VII.1. First Reading of Ordinance 2026-1234 Amending the Development Code to Reclassify Short Term Rentals as a Permitted Use in Neighborhood Zones; Gallagher
1
City Council Report 2026-074
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
Mike Mornson, City Manger
From: Sam Gallagher, Associate Planner
Date: July 14, 2026
Subject: First Reading of Ordinance 2026-1234 Amending the Development Code
to Reclassify Short Term Rentals as a Permitted Use in Neighborhood
Zones
_____________________________________________________________________
REQUEST
Consider a first reading of Ordinance 2026-1234 amending the Development Code
to:
• Reclassify Short-term rentals (STRs) as Permitted Uses within N1, N2, N3-A,
N3-B, NX1, NX2, Neighborhood Zones, subject to licensing requirements and
supplemental use regulations.
The proposed amendment is the result of City Council discussion to eliminate the
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) requirement while retaining the City’s licensing,
inspection, and operational regulations for STRs.
RECOMMENDATION
MOTION TO adopt Resolution 2026-024 approving the first reading of Ordinance
2026-1234 amending the Development Code.
ANALYSIS
Background and Recent Experience
The growth of online platforms such as Airbnb and Vrbo has expanded the short -term
rental (STR) market and prompted communities across the country, including Hopkins,
to consider how these uses should be regulated.
Since adoption of the 2022 Zoning Code update, two applications for Conditional Use
Permits (CUPs) for STRs have been reviewed by the Planning & Zoning Commission
and City Council, in 2022 and 2025. These applications provided an opportunity to
evaluate the City's regulatory framework in practice. During the review process,
discussions focused on neighborhood character, property values, housing availability,
nuisance enforcement, unpermitted STR activity, and the City's ability to administer a
Planning & Development
CITY OF HOPKINS
2
fair and consistent approval process. Staff has not received complaints regarding
nuisance activity or noncompliance associated with STRs in Hopkins. Information found
2026 Assessment Report (see page 55) shows that Hopkins’ growth in single family
residential market value is not exceeding the County’s growth which suggests there is
not direct correlation that allowing short-term rentals as a conditional use since 2022
subdues single family housing supply which would result in higher increases property
values.
Following approval of the most recent STR CUP, staff understood that there was
interest in exploring the modification to allow STRs as a permitted use in neighborhood
zoning districts.
Limitations of the Conditional Use Permit Process
Staff believe the Conditional Use Permit process is not ideally suited to regulating STRs
because many concerns associated with STRs relate to the future behavior of guests
and ongoing operational characteristics rather than the physical characteristics of a
property.
A Conditional Use Permit is intended to evaluate whether a use is appropriate for a
particular property based on objective land use considerations and established approval
criteria. In the context of STRs, concerns often relate to issues such as noise, parking,
occupancy, and property management practices. Evaluating these concerns during a
CUP review requires decision-makers to make assumptions about the behavior of future
guests, making it difficult to apply approval criteria consistently and objectively from one
application to another.
Additionally, a CUP runs with the property and remains valid so long as its conditions
are met. This limits the City's ability to adapt operational requirements over time in
response to changing market conditions, community feedback, or emerging trends. Staff
believe that the licensing framework with clearly defined operational standards is an
effective and legally defensible mechanism for regulating STRs, monitoring compliance,
and addressing community concerns on an ongoing basis.
Properties Operating a STR without a CUP or Rental License
Staff have not received complaints regarding properties operating a STR in Hopkins and
do not have a complete record of unpermitted STRS in Hopkins. Planning and Zoning
Commissioners recommended that staff provide research to Council on unpermitted
STRs operating in Hopkins. Staff found that there are at least 12 unpermitted STRs
operating throughout Hopkins Neighborhood Zones, including Bellegrove, The Avenues,
Presidents, Cottageville, and South Presidents neighborhoods.
