V. 1. Planning Application 2019-06-AMD Wilshire Properties, LLC Zoning Code Text Amendment
April 23, 2019 Planning Application 2019-06-AMD
Zoning Code Text Amendment to Allow Licensed Residential Programs for
7 to 10 Persons as a Conditional Use in the R-1-D and R-1-E Districts
Proposed Action: Move to adopt Planning & Zoning Resolution 2019-07, recommending the
City Council deny the zoning code text amendment application from Wilshire Properties, LLC
to allow Licensed Residential Programs for 7 to 10 persons as a conditional use in the R-1-D
and R-1-E Districts.
Overview
The applicant, Bruce Lawrence of Wilshire Properties, LLC, requests a zoning code text
amendment to allow Licensed Residential Programs for 7 to 10 persons as a conditional use in
the R-1-D and R-1-E districts. While the zoning code text amendment would apply throughout
these districts, the applicant is attempting to alleviate a zoning violation for the group home he
owns at 601 Oakwood Road. That property is located in the northeastern quadrant of Highway
7 and Oakridge Road at the entrance to the Knollwood neighborhood. It is guided by the
comprehensive plan and zoned for low density single family activity. Staff recommends denial
of this request based on the findings made in this report.
Recent complaints from the surrounding neighborhood led city staff to conduct a series of site
inspections and contact the property owner regarding these issues. This process found the
subject property housed a licensed residential facility with ten (10) residents. Under state law,
this type of facility is permitted in any single family residential district provided it has no more
than six (6) residents. As a result, staff initiated a code enforcement process to bring the site
into compliance. In response, the property owner filed for the above stated application to
change the zoning standards to allow a Licensed Residential Facility Serving 7 to 10 residents as
a conditional use in the R-1-D and R-1-E districts.
Primary Issues to Consider
● Background
● Zoning Code Text Amendment
● Alternatives
Supporting Documents
● Planning & Zoning Resolution 2019-07
● Public Comments
● Neighborhood Meeting Notice
● Neighborhood Meeting Summary
● Zoning Violation Letter
● Applicant’s Narrative
● Zoning Map
● Zoning Standards in Other Cities
● 4/6/12 City Council Minutes
● 4/6/12 Patch Article
_____________________
Jason Lindahl, City Planner
Financial Impact: $ N/A Budgeted: Y/N ____ Source: _____________
Related Documents (CIP, ERP, etc.): _________________________________________
Notes:
Planning Application 2019-06 AMD
Page 2
Background
The Background section includes information on the history of this application, neighborhood
meeting, applicant’s request, public comments, current zoning standards for group homes in
Hopkins and zoning standards for Licensed Residential Facilities in other communities.
History. According to the applicant’s narrative (attached), the subject property began operating
as a Licensed Residential Facility in 2011. City permit records confirm this timing. At that time
the facility was owned and operated by Grace Homes. Representatives of Grace Homes
attended the March 20, 2012 City Council meeting to announce the startup of their 8-bed
facility. There was also an article in the Hopkins Patch on April 6, 2012 highlighting the facility
(attached). In May of 2017, the applicant purchased the subject property (and the neighboring
property at 414 Wilshire Walk) from Grace Homes.
In the summer of 2018, code enforcement complaints from the surrounding neighborhood led
city staff to conduct a series of site inspections and contact the property owner regarding these
issues. In January 2019, a routine fire inspection and subsequent review of Minnesota
Department of Health records found ten (10) residents living at the subject property. This is a
violation of Hopkins City Code, section 530.06(b) which limits licensed residential facilities in
single family zoning districts to 6 or fewer residents. As a result, staff began the code
enforcement process and informed the property owner they must bring the site into compliance
with the City’s zoning standards within 30 days (March 4, 2019).
In response, on February 21, 2019 the property owner filed for a comprehensive plan
amendment, rezoning and conditional use permit to allow a Licensed Residential Facility Serving
7 to 16 residents. That application required the applicant to host a neighborhood meeting (see
details below). According to applicant, after talking with the neighbors at that meeting he
decided to withdraw his original application stated above and re-file for a zoning code text
amendment to allow Licensed Residential Programs for 7 to 10 persons as a conditional use in
the R-1-D and R-1-E Districts.
Neighborhood Meeting. Hopkins neighborhood meeting policy requires applicants for
conditional use permit or rezoning applications located adjacent to or within residential zoning
district to host an informational meeting for neighbors within 350 feet of the subject property.
This requirement applied to the original rezoning and conditional use permit applications but
not to the current zoning code text amendment application. As part of his original application,
the applicant held a neighborhood meeting at the Hopkins Pavilion on Tuesday, March 19 from
6:30 to 7:30 PM. The applicant mailed an invitation for this meeting to the Knollwood
neighborhood, Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council (see attached).
Summary minutes from the neighborhood meeting are attached for your reference. According
to these minutes, seven (7) members of the neighborhood attended the meeting and one (1)
other resident contacted the applicant by phone. While the attendees acknowledged the need
for these types of facilities, they did not support the applicant’s proposal to intensify the use of
this facility in a single family neighborhood. As noted above, after talking with the neighbors at
that meeting the applicant decided to withdraw his original comprehensive plan amendment,
rezoning and conditional use permit applications and re-file for a zoning code text amendment
to allow Licensed Residential Programs for 7 to 10 persons as a conditional use in the R-1-D
and R-1-E Districts.
Planning Application 2019-06 AMD
Page 3
Applicant’s Request. The applicant requests to amend Section 530.09, Conditional Uses
within the R Districts to include Licensed Residential Programs Serving 7 to 10 Persons in the
R-1-D and R-1-E Districts. The standards requested by the applicant are detailed below.
