VII.2. 227 Homedale Road Side Yard Setback Variance; Lindahl
June 2, 2020 City Council Report 2020-043
227 Homedale Road Side Yard Setback Variance
(PID 20-117-21-33-0068)
Proposed Action: Move to adopt Resolution 2020-034, approving a four (4) foot south side
yard setback variance for the property located at 227 Homedale Road (PID 20-117-21-33-0068).
Overview
The applicant, Matt and Trish Sieh, requests a four (4) foot south side yard setback variance to
allow construction of a 2-story addition to their existing single family home located at 227
Homedale Road. The subject property is zoned R-1-C which requires twelve (12) foot side yard
setbacks for 2-story dwellings. In this case, the applicants request a four (4) foot south side yard
setback variance to build over their existing attached garage and maintain its existing eight (8)
foot side yard setback. Based on the findings detailed below, both the Planning & Zoning
Commission and staff find the applicant has demonstrated a practical difficulty with meeting the
City zoning standards as required by Minnesota State Statute 462.357, Subdivision 6 and
recommend approval of this request.
Primary Issues to Consider
• Background
• Public Comment
• Variance Review
• Alternatives
Supporting Documents
• Resolution 2020-034
• Site Location Map
• Homeowner Statement of Request
• Site Plan
• Survey
• Comment Letters
_____________________
Jason Lindahl, AICP
City Planner
Financial Impact: $ N/A Budgeted: Y/N ____ Source: _____________
Related Documents (CIP, ERP, etc.): _________________________________________
Notes:
City Council Report 2020-043
Page 2
Background
The subject property was originally platted in 1911 as Lots 8 & 9, Block 10 of F.A. Savages
Interlachen Park Addition (see attached plat). This plat created a 16-block subdivision with each
block having dimensions of 600 feet wide by 264 feet deep. With this design, each block
contained 30 lots with dimensions of 40 feet wide by 132 feet deep (with some minor
deviations). The two original lots of the subject property are now considered one parcel with
overall dimensions of 80 feet wide by 132 feet deep and totaling 10,568 square feet. The plat
also created a public park directly to the south of the subject property.
The existing house on the subject property was built in 1959. The lot design includes a 2-story
home with a single story attached two stall garage. There is also an in-the-ground pool and pool
house in the rear yard. The applicant proposes to build a second story addition over the existing
attached garage, which is currently located eight (8) feet from the southern property line. To
simplify the construction process, the applicant wishes to construct the 2-story addition above
the existing garage and maintain the existing eight (8) foot south side yard setback.
The existing eight (8) foot south side yard garage setback exceeds the five (5) foot side yard
setback requirement for attached garages. However, the R-1-C district requires greater side yard
setbacks for dwelling units. These standards are tiered based on the height of the dwelling unit
(1-story = 10’, 2-stories = 12’ and 3-story = 14’). As a result, adding a second story addition
above the existing attached garage changes the setback requirement from five (5) feet for an
attached garage to twelve (12) feet for a two-story dwelling unit causing the need for the
applicant’s four (4) foot side yard setback variance request.
Lot & Building Standards for the R-1-C Single Family Medium Density District
Standard Requirement
Lot Area 12,000 square feet
Lot Width 80 feet
Front Setback 30 foot
Side Setback 1-Story = 10’, 2-Stories = 12’ and 3-Story = 14’
Rear Setback 40 feet
Maximum Principal Building Height 35 feet (maximum)
Maximum Building Coverage 35 percent
Planning & Zoning Commission Action. The Planning & Zoning Commission held a public
hearing to review this item (Planning Application 2020-10) during its regular meeting on May 26,
2020. During that meeting, the Commission heard a summary presentation from staff and no
comments from public. Due to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic and the related statewide
emergency declaration, notice of the public hearing for this item directed all interested parties to
make their comments to City Planner Jason Lindahl by mail, phone or e-mail before noon on
Tuesday, May 26, 2020. Prior to the meeting, staff received three e-mail comments all of which
were in support of the proposed variance. Copies of these e-mails are attached for your
reference.
