Paul Porky's, the drive-thru that exits onto a residential street, and that a fast food drive-thru business runs counter to numerous city goals. The city will take a step backward with this business.

Contact four of the listed council members below

Diane Hofstede: diane.hofstede@ci.minneapolis.mn.us
Robert Lilligren: robert.lilligren@ci.minneapolis.mn.us
Betsy Hodges
Elizabeth Glidden
Cam Gordon: cam.gordon@ci.minneapolis.mn.us
Gary Schiff: Gary.Schiff@ci.minneapolis.mn.us
Ralph Remington: ralph.remington@ci.minneapolis.mn.us
Don Samuels: don.samuels@ci.minneapolis.mn.us
Lisa Goodman
Scott Benson: scott.benson@ci.minneapolis.mn.us
Sandy Colvin Roy
Barbara Johnson: barbara.johnson@ci.minneapolis.mn.us
Paul Ostrow: paul.ostrow@ci.minneapolis.mn.us

--Neighbors Against Porky's--

neighborsagainstporkys@gmail.com

Lawn Signs are In!

Request your lawn sign stating "No Porky's" today! A friend of NAP decided a more visible neighborhood presence was needed.

Email neighborsagainstporkys@gmail.com to request your lawn sign today. A friend of Neighbors Against Porky's will put the sign in your yard.

--Neighbors Against Porky's--

neighborsagainstporkys@gmail.com

NE Neighbors React to One-Sided Porky's Article

Northeast neighbors expressed their displeasure with the Northeaster's one-sided Porky's article by writing letters to the editor published in the November 22 edition.

Chad Gillard took issue with article's lack of coverage of crime at the St. Paul Porky's. The Northeaster "did not include anything about Nora Truelson's (owner of Porky's parent company, Truco) misleading statement about no crime at the St. Paul Porky's site in the last 50 years (there was an immediate response by a neighborhood member who had the police report for Porky's address from the St. Paul Police Department, and it included 20 calls for 2006 and over 30 for 2005).

Dave Buchanan wrote, "I attended the meeting and those who spoke out against Porky's outnumbered those who supported it at least 3-1. Yet your article quotes six in favor an only one against."

Don Anderson writes that "as a senior citizen" he is a "faithful reader of the Northeaster and was appalled by the lack of reference to the (crime) side of the issue. I would have expected more evenly balanced reporting"

Finally, Adelheid Koski writes, "Building a drive-thru only a few blocks from an existing Burger King (both a drive-thru and that American food some think we more of) runs counter to the idea of pedestrian friendliness. If the developer let go of the drive-thru I'd bet the neighborhoods would be more than happy to work with them in the site development."

--Neighbors Against Porky's--
neighborsagainstporkys@gmail.com

Porky's Appeals Minneapolis Decision to Deny

The developers of Porky's appealed the Minneapolis Planning Commissions unanimous decision to deny their application.

The Minneapolis Zoning and Planning committee will hear the appeal on November 27th. They will issue an advisory opinion to the full city council who will hear the appeal on December 1st.

Contact your city council member now and say, "No Porky's on Central! The business does not fit the lot."

--Neighbors Against Porky's--
neighborsagainstporkys@gmail.com

St. Paul Police stated Porky's is "Undependable"

Speaking to City Pages, Michael Jordan of the St. Paul Police department stated , "Porky's proved to be undependable. They said they'd clean up and they didn't clean up."

There is already enough fast food trash blowing around the neighborhood. Do we really need more?

--Neighbors Against Porky's--
neighborsagainstporkys@gmail.com

Comment of the Day

An occasional feature, NAP debuts "Comment of the Day."

Here is a comment that a reader left:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I gotta be honest. For me, the problem's not crime, it's not the food, it's not the cars.

It's location, location, location!

Go look at the lot where they want to build this thing. It's too small for what they want to put there. I can see why neighbors are railing against it, and if more people would go take a look, they'd get it, too.