Licensed Residential Programs Serving 7 to 10 Persons in the R-1-D and R-1-E Districts, subject
to the following:
1. The property must be with-in 75 feet of an R-2, R-3, R-4, R-5, or R-6 district.
2. The minimum lot size is 35,000 square feet.
3. Modifications that change the exterior size of the dwelling are not allowed.
4. The dwelling living area, excluding the basement, must be at a ratio of 500 square feet per
person minimum.
5. Expansion of parking surfaces must not decrease open space ratio by more than 3%.
6. For driveways and parking areas that abut or are across the street from an existing dwelling
of the same zoning district, there shall be a landscaped buffer area per Section 542.05 Subd.
1, Item 3.
Should the City approve the applicant’s request, the next step for the applicant would be to file
for review of a conditional use permit. Conditional use permit applications are considered quasi-
judicial actions. In such cases, the City would act as a judge to determine if the regulations
within the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance are being
followed. Generally, if a conditional use permit application meets these requirements it should
be approved. The City has the ability to add conditions of approval that are directly related to
the conditional use permit standards. In evaluating the proposed conditional use permit
application, the City must consider and require compliance with the general conditional use
permit standards in Section 525.13, Subdivision 15 and any standards created through the text
amendment process.
Public Comments. The City has received several comments from the public on this item all of
which expressed opposition to the proposed text amendment. These comments came to the
City through both phone calls and e-mails. These comments are attached for your reference and
summarized in the table below.
Zoning Code Text Amendment Public Comment Summary
Commenter Comment
Kim Burmeister Opposed to proposal
Randy Engel Opposed to proposal
DW Johnson Opposed to proposal
Susan Kahn Opposed to proposal
Ben Rubin Opposed to proposal
John Sheehan Opposed to proposal
Ann Steinfeldt Opposed to proposal
Standards for Licensed Residential Facilities in Hopkins. Minnesota Statute 462.357,
Planning Application 2019-06 AMD
Page 4
Subdivision 7, requires all local governments in Minnesota to allow licensed residential facilities
in residential zoning districts. This is not an option for local governments. The state
administers the license for these facilities so local governments have no direct oversight or
control over the day to day operation of these facilities. However, the City can regulate group
homes the same as it would any other single family dwelling (outdoor storage, condition of the
yard, number of vehicles, etc.).
Under state law licensed residential facilities serving 6 or fewer residents must be allowed as a
permitted use in any single family residential zoning district. Residential Facilities serving 7
through 16 residents must be allowed as permitted use in multiple family residential districts.
The state law provides cities with an option to require a conditional use permit for these uses in
multiple family districts.
To comply with these state requirements, the City of Hopkins adopted Ordinance 93-722 which
established zoning standards for Licensed Residential Facilities. Hopkins City Code Section
530.06(b) allows licensed residential programs with a capacity of 6 or fewer persons as a
permitted use in any single family district. Section 530.09(p) allows licensed residential program
with a Capacity of 7 to 16 persons as a conditional use in the R-2, R-3, R-4, R-5 and R-6
districts, subject to the following conditions:
1. Facilities shall comply with all applicable codes and regulations and shall have, current and in
effect, the appropriate State licenses.
2. On-site services and treatment at residential facilities shall be for residents of the facility
only, and shall not be for nonresidents or persons outside the facility.
3. The conditional use permit is only valid as long as a valid State license is held by the operator
of the facility where such license is required.
4. Traffic generated by the facility not to exceed the design capacity of the local street system
or cause a decrease in service levels of intersection, as defined by the Institute of Traffic
Engineers. Adequate sight distance at access points shall be available.
5. No on-street parking to be allowed. Adequate off-street parking shall be required by the
City based on the staff and resident needs of each specific facility.
6. No external building improvements undertaken which alter the original character of the
home unless approved by the City Council.
7. Additional conditions may be required by the City in order to address the specific impacts of
a proposed facility.
Standards for Licensed Residential Facilities in Other Communities. Staff researched the
standards for Licensed Residential Facilities in other communities through the City Attorney and
other metropolitan communities. According to the City Attorney, their client communities
follow the standards required by state law and they have not modified their zoning requirements
to allow exceptions similar to the applicant’s request.
City staff also reached out directly to the cities of Bloomington, Eden Prairie, Minnetonka,
Planning Application 2019-06 AMD
Page 5
Richfield and St. Louis Park and received response from three of these communities which are
detailed below. In summary, Richfield follows state statute; however, both Minnetonka and St.
Louis Park have modified their zoning standards to allow exceptions for group homes similar to
the applicant’s request.
The zoning standards for Licensed Residential Care Facilities in Minnetonka and St. Louis Park
are attached for your reference. Minnetonka allows these uses with 6 – 12 residents as a
conditional use in its R-1 District while St. Louis Park allows these uses with up to 9 residents as
a permitted use subject to certain conditions in its R-2 district. It’s important to note, the zoning
districts in these communities have different standards than Hopkins (see table below). Of the
standards in other communities, Minnetonka’s standards for its R-1 district are most like
Hopkins’ R-1-D district.
Zoning District Comparison
Category Hopkins Minnetonka St. Louis Park
R-1-D R-1-E R-1 R-2
Minimum Lot
Size
20,000 Sq. Ft. 40,000 Sq. Ft. 22,000 Sq. Ft. 7,200 Sq. ft.