The Conditional Use Permit process is difficult to apply consistent and objective
approval for STR guest activity and may deter property owners from complying with
regulatory and licensing requirements. Prohibiting STRs in Hopkins may perpetuate
unpermitted STRs operating in Hopkins without required inspections, licensing and
compliance with conditions. The proposed amendment to eliminate the CUP process
may encourage compliance with rental licensing requirements, help property owners be
aware of conditions to operate a STR and help staff monitor compliance to address
3
community concerns on an ongoing basis. Staff will follow up with identified potential
unpermitted STRs with information about requirements and procedures persistent to the
Council’s decision on the proposed amendment.
Existing Regulatory Framework
Prior to the 2022 Zoning Code update, STRs were not specifically addressed in City
Code. Beginning in 2018, staff administratively regulated STRs in a manner similar to
bed and breakfast establishments because of their comparable operational
characteristics. During the code update process STRs were studied in greater detail and
ultimately established as a distinct land use with specific regulations.
The current regulatory framework is summarized below.
Current Requirements
STRs are currently subject to three layers of regulation: Zoning regulations, Rental
licensing requirements, and general nuisance ordinances. Short-term rentals (STRs)
are considered by zoning code to be a form of lodging. Lodging is described as
“establishments that provide temporary lodging for less than 30 days to transient
guests who maintain a permanent place of residence elsewhere.” STRs are defined
as “all or portion of a residential dwelling unit offered for rent to overnight guests for
fewer than 30 consecutive days.”
STRs are permitted in non-industrial mixed-use zones, conditional in neighborhood
zones, and prohibited in all other zones. All permitted STRs in the City are subject to
the Supplemental Use Regulations established by the code, which are:
1. Short-term rentals must comply with all applicable licensing and permit
requirements of the city and Hennepin County.
2. No more than 6 adults and their dep endent children may occupy rooms
within a short-term rental.
3. Short-term rentals are not permitted on lots occupied by accessory dwelling
units.
4. External structural alterations or site improvements that change the
residential character of the lot upon which a short-term rental is located are
prohibited. Examples of such prohibited alterations include the construction
of a parking lot, the addition of commercial-like exterior lighting, and signage.
5. A register of short-term rental guests must be maintained and made
available to the city upon request.
6. Short-term rentals may not be used for special events to be attended by
individuals who are not registered guests of the short-term rental unit.
The City Code’s rental licensing requirements apply to STRs in the same manner as
any other rental dwelling unit. Licensing requirements include an annual fee based
on property type (single family, two units, three units or more), initial inspection, and
4
routine rental inspections every one to five years, based on the grade of the initial
inspection. A rental property may be inspected at any time between routine
inspections on a compliant basis to the City.
The City’s general nuisance ordinances regarding noise, trash, and parking all apply
to properties used for STR the same way they do for all other properties in the City.
These ordinances reinforce the expectation to be a good neighbor and grant the City
authority to stop in if nuisances persist.
Supplemental Use Regulations Review Standards
During the discussion of the proposed ordinance amendments, the Planning & Zoning
Commission expressed interest in exploring additional supplemental use regulations for
short-term rentals in Neighborhood Zones. Additional regulations included support to
remove the prohibition of Backyard Cottages (also referred to as Ac cessory Dwelling
Units or ADUs) as STRs, a minimum stay duration for STR guests, and a homesteading
or owner-occupied requirement to operate a STR depending on future housing stock
concerns. Staff can convene a discussion with the City Council and/or the Planning and
Zoning Commission and bring forward additional ordinance modifications at a future
date.
Proposed Amendment
Reclassification of Short-term Rentals in Neighborhood Zones
The proposed amendment would reclassify short-term rentals from conditional uses to
permitted uses within the N1, N2, N3-A, N3-B, NX1, NX2, Neighborhood Zones. As a
result, short-term rentals within neighborhood zones would be permitted, subject to
licensing requirements and supplemental use regulations.
The proposed change provides consistent and objective review criteria for
administrative approval of short-term rentals with ongoing review for compliance with
licensing and supplemental use regulations. The Hopkins Zoning Map shows which
property areas are Neighborhood Zones.