Variance Review
City review of variance applications is a Quasi-Judicial action. Generally, if the application meets
the review standards, the variance should be approved. The standards for reviewing variances
are detailed in Minnesota State Statute 462.357, Subdivision 6. In Summary, variances may be
granted when the applicant establishes there are "practical difficulties" in complying with the
City Council Report 2020-043
Page 3
zoning regulations. A practical difficulty is defined by the five questions listed below.
Economic considerations alone do not constitute a practical difficulty. In addition, under the
statute the City may choose to add conditions of approval that are directly related to and bear a
rough proportionality on the impact created by the variance.
Staff has reviewed the variance request against the standards detailed in Minnesota State Statute
462.357, Subdivision 6 and finds the applicant has demonstrated a practical difficulty. As a
result, staff recommends the City approve the applicant’s request. The standards for reviewing a
variance application and staff’s findings for each are provided below.
1. Is the variance in harmony with purposes and intent of the ordinance?
Finding: The applicant seeks a four (4) foot south side yard setback variance from twelve (12)
feet to eight (8) feet. The purpose and intent of the setback zoning standards is to maintain
separation between properties for density, safety and esthetic reasons. In this case, the south
side of the subject property abuts the City owned Interlachen Park. Interlachen Park consists of
open space, a basketball court, a baseball field and a small picnic shelter. Given the uses and
design of this park, granting the four (4) foot side yard setback variance allowing the neighboring
home to be four (4) feet closer to the shared property line will maintain the propose and intent
of the setback standards.
2. Is the variance consistent with the comprehensive plan?
Finding: The proposed four (4) foot south side yard setback variance is consistent with both
the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and the Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan – Cultivate Hopkins.
The 2030 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map guides the subject property as LDR – Low
Density Residential. According to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, the Low Density Residential
category is intended to accommodate single family detached housing at densities between 1 and
7 units per acre.
By comparison, the Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan – Cultivate Hopkins Future Land Use Map
guides the subject property as Suburban Neighborhood. This land use category is characterized
by low density single family dwellings and golf courses. Neighborhoods in this category are
designed around a modified grid street network with good access to the surrounding
transportation network. Properties in this category are relatively large for Hopkins, with most
having ample private yards and attached garages. The 2040 plan calls for continuation of the
low density single family land use pattern along with accessory uses such as parks and
neighborhood scaled public and institutional uses. Granting the requested variance will maintain
the intended single family use and density requirements called for in both the 2030 and 2040
comprehensive plans.
3. Does the proposal put property to use in a reasonable manner?
Finding: The proposal would put the subject property to use in a reasonable manner. The
proposed variance would allow construction of a second story addition to the existing single
family home eight (8) feet from the southern property. Staff finds this is reasonable given the
abutting property to the south is a city park primarily used for open space. As a result, there will
be no visible or noticeable impact on either the park or the surrounding residential properties.
City Council Report 2020-043
Page 4
4. Are there unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner?
Finding: There are unique circumstances to the property that were not created by the
landowner. In this case, the original plat created a city owned public park on the same side of
the subject property where the variance is requested. As mentioned above, since the adjacent
park is primarily used for open space, there will be no visible or noticeable impact on either the
park or the surrounding residential properties.
5. Will the variance, if granted, alter the essential character of the locality?
Finding: Granting the requested variance will not alter the essential character of the
surrounding neighborhood. The proposed south side yard setback variance will allow a 2-story
addition to the existing single family dwelling to be located four feet closer to the southern
property. Since the abutting property to the south is a public park primarily used for open
space, there will be no visible or noticeable impact on the surrounding neighborhood.
Alternatives
1. Approve the requested variances. Voting to approve the requested 4’ side yard setback
variance would allow the applicant to construct a 2-story addition 8’ from their southern
property line.