Minimum Lot
Width
100’ 100’ 110’ 60’
Front Setback 35’ 35’ 35’ – 50’
Side Setback 10’ – 14’ 10’ – 14’ 10’ 5’ – 7’
Rear Setback 40’ 40’ 40’ or 20% of
Lot Depth
25’
Zoning Code Text Amendment
Zoning Code amendments are legislative actions in that the City is creating new standards to
regulate the development of certain types of uses and/or structures. Under the law, the City has
wide flexibility to create standards that will ensure the type of development it desires; however,
zoning regulations must be reasonable and supported by a rational basis relating to promoting the
public health, safety and welfare. Based on the findings made below, staff recommends denial of
this request.
Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed zoning code text amendment would
be inconsistent with both the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan.
2030 Comprehensive Plan. The proposed text amendment would allow Licensed Residential
Programs for 7 to 10 persons as a conditional use in the R-1-D and R-1-E Districts. These
zoning districts are guided as LDR – Low Density Residential on the 2030 Future Land Use
Map. According to the narrative for this land use classification, it allows for single family
detached residential dwelling at 1 to 7 units per acre. Chapter 4 of the 2030 Comprehensive
Plan – Land Use and Development details the rationale behind the City’s land use plan. This
narrative supports the preservation and protection of the City’s existing residential
neighborhoods. As mentioned above, state law requires the City to allow Licensed Residential
Facilities serving six (6) or fewer residents as a permitted use in single family zoning district.
However, staff finds that permitting these uses with more than 6 residents in single family
districts is not consistent with the goals and policies of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
Planning Application 2019-06 AMD
Page 6
The Land Use and Development chapter states the City regards the preservation and protection
of its existing residential neighborhoods as one of its most important priorities. The City will
work to protect land use patterns that continue to support single family homes. In order to
facilitate this residential land use patterns, Hopkins will:
• Work to protect the integrity and long-term viability of its low-density residential
neighborhoods and strive to reduce the potential negative effects of nearby commercial or
industrial land through zoning, site plan reviews, and code enforcement.
• Ensure that the infilling of vacant parcels and the rehabilitation of existing developed land
will be in accordance with uses specified in the Comprehensive Plan.
• Ensure that incompatible land uses will be improved or removed where possible and the
land reused in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan.
• Work to assure strong and well-maintained neighborhoods.
Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan – Cultivate Hopkins. The proposed text amendment would
allow Licensed Residential Programs for 7 to 10 persons as a conditional use in the R-1-D and
R-1-E Districts. The Draft 2040 Future Land Use Map guide properties in the R-1-D District as
Suburban Neighborhood while R-1-E properties are guided as Estate Neighborhood.
Properties in the Suburban Neighborhood 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
Suburban Neighborhood category plans for low density single family neighborhoods and
accessory uses such as parks and neighborhood scaled public and institutional uses.
Neighborhood scale public and institutional uses would acknowledge and allow for licensed
residential facilities serving six (6) or fewer residents as required by state law but not those
facilities with more than six (6) residents.
The Estate Neighborhood category is fully contained within the Bellgrove neighborhood along
either side of Minnetonka Boulevard. It consists of relatively secluded large lot single family
dwellings connected to city sewer and water services. Streets in this area follow a curved and
looping design that rarely connects, creating organically shaped blocks to cul-de-sacs that limit
pedestrian and bicycle mobility. Properties in this district tend to have larger footprints with
attached garages and may include large accessory buildings or amenities. Large lot single family
residential should remain the primary use in this category. Densities in this area typically range
from 1-2 units per acre on average.
The Built Environment section contains goals and policies that support denial of this
application. Built Environment Goal 4 states “support and strengthen the city’s residential areas
with reinvestment and appropriate infill.” The supporting policy for this goal states the City
should “preserve and enhance the community’s detached single family housing stock, especially
in the Estate Neighborhood and Suburban Neighborhood future land use categories.”
Compatibility with Present and Future Land Uses. Based on the analysis above, a zoning
code text amendment introducing Licensed Residential Programs for 7 to 10 persons as a
conditional use in the R-1-D and R-1-E Districts would be incompatible with present and future
land uses. Properties in the R-1-D and R-1-E district are currently, and intended to remain,
primarily large lot single family dwellings. The future land use plans in both the 2030
Comprehensive Plan and Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan reinforce this land use pattern and
Planning Application 2019-06 AMD
Page 7
would not support introducing group homes with more than six (6) residents, and its related
activities, into these single family residential zoning districts.
Surrounding Existing and Future Land Uses Analysis
Location Existing Future
North Single Family Residential Low Density Residential
South Single Family Residential (Hwy. 7) Low Density Residential
East Single Family Residential Low Density Residential
West High Density Residential High Density Residential
Conformance with New Standards. Based on the goals and policies of the 2030 Comprehensive
Plan and the Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan, staff recommends denial of the proposed text
amendment to allow Licensed Residential Programs for 7 to 10 persons as a conditional use in the
R-1-D and R-1-E Districts. Should the City make a different finding, staff would need to further
evaluate the proposed zoning standards to assess how they conform to the applicant’s properties
and properties throughout the R-1-D and R-1-E districts. It should also be noted that this
additional review would include further assessment by the Fire Marshal whose general
recommendation would be that group homes with more than 6 residents be sprinkled.
Alternatives
1. Recommend approval zoning code text amendment application. By recommending
approval of this application, the City Council will consider a recommendation of approval.
Should the Planning & Zoning Commission consider this option, it must also identify
specific options that support this alternative.
2. Recommend denial of the zoning code text amendment application. By recommending
denial of this application, the City Council will consider a recommendation of denial.
3. Continue for further information. If the Planning Commission indicates that further
information is needed, the items should be continued.
