P&Z Resolution 2023-03 - Resolution Recommending the City Council Deny the Variance Request for the Property Located at 13 Harrison Avenue SCITY OF HOPKINS
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2023-03
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL DENY THE VARIANCE
REQUEST FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 13 HARRISON AVENUE SOUTH
WHEREAS, the City of Hopkins (the "City") is a municipal corporation, organized and
existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, Adam Price of Price Custom Homes (the "Applicant"), applied for
variances on behalf of Brianna Frederick, the fee owner of 13 Harrison Avenue South (PID
19-117-21-34-0153) legally described below:
and
Lot 2, Block 1, East Hopkins Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the "Property");
WHEREAS, the Property is zoned N3 -B, Small Lot Traditional Neighborhood; 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, City Code Part III, Chapter 102, Article II, Section 102-260 (d) (10)
requires attached garages to be set back a minimum of 30 feet from the main principal
building's front facade; and
WHEREAS, City Code Part III, Chapter 102, Article II, Section 102-260 (d) (11) only
allows garage doors to be located on the rear, side, and street side facades requires; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the aforementioned code provisions, the Applicant has
made a request to the City for variances from the attached garage setback and garage door
location requirements to construct a single unit home; and
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 23, 2023, pursuant to the procedural requirements contained in
Article III, Section 102-13130 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 their submissions, the
written staff report, and after careful consideration of all other written and oral comments
concerning the requested variance, 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 requested variances are not in harmony with the purpose and intent of the
zoning ordinance. The purpose and intent of the additional setback for attached garages
and the allowed garage door location standard is to deemphasize automotive use of the
traditional house building type in favor of emphasizing habitable living space. Granting
the variance would allow the garage to project 10.5 feet beyond the main principal
building's front fagade rather than be set back the minimum of 30 feet required by the
zoning ordinance.
2. Is the variance consistent with the comprehensive plan?
Finding: The requested variances are not consistent with the comprehensive plan. A
stated goal of the Cultivate Hopkins 2040 Comprehensive Plan is to encourage all
public and private developments to be well-designed, durable, human -scaled, and
pedestrian -oriented. One policy associated with this goal is to reduce parking between
buildings and the street as much as possible. Granting the variance would emphasize
the automotive uses of the property between the building and the street and undermine
the human -scaled, pedestrian -oriented uses of the property.
3. Does proposal put property to use in a reasonable manner?
Finding: The proposal does put the property to use in a reasonable manner. Single unit
household living is an allowed principal use in the N3 -B zone and the scale of the
development fits within the density range prescribed by the comprehensive plan.
4. Are there unique circumstances to the property not created by the
landowner?
Finding: There are not unique circumstances to the property that were not created by
2
the landowner. Under this standard, the applicant must demonstrate the issues that
prevent him from developing the subject property were caused by circumstances unique
to the property that were not caused by them. The lot is a regular shape with no
constraints on development in the form of topography or wetlands. The lot meets the
minimum lot area and lot width standards for the N3-13 zone and could be used to
accommodate development of a single unit household under the requirements of the
zoning code.
5. Will the variance, if granted, alter the essential character of the locality?
Finding: Granting the variance would alter the essential character of the surrounding area.
The vast majority of the homes in the surrounding area have garages that are set back
from the main principal building's front fagade in ways that would meet the requirements of
the code.
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 deny the
Applicant's requested variance.
Adopted this 23rd day of May, 2023.
Nathan White, Chair
k]