I'm all for nostalgia, but let's put it in the right spot. Look up Central avenue, toward 30th. That is where a drive in should go. NOT rammed onto a tiny corner for convenience's sake.

I am pleased to hear that the planning group at the City has the foresight to see the problem with the proposed site. Development shouldn't go in because it CAN...it should go in because it WORKS for and ENRICHES the area in the present AS WELL AS the future. Let's look down the road.

(And yes...I'm fine with the fact that there will be CARS on that road in the future.)

Drive-thru Exits onto Residential Street

Porky's proposed drive-thru funnels traffic onto residential streets.

Porky's drive-thru exits onto 19th Avenue: a street serving single family homes and small apartments. The site on Central Avenue is adjacent to a single-family home (942 19th Ave NE) and the drive-thru is less than 40 feet from its front door. Other drive-thru restaurants have attempted to direct traffic back to the main commercial street via residential street and have been unsuccessful.

To get back to Central, drivers will need to take a left turn crossing a lane of traffic, stop at traffic lights, and then turn onto Central. Due to the configuration of the drive-thru and the location of the stop light, only 2 cars will be able to wait at the light before the drive-thru will become blocked. Then, the option will be to turn right into the neighborhood.

Porky's plans to slightly angle the exit and post a sign stating left turn only. Similar measures have been unsuccessful at the Quarry shopping center and fast food drive-thrus in south Minneapolis. People will make a move to go the route that provides the least resistance. At Porky's on Central, the easiest move will often be to turn into the neighborhood.

In most towns and cities, drive-thru restaurants are typically found next to main highways (interstates) or in areas that surrounding by commercial areas to insulate neighbors from the traffic. Here, the drive-thru is directly next a single family home and shares a block with other residences.

In the end, Porky's bought the wrong site. They recognize that Central is vibrant and they want to be part of the action. However, they need a bigger lot that is away from residential areas that enters and exits off of a commercial street. A site with 9 parking spaces cannot accommodate the traffic that Porky's will attract.

--Neighbors Against Porky's--
neighborsagainstporkys@gmail.com

Neighbors Against Porky's in the News

The Neighbors Against Porky's blog has hit the big time.

First, the blog was mentioned in the Pioneer Press today and reports are coming in that Neighbors Against Porky's was mentioned on AM1500's Garage Logic today.

The additional publicity provided a bit more traffic to the site and more comments. Unfortunately, some of the comments are a bit vulgar. The filters have been turned on, so it may take a while for your comments to appear as they will now need to be reviewed.

--Neighbors Against Porky's--
neighborsagainstporkys@gmail.com

Mayor Rybak, The Issue is not Food!

What is Mayor Rybak thinking when he stated that he "would walk across glass on my knees for Porky's onion rings?" Perhaps this statement was said during some sort of post-fast food comatose, but he is simply ignoring the real issues. Yes, the onion rings are good, but the issue is bigger: TRASH, TRAFFIC, NOISE, and LAND USE.

Focus on the issues, Mayor Rybak!

Porky's is indelibly associated with a culture of cars. The hot rod groups seem to be filled with upstanding people. However, hot rods unfortunately bring out the crowds of idiots who like to drag race and want to be seen with the hot rods. This is the issue.

Drag racing, drinking, dumping bleach on the streets (creates a large cloud of smoke when pealing out), and being a nuisance are synonymous with this crowd. Central Avenue is on the up-swing; it does not need a weight around its neck.

--Neighbors Against Porky's--
neighborsagainstporkys@gmail.com

It's the Crime!!!

Drugs, fighting, drunkenness, disorderly conduct, & child abuse. In 2006, St. Paul police visited the St. Paul Porky's for all of these reasons and more.

If the St. Paul Porky's cannot control their existing business, why would we want to invite them to Northeast Minneapolis?

On October 26, the owner of Porky's stated that the Police hadn't visited Porky's in its 53 years of existence. The Truth: 22 visits in 2006 and 31 in 2005.

What other business on Central draws this kind of crime?