CITY OF HOPKINS
Hennepin County, Minnesota
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2019-07
A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL DENY THE ZONING CODE
TEXT AMENDMENT REQUEST FROM WILSHIRE PROPERTIES, LLC TO ALLOW
LICENSED RESIDENTIAL PROGRAMS FOR 7 TO 10 PERSONS AS A CONDITIONAL USE
IN THE R-1-D AND R-1-E DISTRICTS
WHEREAS, the applicant, Wilshire Properties, LLC, initiated zoning code text amendment
application to allow Licensed Residential Programs for 7 to 10 persons as a conditional use in the R-1-D
and R-1-E Districts; and
WHEREAS, the procedural history of the application is as follows:
1. That comprehensive plan, rezoning and conditional use permit applications were initiated by
the applicant on February 21, 2019.
2. That the applicant held a neighborhood meeting at the Hopkins Pavilion on March 19, 2019 in
conformance with the City of Hopkins Neighborhood Meeting Policy.
3. That the applicant withdrew the comprehensive plan, rezoning and conditional use permit
applications on March 22, 2019.
4. That a zoning code text amendment to allow Licensed Residential Programs for 7 to 10
persons as a conditional use in the R-1-D and R-1-E Districts was initiated by the applicant on
March 22, 2019.
5. That the Hopkins Planning & Zoning Commission, pursuant to published and mailed notice,
held a public hearing and reviewed such application on April 23, 2019 and all persons present
were given an opportunity to be heard.
6. That the written comments and analysis of City staff were considered; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning & Zoning Commission of the City
of Hopkins hereby recommends the City Council deny the zoning code text amendment application from
Wilshire Properties, LLC that would allow Licensed Residential Programs for 7 to 10 persons as a
conditional use in the R-1-D and R-1-E Districts based on the findings made in the Planning & Zoning
Commission staff report dated April 23, 2019; and
Adopted this 23rd day of April, 2019.
_______________________
James Warden, Chair
From:Anne Steinfeldt
To:Jason Lindahl
Cc:Randy L. Engel; Siddhartha Chadda
Subject:[EXTERNAL] Zoning 601 Oak Ridge Road
Date:Thursday, March 21, 2019 8:29:50 AM
Good morning Jason,
I regret that I will be unable to attend the public hearing on Tuesday March 26th but I wanted
to share my input with you as Hopkins considers rezoning this property to be a Licensed
Residential Program for 7 to 16 persons.
Grace Homes has been a good neighbor but I am not in favor of changing the current zoning.
I am concerned about increased traffic and safety at a very busy intersection.
I am concerned about increased traffic/parking when it flows onto Wilshire Walk.
This past winter, the amount of snow made Wilshire Walk just passable for a single car
where drivers would need to take turns in order to safely pass each outer.
I am also concerned about the amount of debris that can overflow onto Oak Ridge Road.
Not often, but there have been times when personal property was discarded onto Oak
Ridge Road — not in trash bins but on the street. I probably should have reached out to
the City when those occurrences happened but I did not. I was just disappointed that a
business didn’t dispose of oversize items in a business-required fashion. It felt
disrespectful to the integrity of the neighborhood and their consideration of neighbors.
Thank you and the Commission for consideration of my concerns. Copied on this email are
my husband, Siddhartha Chadda, and Randy Engel, President of the Knollwood Association.
Warmest regards,
Anne Steinfeldt
710 Edgemoor Drive
From:Ben Rubin
To:Jason Lindahl
Cc:"Randy L. Engel"; brubin@deephaveninc.com
Subject:[EXTERNAL] GROUP HOME AT 601 OAK RIDGE ROAD
Date:Saturday, March 23, 2019 8:39:44 AM
Hi Jason:
I understand that Grace Homes as decided not to pursue a zoning change to allow them to operate
with more than six residents at the above noted address. However, it troubles me that they have
been and may continue operating with more than six residents in violation of the zoning ordinance.
There a number of reasons this concerns me, from traffic to visitors, but none more than setting a
precedent for businesses to operate in what we thought was a residential zoned neighborhood
when we purchased our lot in 2013 and built our home. So, to be clear, we are adamantly opposed
to any change in the zoning or a waiver allowing Grace, or any other business, to operate outside the
current zoning guidelines allowing more than six residents. Please feel free to contact me if you
want to discuss further.
Sincerely,
Ben Rubin
115 Cottage Downs
Hopkins MN 55305
Tel: 612.868.4462
ben@benrubin.net
Notice: This e-mail and any attachments may contain information that is legally privileged and confidential. If you
are not the intended recipient, please be advised that you are legally prohibited from retaining, using, copying,
distributing, or otherwise disclosing this information in any manner. If you received this transmission in error,
please reply to the sender and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format.
1
Jason Lindahl
From:Kim Burmeister <kimburm@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, April 17, 2019 4:39 PM
To:Jason Lindahl
Subject:[EXTERNAL] Grace Homes - zoning change
Dear Mr. Lindahl,
We have lived in Knollwood for over 25 years and strongly oppose the conditional permit to change the residential
group home located at 601 Oak Ridge Road (located next to their other group home on Wilshire
Walk) from a 6‐bed residence to a 7 to 10 bed facility. Our primary concern is the dramatic negative change that it will
cause our quiet and beautiful neighborhood. Our neighbors take great pride in our small community and love the “less
travelled” and open landscape of the area.
The changes that have already occurred with the two residential homes (with a third opening on Wilshire Walk) has
already caused hardship on local homeowners due to additional traffic and parking issues. We have narrow streets (in
need of repair) and tight corners that are not built to take on more traffic.
The current owners of Grace Homes purchased the business knowing the licensing was for six beds and we see no
reason why we, a small, quiet and historic neighborhood should have to pay a price for increasing the volume of
congestion.