2. Deny the requested variances. Voting to deny the requested 4’ side yard setback variance
would prohibit the applicant from constructing a 2-story addition 8’ from their southern
property line. Instead, the applicant would be required to meet the 12’ side yard setback
standard. Should the City Council consider this option, it must also identify specific findings
that support this alternative.
3. Continue for further information. If the City Council concludes that further information is
needed, the items should be continued.
1
CITY OF HOPKINS
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2020-034
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A FOUR (4) FOOT SOUTH SIDE YARD SETBACK
VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 227 HOMEDALE ROAD
(PID 20-117-21-33-0068)
WHEREAS, the City of Hopkins (the “City”) is a municipal corporation, organized and existing
under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, Matt and Trish Sieh (the “Applicants”) are the fee owner of 227 Homedale Road
legally described below:
Lots 8 & 9, Block 10 of F.A. Savages Interlachen Park Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
(the “Property”); and
WHEREAS, the Property is zoned R-1-C, Single Family Medium Density; and
WHEREAS, the City has adopted a zoning ordinance and other official controls for reasons that
include, but are not limited to, protecting the character of properties and areas within the community,
promoting the proper use of land and structures, fixing reasonable standards to which buildings,
structures and land must conform for the benefit of all, and prohibiting the use of buildings, structures
and lands in a manner which is incompatible with the intended use or development of lands within the
specified zones; and
WHEREAS, Article V, Section 102-160, of the City Code requires single-family dwellings in the
R-1-C district have side yard setback of at least 12 feet for a 2-Story dwelling; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the aforementioned code provisions, the Applicants have made a
request to the City for a south side yard setback variance from twelve (12) feet to eight (8) feet in order
construct a two-story addition to their existing detached single family dwelling;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 462.357, subd. 6(2), “[v]ariances shall only
be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance and when
the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. Variances may be granted when the applicant
for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance.
"Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property
owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance; the
plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and
the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone
do not constitute practical difficulties.”; and
WHEREAS, on May 26, 2020, pursuant to the procedural requirements contained in Article III,
Section 102-91 of the City Code, the Hopkins Planning and Zoning Commission (the “Commission”)
2
held a public hearing on the Applicant’s requested variances and all persons present were given an
opportunity to be heard. The Commission also took into consideration the written comments and analysis
of City staff; and
WHEREAS, based on a review of the Applicant’s request and their submission, the written staff
report, and after careful consideration of all other written and oral comments concerning the requested
variances, the Commission voted 6-0 to recommend the City Council approve the requested variances;
and
WHEREAS, based on a review of the Applicant’s request and their submissions, the written
staff report, the Planning & Zoning Commission’s recommendation and after careful consideration of all
other written and oral comments concerning the requested variance, the Hopkins City Council makes the
following findings of fact with respect to the aforementioned criteria provided in Minnesota Statutes,
section 462.357, subd. 6(2):
1. Is the variance in harmony with purposes and intent of the ordinance?
Finding: The applicant seeks a four (4) foot south side yard setback variance from twelve (12) feet to eight
(8) feet. The purpose and intent of the setback zoning standards is to maintain separation between properties
for density, safety and esthetic reasons. In this case, the south side of the subject property abuts the City
owned Interlachen Park. Interlachen Park consists of open space, a basketball court, a baseball field and a
small picnic shelter. Given the uses and design of this park, granting the four (4) foot side yard setback
variance allowing the neighboring home to be four (4) feet closes to the shared property line will maintain the
propose and intent of the setback standards.
2. Is the variance consistent with the comprehensive plan?
Finding: The proposed four (4) foot south side yard setback variance is consistent with both the 2030
Comprehensive Plan and the Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan – Cultivate Hopkins. The 2030
Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map guides the subject property as LDR – Low Density
Residential. According to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, the Low Density Residential category is intended
to accommodate single family detached housing at densities between 1 and 7 units per acre.
