P&Z Resolution 2020-02 - Recommending the City Council Approve a 4 Foot South Side Yard Setback Variance for the Property Located at 227 Homedale Road (PID 20-117-21-33-0068)CITY OF HOPKINS
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2020-02
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE 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, 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")
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 submissions, the written
staff report, and after careful consideration of all other written and oral comments concerning the
requested variances, the Commission 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 applicant seeks a four (4) foot south sideyard setback variance from twelve (12) feet to eight
(8) feet. The purpose and intent of the setback tinning standards is to maintain separation between properties
for density, safety and esthetic masons. In this case, the south side of the subjectpmperty 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 thisparkgranting the four (4) foot side yard setback
variance allowing the neighboring home to be four (4) feet closes to the shared properly 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 sldeyard 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 pmperty as LD
R —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 properly as Suburban Neighborhood. This land use category is characterised by low density single
family dwellings andgolf courses Neighborhoods in this category are designed around a modifiedgrid street
network with good access to the surrounding transportation network. Properties in this category are relatively
large for Hopkins, with most having ample privateyards and attachedgarages The 2040plan calls for
continuation of the low density single family land usepattern 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 pmposal wouldput the subject pmpery 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 properly. Stafznds this is reasonable given the abutting propery 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 pmperties
4. Are there unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner?
Finding. • There are unique an-umstances 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 proper y where the
2
variance is requested As mentioned abom, since the ai#acentpark is primariy used for open space, there
will be no visible or noticeable impact on either the park or the surrounding residential pmpertier.
5. Will the variance, if granted, alter the essential character of the locality?
Finding: Granting the requested variance will not alter the essenkal character of the surrounding
neighborhood The proposed south sideyard setback variance will allow a 2 -story addition to the existing
single famiy dwelling to be located fourfeet closer to the southern propery Since the abutting prnperiy 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 Planning and Zoning Commission 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 Commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning
Commission of the City of Hopkins that based on the findings of fact contained herein, the Commission
hereby recommends that the City Council of the City of Hopkins approve the Applicant's requested
variances.
Adopted this 26' day of May, 2020.
P��
"F" 'M
Gerard Balan, Chair
3