People specifically purchase homes in Knollwood because of the charm, stability and quiet streets. We are one of the
very few low‐density neighborhoods of Hopkins, and like us, the City of Hopkins would not benefit from increasing the
density in a residential area for business operations.
Looking forward, one conditional permit change opens doors for more permit changes, that again we do not support for
our neighborhood and other Hopkins neighborhoods.
In conclusion, we strongly oppose the City approving the request for a conditional permit change to increase the number
of clients allowed in a home.
We appreciate your consideration.
Kim and John Burmeister
810 Edgemoor Drive
Hopkins, MN 55305
1
Jason Lindahl
From:Susan Kahn <susan.kahn@mac.com>
Sent:Wednesday, April 17, 2019 4:54 PM
To:Jason Lindahl
Subject:[EXTERNAL] Grace Homes (Wilshire Properties, LLC) Request
We are writing in regard to the upcoming request by Grace Homes to amend the Hopkins City Code to allow a
licensed group home with seven to 10 beds as a conditional use in certain R-1 zoning districts … and the
potential, if this request is approved, to allow the facility located at 601 Oak Ridge Road to receive a
conditional use permit for its current location.
We are opposed to a change to the Hopkins City Code and opposed to Grace Homes receiving a conditional use
permit for its current location - to operate a group home with up to 10 beds. We have made significant
investments in our property and our neighborhood, treasure the nature and density of our residential
neighborhood - and therefore, we are not in favor of this request to expand this group home in the Knollwood
neighborhood.
We are unable to attend the Hopkins Planning and Zoning Commission meeting next week on April 23, so we
are sharing our perspective via this email and hope that it will be considered in this process.
Sincerely,
Susan and Ken Kahn
712 Valley Way
Hopkins, MN 55305
March 19, 2019
Neighborhood Meeting Minutes
Agenda:
6:30: Gather and Sign-In
6:40: Welcome and Introductions
6:50: Project Description and Background
7:00: Q & A
Attendance:
7 people from the neighborhood representing 6 properties as follows:
122, 203, and 216 Wilshire Walk
302 and 417 Cottage Downs
810 Edgemoor Drive
2 people with ties to Hopkins Community Arts one of which is a business partner of the Grace
Homes owners.
1 person contacted me by phone earlier in the week as they were not able to attend the
meeting.
The meeting opened with an introductions and an overview of Matrix Home Health Care
Specialists, including when the company was founded, when and why it expanded into home
care and when and why residential care came was added. The licensing requirements for care
homes was provided including state and county requirements.
The background on how we got to this point was presented highlighting the fact that residential
care homes were fairly new to the city when Grace Homes opened in 2011 leading to the
oversight in zoning restrictions that lasted for the better part of 7 years. We talked about R-1
zoning and 6 residents being protected by the state and that there is a provision to allow more
than 6 residents that requires multiple family zoning and a conditional use permit. R-1-A zoning
which supports multiple family housing was discussed although it wasn’t a good fit for this
situation. The possibility of a text change was also discussed as an option but again not a good
fit for this situation.
6900 Shady Oak Road Suite 216
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Phone: 952/525-0505 / Fax: 952/525-0506
www.MatrixHomeHealthMN.com
www.GraceHomesMN.com
The meeting was fairly free flowing with questions and discussion all throughout. In general the
attendees agreed that there weren’t issues with Grace Homes and acknowledged that the
pushback is primarily due to the new home going in on Wilshire Walk. Many acknowledged the
need for this type of housing and were supportive of Grace Homes.
The operations at Grace Homes was discussed including the number of bedrooms, how they
are allocated, what the staffing ratios by time of day are, and who else works at the house. A
question was asked about the number of cars that come and go on a daily basis, not so much
as an issue with Grace Homes but a potential issue with the new care home. The Elderly (EW)
and CADI waivers were discussed as well as how shared rooms are sometimes necessary for
EW residents due to the relatively low reimbursement rate. Also discussed was the ability of
Grace Homes to accommodate more EW residents if the total number of residents was more
than 6.
The person that called in asked why a conditional use permit couldn’t be issued rather than
rezoning the property. The answer being that the conditional use permit didn’t pertain to R-1
properties. Thus the property needed to be rezoned in order to apply the conditional use permit.
There were several concerns expressed which were shared by all of the neighborhood
attendees. They were:
1. Any zoning change is permanent and while they were receptive of what Grace Homes
was doing, the property could be used differently in the future which may negatively
impact the neighborhood.
2. A precedent gets set if an exception is made for one property that might lead to others
wanting to do similar things. “You did it for them, why won’t you do it for me”.
3. There was concern about the ability to have up to 16 residents if rezoned to R-2. This
was addressed by limitations placed on the number of residents by the county as well as
the practicality of having too many residents in a limited space as shared rooms are
generally more difficult to rent than private rooms.
4. Parking and traffic flow was a concern although a stipulation of the conditional use
permit in the R-2 district is that all parking must be off-street. The traffic flow was trivial
compared to that generated on Hwy 7 and by the neighboring apartment building. Again
the real concern was not with Grace Homes but with the new care home on Wilshire
Walk.
5. A concern was expressed the opinion that property values were being affected by the
presence of the care homes citing 3 properties on Wilshire Walk that sold for less than
property value. Not all shared this concern as it’s not clear what the true connection
between property value and the care homes is.
Summary
The meeting was generally positive and had good discussion. The attendees came to better
understand the situation, how it came to be, what the limitations are, and were generally
supportive of the business recognizing the need for this type of housing. The attendees were
not supportive of a zoning change however due to precedent and future development issues.
The meeting concluded at 7:30pm as scheduled.
