2019-029 Approving a Four (4) Foot East Side Yard Setback Variance for an Accessory Building at the Harley Hopkins Family Resource Center Located at 125 Monroe Avenue South (PID 19-117-21-34-0140) CITY OF HOPKINS
HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2019-029
RESOLUTION APPROVING A FOUR(4)FOOT EAST SIDE YARD SETBACK
VARIANCE FOR AN ACCESSORY BUILDING AT THE HARLEY HOPKINS
FAMILY RESOURCE CENTER LOCATED AT 125 MONROE AVENUE SOUTH
(PID 19-117-21-34-0140)
WHEREAS, the City of Hopkins (the "City") is a municipal corporation, organized and
existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS,Hopkins Public School 270(the"Applicant")are the fee owners of 125 Monroe
Avenue South legally described below:
Lots 13 To 24 Incl And That Part Of Lots 1 To 12 Incl Lying Wly Of A Line Desc As Com
At Se Cor Of Lot 13 Blk 35 Th On An Assumed Bearing Of S 87 Deg 34 Min 17 Sec W Along S
Line Of Said Lot 13 And Its Wly Extension 213.14 Ft To Actual Pt Of Beg Th N 0 Deg 22 Min 04
Sec W Par To E Line Of Lots 13 To 24 Incl Blk 35 Dis 382 Ft Th S 89 Deg 37 Min 56 Sec W 20 Ft
Th N 0 Deg 22 Min 04 Sec @ 178.05 Ft To N Line Of Blk 34 And There Terminating Incl Adj Vac
Alley,West Minneapolis Center Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota(the"Property"); and
WHEREAS,the Property is zoned Institutional; 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, Section 542—Institutional District,of the City Code allows for schools and all
structures, facilities and physical improvements incidental or accessory thereto as conditional uses,
subject to a 35 foot setback; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the aforementioned code provisions, the Applicant has made a
request to the City for a four (4) foot east side yard setback variance to allow placement of an
accessory building;
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
1
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 March 26, 2019, pursuant to the procedural requirements contained in
Section 525.07 of the City Code,the Hopkins Planning and Zoning Commission(the"Commission")
held a public hearing on the Applicant's requested variance 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 his submissions, the written
staff report, and after careful consideration of all other written and oral comments concerning the
requested variances,the Commission vote 4-0 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 variances,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 variance in harmony with purposes and intent of the ordinance?
Finding. The requested variances is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Institutional district.
The performance standards for this district are detailed in City Code Section 542—Institutional District.
These standards allowfor".schools and all structures,facilities and physical improvements incidental or
accessory there to"as conditional uses,subject to a 35 foot setback. Given that the abutting pmper y to the
east is a city park primary used as open space, thea will be no visible evidence of a lesser setback or impact to
the neighbors on the east side ofthe park.
2. Is the variance consistent with the comprehensive plan?
Finding. The proposed accessory building 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 proper y as Institutional. According to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, the
Institutional land use category is intended to capturepublic and semipublic uses such as schools,churches,
government buildings and other civic. These uses include related accessory buildings like the proposed shed.
By comparison,the Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan—Cultivate Hopkins Future Land Use Map guides
the subject proper y as Open and Social Space. This district is intended to provide a aide range of public and
private uses where the community maygatberfor education,social and recreation activities Uses in this
district may include community centers, conservation areas,colleges or universities, libraries,parks,public or
private schools, regional trails or recreational facilities These areas are intended to retain their existing
boundaries and character but may improve to meet the changing educational,social and trcreational needs of
the community.
3. Does the proposal put property to use in a reasonable manner?
2
Finding.• The proposal would put the subject properly to use in a reasonable manner. The proposed variance
would allowplacement of an accessory building 31 feet from the subjectpto ny's eastern pm ry line. Staff
finds this is reasonable given the abutting propery to the east 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 residential propery along
the east.ride of the park.
4. Are there unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner?
Finding.• There are unique c n-umstances to the properly that were not created by the landowner. In this
case, both lot design and topography necessitate the need for the requested variance. Overall, the subject
propery is appmximatey550jeet long and 250 feet deep. However, the northern end of tbepmperyt
narrows to 227 feet in depth creating a `f pinch point"right next to the proposed location of the accessory
building. In addition,there is an eight(8)foot topographic drop in this same location, which limits the
applicant's abiliy to reposition or change the dimensions of the proposed accessory building to eliminate the
need for a variance.
5. Will the variance,if granted, alter the essential character of the locality?
Finding. Granting the requested variance would not alter the essential character of the surrounding area.
As mentioned above,use of the site for an accessory building to a communiy centerl school use is consistent
with both the comprehensive plan and Institutional-oning classification. Additionally, with the reduced
setback located abutting a city park primanyused as open space there will be no visible or noticeable impact
to the adjacent properties.
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 Council 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 2"d day of April 2019.
ATTEST:
Amy Domeier, City Clerk ason Gadd, Mayor
3