By comparison, the Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan – Cultivate Hopkins Future Land Use Map guides
the subject property as Suburban Neighborhood. This land use category is characterized by low density single
family dwellings and golf courses. Neighborhoods in this category are designed around a modified grid street
network with good access to the surrounding transportation network. Properties in this category are relatively
large for Hopkins, with most having ample private yards and attached garages. The 2040 plan calls for
continuation of the low density single family land use pattern along with accessory uses such as parks and
neighborhood scaled public and institutional uses. Granting the requested variance will maintain the intended
single family use and density requirements called for in both the 2030 and 2040 comprehensive plans.
3. Does the proposal put property to use in a reasonable manner?
Finding: The proposal would put the subject property to use in a reasonable manner. The proposed variance
would allow construction of a second story addition to the existing single family home eight (8) feet from the
southern property. Staff finds this is reasonable given the abutting property to the south is a city park
3
primarily used for open space. As a result, there will be no visible or noticeable impact on either the park or
the surrounding residential properties.
4. Are there unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner?
Finding: There are unique circumstances to the property that were not created by the landowner. In this
case, the original plat created a city owned public park on the same side of the subject property where the
variance is requested. As mentioned above, since the adjacent park is primarily used for open space, there
will be no visible or noticeable impact on either the park or the surrounding residential properties.
5. Will the variance, if granted, alter the essential character of the locality?
Finding: Granting the requested variance will not alter the essential character of the surrounding
neighborhood. The proposed south side yard setback variance will allow a 2-story addition to the existing
single family dwelling to be located four feet closer to the southern property. Since the abutting property to the
south is a public park primarily used for open space, there will be no visible or noticeable impact on the
surrounding neighborhood.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Hopkins that
the recitals set forth in this Resolution are incorporated into and made part of this Resolution, and
more specifically, constitute the express findings of the City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Co uncil of the City of
Hopkins that based on the findings of fact contained herein, the City Council of the City of Hopkins
hereby approves the Applicant’s requested variance.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Hopkins this 2nd day of June 2020.
ATTEST:
______________________ _______________________
Amy D omeier, City Clerk Jason Gadd, Mayor
Site Location Map – 227 Homedale Road
227 Homedale Road
Hopkins, MN 55343
Trisha & Matthew
Custion Home Addition/ Remodel
Sieh Residence
Variance Application/
Design Documents
04 - 24 - 2020
VARIANCE
APPLICATION SET:
04 - 24- 2020
Sheet:
Architecture
& Design, P.A.227 Homedale RoadHopkins, MN 55343Custom HOME: ADDITION/ REMODELTrisha & Matthew Sieh
VARIANCE
APPLICATION SET:
04 - 24- 2020
Sheet:
Architecture
& Design, P.A.227 Homedale RoadHopkins, MN 55343Custom HOME: ADDITION/ REMODELTrisha & Matthew Sieh
VARIANCE
APPLICATION SET:
04 - 24- 2020
Sheet:
Architecture
& Design, P.A.227 Homedale RoadHopkins, MN 55343Custom HOME: ADDITION/ REMODELTrisha & Matthew Sieh
VARIANCE
APPLICATION SET:
04 - 24- 2020
Sheet:
Architecture
& Design, P.A.227 Homedale RoadHopkins, MN 55343Custom HOME: ADDITION/ REMODELTrisha & Matthew Sieh
VARIANCE
APPLICATION SET:
04 - 24- 2020
Sheet:
Architecture
& Design, P.A.227 Homedale RoadHopkins, MN 55343Custom HOME: ADDITION/ REMODELTrisha & Matthew Sieh
VARIANCE
APPLICATION SET:
04 - 24- 2020
Sheet:
Architecture
& Design, P.A.227 Homedale RoadHopkins, MN 55343Custom HOME: ADDITION/ REMODELTrisha & Matthew Sieh
VARIANCE
APPLICATION SET:
04 - 24- 2020
Sheet:
Architecture
& Design, P.A.227 Homedale RoadHopkins, MN 55343Custom HOME: ADDITION/ REMODELTrisha & Matthew Sieh
VARIANCE
APPLICATION SET:
04 - 24- 2020
Sheet:
Architecture
& Design, P.A.227 Homedale RoadHopkins, MN 55343Custom HOME: ADDITION/ REMODELTrisha & Matthew Sieh
VARIANCE
APPLICATION SET:
04 - 24- 2020
Sheet:
Architecture
& Design, P.A.227 Homedale RoadHopkins, MN 55343Custom HOME: ADDITION/ REMODELTrisha & Matthew Sieh
VARIANCE
APPLICATION SET:
04 - 24- 2020
Sheet:
Architecture
& Design, P.A.227 Homedale RoadHopkins, MN 55343Custom HOME: ADDITION/ REMODELTrisha & Matthew Sieh
VARIANCE
APPLICATION SET:
04 - 24- 2020
Sheet:
Architecture
& Design, P.A.227 Homedale RoadHopkins, MN 55343Custom HOME: ADDITION/ REMODELTrisha & Matthew Sieh
VARIANCE
APPLICATION SET:
04 - 24- 2020
Sheet:
Architecture
& Design, P.A.227 Homedale RoadHopkins, MN 55343Custom HOME: ADDITION/ REMODELTrisha & Matthew Sieh
From:Trisha Sieh
To:Jason Lindahl; Courtney Pearsall
Subject:[EXTERNAL] Fwd: Sieh home expansion
Date:Monday, May 25, 2020 3:03:26 PM
Attachments:image002.png
image004.png
Jason & Courtney,
See below from another one of our neighbors (Gus Kellom 219 Homedale Rd) in support of
the variance for 227 Homedale Rd.
Thanks!
Trish Sieh
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Gus Kellom <Gus@envcap.com>
Date: Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 1:31 PM
Subject: RE: Sieh home expansion
To: Trisha Sieh <tdsieh@gmail.com>
Trish, sorry for the delay on this.
I do not have any concerns or issue with your proposed remodel/expansion plans. I think it
will look good and support your efforts! If there is anything else I can do to help let me know!
GUTHRIE (GUS) KELLOM
Mortgage Consultant & Partner
NMLS ID: 371852 | Lender ID: 327578
10590 Wayzata Boulevard #160 | Minnetonka, MN 55305
MAIN 952.473.9988 CELL 612.386.4664 FAX 952.960.3132
From: Trisha Sieh <tdsieh@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2020 9:47 AM
To: Gus Kellom <Gus@envcap.com>
Subject: Sieh home expansion
Gus,
As we chatted about yesterday, here are the draft elevation plans for our hopeful expansion
plans on the south side of our house. Let me know what you think... if you have any
reservations or support what we are doing including the variance we need from the City wrt
the southern setback.
Thanks!
1
Jason Lindahl
From:Luke Foster <lukefosterdds@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, May 17, 2020 11:23 AM
To:Jason Lindahl
Subject:[EXTERNAL] variance
Hello,
I received a letter about a variance requested by my neighbors at 227 Homedale Rd.
I am fully supportive of this request for variance. The addition plan will add value to the home and to our
neighborhood. Our home has a very similar situation with a second story addition on a lot adjacent to the park.
This variance will provide for an addition that is consistent with the high value and size of home in our
neighborhood. Please feel free to contact me with any further questions.
Luke Foster
228 Homedale Rd, Hopkins, MN 55343
--
Visit our website / 952-924-0709 / 4047 Brookside Avenue, St. Louis Park, MN 55416
1
Jason Lindahl
From:Tina Sherman <tina.sherman@magnet360.com>
Sent:Tuesday, May 19, 2020 9:27 AM
To:Jason Lindahl
Subject:[EXTERNAL] 227 Homedale
We live at 241 Maple Hill Road and we have no issues at all with the residents of 227 Homedale seeking a
variance. We support the project.
Tina
TINA SHERMAN | VP, Chief Growth Officer
Magnet360, The Mindtree Salesforce Practice
M 952.240.7373
L linkedin.com/in/tinapuente
T @Magnet360
http://www.mindtree.com/email/disclaimer.html