The following handout was provided:
March 19, 2019
Neighborhood Meeting Agenda
6:30: Gather and Sign-In
6:40: Welcome and Introductions
6:50: Project Description and Background
7:00: Q & A
Background:
The property at 601 Oak Ridge Road is owned by Wilshire Properties, LLC; Mr. Charles Scott
President. The property was operated as a Residential Living facility by Mr. Scott and his
spouse Bethany Buchanan, RN beginning in July of 2011. Grace Homes was announced to the
Hopkins City Council as an 8-bed senior care home at the March 20, 2012 meeting. Sometime
later a 9th resident was added with permission from Christopher Kearney, the Lead Inspector
for the City of Hopkins.
In May of 2017 Matrix Advocare Network, Inc. d/b/a Matrix Home Health Care Specialists
(Matrix) purchased the business operations of Grace Homes with the intent of continuing to
operate the care home. This includes the properties at 601 Oak Ridge Road and the adjacent
property at 414 Wilshire Walk. The physical properties are still owned by Wilshire Properties,
LLC and Matrix has continued to operate the homes under the name Grace Homes.
In January of 2019, after a routine fire marshal inspection the City of Hopkins cited Matrix for
operating the facility with more than 6 residents due to the way the property was zoned. There
haven’t been any neighborhood issues to the knowledge of the former or present owners of
Grace Homes.
6900 Shady Oak Road Suite 216
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Phone: 952/525-0505 / Fax: 952/525-0506
www.MatrixHomeHealthMN.com
www.GraceHomesMN.com
Project Description:
This project is a request to change the zoning of the property from R-1-D to R-2 and approve a
conditional use permit for up to 10 residents. The property in its current form meets all the
requirements for R-2 zoning. The project does not call for any physical changes to the property
or building nor does it change the way the property has been used since it opened in 2011. The
project is merely a request to allow the facility to continue to operate as it has been and meet
current zoning and use requirements.
Below is a copy of the zoning map showing the subject and surrounding properties.
601 Oak Ridge Road
Hwy 7.
Hwy 7. Oak Ridge Road 5th Avenue
Attendance Sign-In Sheet
Zoning Map
Subject Property
Standards for Licensed Residential Facilities in Other Communities
City of Minnetonka. Section 300.16, Subdivision 3.g - Licensed Residential Care Facilities or Community
Based Residential Care Facilities:
1. 3,000 square feet of lot area for each overnight resident, based on proposed capacity;
2. 300 square feet of residential building area for each overnight resident, based on proposed capacity;
3. In R-1 and R-2 districts, for new construction including additions, a floor area ratio (FAR) that is no
more than 100% of the highest FAR of the homes within 400 feet of the lot lines and within 1,000
feet of the lot along the street where it is located, including both sides of the street. The FAR applies
to an existing structure only if it seeks to expand. The city may exclude a property that the city
determines is not visually part of the applicant's neighborhood and may add a property that the city
determines is visually part of the applicant's neighborhood. The city may waive or modify the floor
area requirement where:
a. The proposed use would be relatively isolated from the rest of the neighborhood by slopes,
trees, wetlands, undevelopable land, or other physical features; or
b. The applicant submits a specific building design and site plan, and the city determines that the
proposed design would not adversely impact the neighborhood character because of such
things as setbacks, building orientation, building height, or building mass. In this case, the
approval is contingent upon implementation of the specific site and building plan.
4. No external building improvements undertaken in R-1 and R-2 districts which alter the original
character of the home unless approved by the city council. In R-1 and R-2 districts, there must be no
exterior evidence of any use or activity that is not customary for typical residential use, including no
exterior storage, signs, and garbage and recycling containers;
5. Traffic generation: a detailed documentation of anticipated traffic generation must be provided. In
order to avoid unreasonable traffic impacts to a residential neighborhood, traffic limitations are
established as follows:
a. In R-1 and R-2 districts, the use is not be permitted on properties that gain access by private
roads or driveways that are used by more than one lot;
b. The use must be located on, and have access only to, a collector or arterial roadway as identified
in the comprehensive plan;
c. The use must prepare, and abide by, a plan for handling traffic and parking on high traffic days,
such as holidays, that has been reviewed and approved by city staff.
6. No on-street parking to be allowed. Adequate off-street parking will be required by the city based
on the staff and resident needs of each specific facility. In R-1 and R-2 districts, the parking area
must be screened from the view from other R-1 and R-2 residential properties. Private driveways
must be of adequate width to accommodate effective vehicle circulation and be equipped with a
turnaround area to prevent backing maneuvers onto public streets. Driveways must be maintained
in an open manner at all times and be wide enough for emergency vehicle access. Driveway slope
must not exceed 8 percent unless the city determines that site characteristics or mitigative
measures to ensure safe vehicular circulation are present. Adequate sight distance at the access
point must be available;
7. All facilities to conform to the requirements of the Minnesota state building code, fire code, health
code, and all other applicable codes and city ordinances;
8. Landscape buffering from surrounding residential uses to be provided consistent with the
requirements contained in section 300.27 of this ordinance. A privacy fence of appropriate
residential design may be required to limit off-site impacts. Landscape screening from surrounding
residential uses may be required by the city depending on the type, location and proximity of
residential areas to a specific facility;
9. Submission of detailed program information including goals, policies, activity schedule, staffing
patterns and targeted capacity which may result in the imposition of reasonable conditions to limit
the off-site impacts;
10. Submission of a formal site and building plan review if a new building is being constructed, an
existing building is being modified, or the city otherwise determines that there is a need for such
review; and
11. Additional conditions may be required by the city in order to address the specific impacts of a
proposed facility.
