2020-036 Resolution Denying the Variance Request from Robin Franks with Pawn Amrica, LLC for the Properties Located at 1409 (PID 24-117-22-32-0099) and 1413 Mainstreet (PID 24-117-22-32-0100) CITY OF HOPKINS
HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2020-03G .
RESOLUTION DENYING THE VARIANCE REQUEST FROM ROBIN FRANKS WITH
PAWN AMERICA,LLC FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 1409(PID 24-117-22-32-
0099)AND 1413 MAINSTREET (PID 24-117-22-32-0100)
WHEREAS,the Cit�T of Hopkins (the"Cit��")is a municipal corporation,organized and e?:isting
under the laws of the State of Minnesota;and
WHEREAS, Robin Franke with Pawn America, LLC (the "Applicant") was authorized by the
fee owner to apply for this applicarion for the properties at 1409 & 1413 Mainstreet (collectively, the
"Property'�;and
WHEREAS, the Property is zoned B-3,Ueneral Business District;and
WHEREAS,the City has adopted a zorung ordinance and other official controls for reasons that
include, but are not limited to, protecting the character of properties and areas within the communit��,
promoting the proper use of land and structures, fi�ng 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, contained �vithin said zoning provisions and official controls is Ciry Ordinance
2017-1125 (the "Ordinance'�, which took effect on November 30, 2017 after an eatensive stud}'
conducted by the Cit��regardin�pawnshops; and
WHEREAS,the Ordinance,as it relates to pa�vnshops in particular,is codified in Hopkins Ciry
Code, sections 102-4, 102-214,and 102-216,respectivelj�;and
WHEREAS,the Ordinance allows pa�vnshops as a conciirional use in the B-3,General Business
District,and provides certain performance standards that must be satisfied in order to obtain a conditional
use permit for a pawnshop, including, but not limited to, pawnshops cannot be located within 200 feet
from any residential use or on a property that has frontage on or abuts Mainstreet;and
WHEREAS,presumabl}�because the Propert��is located within 200 feet of a residenrial use and
fronts l�Zainstreet, the Applicant has made application to the City for a variance, requesting specifically
that the Cit�-allow the Propert}�to be used for a pawnshop notwithstanding the Ordinance and its express
perfortnance standards,which must be sarisfied in order for a pawnshop to be located in the B-3,Central
Business District;and
WHEREAS,pursuant to I�7innesota Statutes, section 462.357,subd. 6(2),"[v]ariances shall only
be permitted when they are in harmony�vith the general purposes and intent of the ordinance and�vhen
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 compl��ing with the zoning ordinance.
"Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property
1
661704.v2
owner proposes to use the propert��in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance; the
plight of the lando�vner is due to circumstances unique to the propert5�not created by the landowner;and
the variance,if granted,will not alter the essential character of the locality.Economic considerarions alone
do not constitute practical difficulties.";and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, secrion 462.357, subd. 6(2) also provides that"[t]he board of
appeals and adjustments or the governing body as the case may be, ma}�not permit as a variance any use
that is not allowed under the zoning ordinance for property in the zone where the affected person's land
is located";and
WHEREAS,on)une 23,2020,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 variance and all persons present were gi�Ten an
opportunity to be heard.The Commission also took into consideration the written comments and analysis
of City staff;and
WHEREAS, following its public hearing, the Commission adopted Planning & Loning
Commission Resolution 2020-03,which recommends that the City Council den��the Applicant's request
for a variance and makes specific findings regarding said request;and
WHEREAS, based on a review of the Applicant's request and its submissions, the written staff
report, the Commission's recommendarion, and after careful considerarion of all other written and oral
comments concerning the requested variance from all interested persons and entities, the Cit}' Council
makes the following findings of fact with respect to the aforementioned criteria provided in Minnesota
Statutes, section 462.357, subd. 6(2):
1. First and foremost,the Applicant's request is tantamount to a request for an unlawful use
variance because it seeks to use the Propert��in a manner that is not otherwise authorized
in the Ciry's zoning regulations. Specifically, the Ordinance expressly makes pawnshops
a conditional use in the B-3 District and,in order to qualify for a conditional use permit,
a property must not be located within 200 feet of a residential use or have frontage on
Mainstreet. Neither of these eapress standards can be met under these circumstances,
and so to grant a variance from the Ordinance, as requested b�� the Applicant, would
effectivel�� authorize a use that is expressly prohibited pursuant to the Ciry's zoning
controls.