--Neighbors Against Porky's--
neighborsagainstporkys@gmail.com

One-sided Reporting from the Northeaster?

A friend of Neighbors Against Porky's shared that in the Northeaster's latest issue (November 8), the paper publishes a very unbalanced story supporting Porky's.

The meeting on October 26th is recapped by sharing comments from 2 residents against Porky's and a dozen for Porky's. Additionally, the paper quotes people without attributing quotes to individuals including "a neighbor who lives across the street from the development." Neighbors Against Porky's isn't certain what street was crossed to get to this street as across Central is a business and across 19th is the police station.

Let your friends know that this depiction is not accurate. A review of a video of the meeting definitively shows that for every 1 person speaking for Porky's, 3 spoke against Porky's Keep up the good work and keep an eye out for more ways you can help prevent this fast food drive-thru from being wedged onto Central Avenue.

--Neighbors Against Porky's--
neighborsagainstporkys@gmail.com

Fries for Signatures?

A petition to support Porky's was circulated at a residence near the proposed Porky's site. Neighbors Against Porky's has been told that some residents of Parker Skyview High Rise were told they could have free french fries, Porky's t-shirt, and/or a Porky's if they signed a petition supporting Porky's.

Some neighbors call this bribery while other call it a smooth campaign move. What do you think?

--Neighbors Against Porky's--
neighborsagainstporkys@gmail.com

Ostrow's History of Supporting Bad Development

Many wonder why CM Paul Ostrow would support the Porky's development, but perhaps looking back at his previous support for bad development will help all learn more about his rationale.

1. Cub Foods proposed demolishing the block between 23rd and 24th on Central Avenue in 2002 and putting up a window-less suburban style grocery store. This style of development in urban districts has been linked to increased crime as the window-less environment reduces the visibility to the streets from the inside of buildings. Crime often increases when criminals know they are less likely to be seen. The developer worked through CM Ostrow's office. Fortunately, neighbors prevented this bad development.

2. Sam's Club: On June 17, 2004, CM Ostrow was the only person to speak on behalf of a proposed Sam's Club to be built in Northeast at an appeal of the city's decision to deny Sam's Club's application. Small business owners were extremely concerned with the possible addition of a Sam's Club and yet CM Ostrow wanted to find a way to bring Sam's Club to Northeast.

Perhaps it is not surprising that CM Ostrow supports putting Porky's on Central Avenue. Although, Neighbors Against Porky's still can't determine why he supports this. Some have suggested he is building a portfolio of buildings in preparation to run for higher office (again).

--Neighbors Against Porky's--
neighborsagainstporkys@gmail.com

Ostrow Supported Expanding Pedestrian Overlay District

Neighbors Against Porky's has obtained a document that shows CM Paul Ostrow supported the expansion of the Pedestrian Overlay District (POD) on Central Avenue.

At the Planning Commission meeting (10.30.2006), Paul Ostrow stated that the POD definitively ended at 22nd and the discussion on the topic was over especially with the 2nd Precinct rezoning.

One must wonder, what is making Ostrow flip-flop on this issue?

NAP is digging into this interesting development and will bring you more information.

Keep up the fight: email us at NeighborsAgainstPorkys@gmail.com to learn how you can help.

City Planning Commission says NO PORKY'S!

In three unanimous votes, the city's planning commission votes to deny Porky's applications for rezoning, conditional use permit (CUP), and site plan review.

The city planning staff, Tara Beard, shared that she has received "dozens" of letters in opposition to Porky's and just a handful in favor of the proposal.

She also shared that the city's planning staff calls their handling of the accidental rezoning of the 2nd Police Precinct their "biggest mistake." The rezoning of the 2nd Precinct allowed the application for Porky's to proceed. The city staff has their eyes on the ball this time and Neighbors Against Porky's is convinced they will continue to fight the development.

Remember though, Porky's can still appeal the decision and Paul Ostrow likely has already shown Porky's what paper work to fill out.

Keep up the fight: email us at NeighborsAgainstPorkys@gmail.com to learn how you can help.