City of St. Louis Park. Sec. 36-163(C) - Uses permitted with conditions. A structure or land in an R-1
district may be used for one or more of the following uses if its use complies with the conditions stated
in section 36-162 and those specified for the use in this subsection.
1. Group home/nonstatutory. The conditions are as follows:
a. At least 800 square feet of lot area shall be provided for each person housed on the site.
b. At least 12% of the lot area shall be developed as designed outdoor recreation area.
c. The residence structure shall be occupied by not more than six persons under treatment.
d. The residence structure shall provide one bedroom for each two persons accommodated in
group living quarters.
e. The residence structure shall provide one bathroom for each four persons accommodated in
group living quarters.
f. The use shall not be located within 1,500 feet of any other group homes.
A regular meeting of the Hopkins City Council was held on March 20, 2012, in the
Council Chambers of the Hopkins City Hall.
Present were Mayor Maxwell, Council Members Cummings, Gadd, Halverson, and
Youakim. Also, present were staff members Bradford, Elverum, Genellie, Mornson,
Stadler and City Attorney Jeremy Steiner.
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Maxwell called the meeting to order at 7:31 p.m.
II. OPEN AGENDA - PUBLIC COMMENTS AND CONCERNS
There were no comments.
III. PRESENTATION
The owners of Grace Homes, an 8 -bed senior care home in Hopkins, introduced their
business. Mayor Maxwell welcomed them to the City of Hopkins.
IV. CONSENT AGENDA
1. Minutes of the Goal Setting Day on February 17, 2012
2. Minutes of the March 6, 2012 Council Meeting
3. Minutes of the March 6, 2012 Work Session following the Council Meeting
4. Minutes of the March 13, 2012 Work Session
5. Approve Overpass Skate Park Operational Agreement with action Sports of
Minnesota, Inc., dba, The Third Lair (CR 2012-024)
6. Accept Improvements and Authorize Final Payment on 5th Street South Street and
Utility Improvements (CR 2012-025)
Mr. Stadler addressed the Council regarding Consent Agenda Item #5. There are no
changes to the agreement and Third Lair continues to add new equipment to provide
a fresh experience for the skate park users.
Mr. Bradford addressed Council regarding Consent Agenda Item #6. The contractor
completed all work as specified in the contract.
Council Member Cummings moved and Council Member Youakim seconded a
motion to approve the Consent Agenda. A poll of the vote was ,as follows: Council
Member Cummings, aye; Council Member Gadd, aye; Council Member Halverson,
aye; Council Member Youakim, aye; Mayor Maxwell, aye. The motion carried
unanimously.
1
IV. NEW BUSINESS
1. Approve Preliminary Plans for Shady Oak Road (CR 2012-027)
Mr. Stadler addressed the Council giving an overview of the Shady Oak Road project.
Hennepin County representative Craig Twinem reviewed the project location, project
history, public meeting input and project schedule.
Tony Heppleman, WSB & Associates Consultant, reviewed the purpose & need for the
project which includes poor pavement condition, safety issues, capacity
improvements, pedestrian & bicycle facility needs, and drainage issues. Mr.
Heppleman reviewed the layout changes & comparison from 2006 to 2012.
Mr. Stadler reviewed the layout changes, property impacts and project funding. The
estimated cost to the City of Hopkins is approximately $2.9 million.
Ms. Elverum discussed the process and plan for working with property & business
owners affected by the project.
Staff will continue to keep the Council updated during the final design process and
construction.
There was much discussion by Council about the preliminary plan, landscape
buffering, keeping the integrity of the neighborhoods, importance of neighborhood
input, minimizing property impact and maximizing buffering, Duck Pond viewing area
outlet to prevent flooding, Highway 7 intersection changes, impact of the future
SWLRT station, pedestrian friendly trails & sidewalks, road elevations and the
importance of working with & communicating with impacted businesses & residents.
Rick Nelson, owner of Nelson's Meats, addressed the Council. Mr. Nelson's business is
impacted and parking is a big concern.
Jill & Allen Forrest, 202 West Park Road, Hopkins addressed the Council. The Forrest's
home is impacted and the close proximity of the road to their home is a big concern.
Council Member Halverson moved and Council Member Gadd seconded a motion to
Approve Resolution 2012-015, Resolution approving preliminary plans, layout #2, for the
reconstruction of Shady Oak Road from Excelsior Boulevard to north of Highway 7. A
poll of the vote was as follows: Council Member Gadd, aye; Council Member
Halverson, aye; Council Member Youakim, aye; Mayor Maxwell, aye. The motion
carried.
2. Approve Cooperative Agreement between Hopkins and Met Council (CR 2012-026)
Mr. Bradford addressed the Council regarding the replacement of the sanitary sewer
lift station, why it needs to be replaced, possible site locations, review of the public
06
input meetings, examples of possible lift station design & landscaping and gave an
overview of the proposed Oakes Park location. Mr. Bradford explained that there
would be additional public input & design meetings as the project moves forward. Mr.
Bradford reviewed the Inter -Governmental Agreement with the Metropolitan Council.
Adam Gordon, Met Council representative, discussed the lift station design with the
Council. Mr. Gordon explained that new Lift Station buildings are built well above noise
odor standards from twenty years ago.
The following residents addressed the Council about the Lift Station project:
Esther Williams, 921 Abbie Lane, Hopkins, & Parkside Homeowners Association Vice -
Chairperson, opposes the Lift Station relocation and is concerned that not all the
impacted homeowners were kept informed during the process.
Gerald Healy, 700 Oak Park Lane, Hopkins, opposes the Lift Station being built on
Parkland and prefers rebuilding the Lift Station at the present location.