2. Additionally, and notwithstanding the proposed unlawful use that is inherent in the
variance request, the Applicant has not demonstrated practical difficulties that would
justify approval for the reasons below:
(a) The requested variance is not in harmony with purposes and intent of the
City's zoning ordinance. The Cit}''s Sapplenrenlalllata for Variance form asks
the Applicant to specify the section of the ordinance from which a variance is
sought. In response to this question, the Applicant merely listed the entire
Ordinance No. 2017-1125,which includes all of the specific conditional use
permit standards for pawnshops that were carefully crafted less than three years
ago following an eatensive study related to such uses. As stated in the recitals
above, two particular standards contained in the conditional use permit
2
c�a��oa.�z
requirements expressly prohibit a pawnshop from operaring on the Propert��.
Granting a variance and ignoring these standards has the practical effect of
eliminating them from the Ciry's zoning controls and changing pawnshops from
a conditional use to a permitted use, circumventing the City's authorit}�to
determine the appropriate location and development regulations for this type of
use in its communit��.
(b) The requested variance is not consistent with the comprehensive plan.
The 2030 Comprehensive Plan's Future Land Use Map guides the Propert��as
Commercial. Chapter 4 of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan details the Cit��'s land
use plan and includes a set of overall goals that provide a framework for land use
initiatives in Hopkins. Of these goals, the most applicable to this variance
request is:
Maintain appropriate transltrons between land uses. Hopkir�s i.r a frilly
de��eloped con�munit��and tvill lrkely.ree neu�developneent throrigl� redevelop»rent i�titiatil�e.r.
Tl�e City will rvork to ensrrre appro�iriate tran.ritional rr.re.r and Guffering betrveen neav and
exi.rting lanrl u.re.r.
One of the wa��s the City's zoning regulations seeks to implement this goal in
relation to pawnshops is bj�requiring minimum separation distances between
pawnshops and other uses such as other pawnshops, residential or institutional
uses or districts and off-sale liquor. Granting the requested variance and
allowing a pawnshop use on the Property would be entirely inconsistent�vith the
minimum separation standards from the single-family residential zone to the
north just across the alle}�and the institutional use to the southeast across
Mainstreet (Chesterton Academy).
The Land Use and Development chapter includes numerous implementation
strategies and goes on to state the Ciry 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-
famil3�homes.
(c) The proposal does not put the Properry to use in a reasonable manner. In
2017 the City Council enacted a moratorium on pawnshops, currency etchanges
and coin dealers to give Ciry staff sufficient time to study these uses and evaluate
various options for regulation. The result of this review was adoption of
Ordinance 2017-1125 which established pawnshops as a conditional use in the
B-3 and B-4 district, subject to certain standards. Approving the applicant's
variance request would have the practical effect of�vaiving these standards and
using the property in a manner that is not reasonable from the standpoint of the
Ciry's e�press goals for regulating and permitting pawnshops.
(d) There are not unique circumstances to the property that were not created
by the landowner that support granting the requested variance. Under this
standard, the Applicant must demonstrate the issues that pre�rent them from
using the Property as a pawnshop were caused by circumstances unique to the
3
661704.v2
Properry and were not caused b5�them. The Applicant does not provide, and
staff cannot find,any evidence supporting a position that there are unique
circumstances to Property not created by the landowner that prevent them from
meeting the zoning regulations for pawnshops. Merely being located on a parcel
that cannot otherwise meet the City's conditional use permit performance
standards for pawnshops is not enough to make unique circumstances that
warrant the granting of a variance.
(e) Granting the requested variance would alter the essential character of the
surrounding area. Chapter 4 of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan provides more
detailed land use planning in eight planning districts. The Properry is located in
Planning District 8—Downtown Hopkins. The residential neighborhood
directly north of the subject properties is located Planning District 2—Central
Hopkins. The Narrative for Planning District 2 states this district needs to be
protected from outside intrusions that might threaten the integrity of the existing
low densit��neighborhoods. Potential intrusions are most likely to occur on the
common boundary between Planning District 8 and Planning District 2. Staff
finds granting the requested variance would be inconsistent with this portion of
the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and alter the essential character of the surrounding
neighborhood.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Cit��Council of the Ciry 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 Cit��Council of the Cit��of
Hopkins that based on the findings of fact contained herein, the Ciry Council hereby denies the
Applicant's requested variance for the real propert}�located at 1409 and 1413 Mainstreet (PIDs 24-117-
22-32-0099 and 24-117-22-32-0100).
Adopted this 14`''day of July,2020.
��,'V�� - —
Amy Domeier,City Clerk Jason Gadd,Mayor
C�-
4
c�i�oa.�2