Corinne Braun, 813 Kassie Court, Hopkins, presented Council with a petition from
residents opposing the re -location of the Lift Station to Oakes Park and requested
community involvement in the site location selection.
Jean Sorenson, 808 Cameron Court, Hopkins, & Parkside Homeowners Association
Chairperson, opposes the Lift Station location and would like Council to explore other
options.
There was much discussion by Council regarding the lift station design, entrance to the
lift station, building maintenance, size of the building, screening of outside equipment,
other possible locations & reasons for choosing the Oakes Park site, reasons for not
building at current location, most cost-effective solution, project costs, distance of lift
station to nearest home, building appearance, enhanced restroom facilities for the
park, odor filter systems, possible hockey rink re -location, additional opportunities for
public input into the design process and the importance of resident engagement in
the process.
Mr. Bradford gave an explanation of the project financials and that staff will continue
to engage the Council, community members & Park Board as the process continues.
Council Member Cummings moved and Council Member Gadd seconded a motion
to Approve Inter -Governmental Agreement with the Metropolitan Council. A poll of
the vote was as follows: Council Member Cummings, aye; Council Member Gadd,
aye; Council Member Halverson, aye; Council Member Youakim, aye; Mayor Maxwell,
aye. The motion carried unanimously.
9
3. 2012 Goals (CR 2012- 016)
Mr. Mornson addressed the Council regarding the City of Hopkins 2012 Mission &
Goals. Mr. Mornson reviewed the Mission Statement, Vision, accomplishments in 2011
and the goals, strategies & action items.
Council Member Youakim moved and Council Member Halverson seconded a motion
to Adopt Resolution 2012-008, affirming the City of Hopkins Mission Statement and
adopting the 2012-2013 Goals and Strategic Plan for the City of Hopkins. A poll of the
vote was as follows: Council Member Cummings, aye; Council Member Gadd, aye;
Council Member Halverson, aye; Council Member Youakim, aye; Mayor Maxwell, aye.
The motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Mornson recognized Community Development Coordinator Tara Beard for
successfully acquiring and completing requirements for grant monies.
V. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Council Member Halverson moved and Council
Member Youakim seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was
adjourned at 10:19 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Debbie Vold
COUN IL MEMBF,RS
ATTEST:
0.100
Eugene J. axwell, Mayor
Local News Real Estate Events Get Tickets
Grace Homes specializes in creating a warm atmosphere for those with memory illnesses.
By James Warden | Apr 6, 2012 2:30 pm ET | Updated Apr 6, 2012 5:55 pm ET
Walk into 601 Oak Ridge Road home, and you’re immediately struck by the warmth of
hard woods. A spacious kitchen, luxurious living room and beautiful backyard with
deck all add to the ambience. Then there’s a dog named Daisy, a cat named Angel and
two birds, Sunny and Sky, who add a spark of life to the elegance.
Hopkins Long-Term Care Facility Makes Residents Feel at Home | Hopk... https://patch.com/minnesota/hopkins/amp/3923186/hopkins-long-term-ca...
1 of 6 4/18/2019, 10:31 AM
This isn’t the home of a wealthy suburban family, though. The house is an 8-bed
residential care facility specializing in memory care—specifically illnesses such as
Alzheimer’s and dementia.
Subscribe
Grace Homes, as the business is named, is a three-year-old company that started in
Hopkins on July 1. A crew of certified nursing assistants—overseen by wife and
husband owners Bethany Buchanan and Charles Scott—care for residents in the secure
but homelike setting.
“I really feel strongly that this is the best model of care for the elderly. It’s small. It’s
personal. It’s intimate,” Buchanan said.
Buchanan is a registered nurse who spent eight years in hospital settings and four years
Hopkins Long-Term Care Facility Makes Residents Feel at Home | Hopk... https://patch.com/minnesota/hopkins/amp/3923186/hopkins-long-term-ca...
2 of 6 4/18/2019, 10:31 AM
in long-term care. That background gives her the ability to care for patients with severe
health issues beyond the memory-related illnesses that are the business’ specialty.
But as the home’s atmosphere suggests, the focus is on quality of life—not just treating
illnesses. The food residents eat is mostly local and organic. They exercise every day,
including with a physical fitness specialist who comes in three times a week. They get
massages once a month. They listen to old, familiar songs while singing and playing
hand instruments.
There’s also aromatherapy and, during the winter, light box therapy to keep residents’
vitamin D levels up and boost their mood. Buchanan and Scott pride themselves on
rarely using psychotropic drugs with patients. They didn’t have any residents on that
type of medication when Patch visited a week ago.
The team spends as much time engaging the residents as providing for them. The
residents feed the pets and water the plants because caring for living beings stimulates
memory care patients. They also participate in other light chores, such as getting the
mail, that keeps them active—vital because memory care patients can sit for 10 hours at
a time if not encouraged.
“They want to feel purposeful, and they need to move,” Buchanan said.
For Grace Homes, the warm atmosphere, the healthy living and the activities all
contribute to one goal: Making residents feel at home.
***
Want to learn more about Grace Homes? The home will host an open house from 1 p.m.
to 4 p.m. May 20 at the facility, located at 601 Oak Ridge Road. The open house is just
one way the business is connecting with the community. It has joined it local
neighborhood association and will continue taking its residents on outings to local
places, such as Dairy Queen and the Farmers’ Market. “We’ve just had a terrific
welcome from Hopkins,” Buchanan said.
Hopkins Long-Term Care Facility Makes Residents Feel at Home | Hopk... https://patch.com/minnesota/hopkins/amp/3923186/hopkins-long-term-ca...
3 of 6 4/18/2019, 10:31 AM