Permitted uses are permitted as-of-right, subject to compliance with all other applicable
regulations, including rental licensing, inspections, and supplemental use regulations.
The proposed amendment would remove the Conditional Use Permit review by City
Council.
Peer Communities:
Staff surveyed STR regulations of similar and nearby communities:
City Regulation Notes
St Louis Park STRs are not permitted.
Edina STRs are not permitted.
Minnetonka New ordinance adopted by City Council will take
effect on January 1, 2027, that STRs are
permitted provided the property is homesteaded.
All properties must comply with the City’s
building code and nuisance ordinance.
5
Eden Prairie STRs are not regulated differently from long-term
rental units.
An annual rental
license is required for
all rental properties
and is non-
transferable.
Minneapolis STRs are permitted in residential zones with a
restriction that a property owner can have one
short-term rental property in addition to their
homestead property. In buildings with 20 or more
units, no more than 10 percent of units can be
STRs.
Richfield No STR may be rented for a term of less than
five days unless the licensee resides on site and
is present during the term.
Modified in 2025
Plymouth STRs are permitted with a City license STR operators must
complete a training:
view on YouTube.
Peer communities utilize a range of approaches for regulating short-term rentals,
from outright prohibition to licensing-based regulatory frameworks. Communities that
allow STRs have administrative licensing models that focus on operational
standards and enforcement rather than discretionary land use approvals. The factors
driving these approaches vary among communities. Some communities prioritize
mitigating neighborhood impacts associated with tourism and visitor activity, while
others focus on preserving housing supply and affordability, or a combination
thereof.
Based on Hopkins' experience administering its short-term rental regulations, staff
has not identified significant nuisance issues associated with permitted short -term
rentals, nor has there been substantial interest in establishing short-term rentals
within the community. As a result, staff do not find that current condi tions warrant a
more restrictive regulatory approach. However, should market conditions, housing
trends, or operational impacts change over time, the City would retain the ability to
revisit its regulatory framework and consider additional regulations as appropriate.
Community Input and Engagement:
The Planning and Zoning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on June
23, 2026. Two community members who had jointly contacted and met with staff
regarding STRs, expressed concerns that STRs can diminish neighborhood
cohesion, neighbor relationships, providing quality housing stock, and potential
impacts to adjacent properties associated with transient lodging activity. They also
expressed concerns regarding monitoring compliance of STRs that are disruptive.
They requested that the City solicit feedback from residents and prohibit STRs in
Hopkins.
Following the public hearing and discussion, the Commission recommended
approval of the proposed ordinance amendment.
6
As of the preparation of this report, additional written public comments were received
regarding the proposed amendment and are attached. These comments express
concern that STRs diminish neighbor relationships and neighborhood character,
increase congestion and reduce public safety in neighborhoods. Comments also
recommended a homesteading requirement be included in STR supplemental use
regulations.
Review Criteria:
Staff find that the proposed code amendment meets the criteria for approval. In
making decisions about development code text amendments, the City must consider
all relevant factors, including at least the following criteria:
1. Whether the proposed Development Code text amendment is in
conformity with the comprehensive plan.
The development code amendment is consistent with the goals and policies
of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The Plan’s Land Use Section identifies a
goal of creating and developing mixed use centers and districts throughout
the city, to support livability and community vitality. Furthermore, the plan
seeks to accommodate growth and expansion of the destination specialty
market, which includes entertainment, arts, and experiential businesses. The
proposed amendment accommodates economic growth of destination uses
by providing accommodations for visitors to patron businesses and centers
and also stay short-term in Hopkins.
Additionally, the proposed development code amendment supports the Plan’s
Housing Section provides goals for maintaining the quality and safety of the
overall housing stock, and maintaining a choice of quality housing options,
including those meeting the needs of a variety of household types and life
stages.
The proposed amendment maintains opportunities for homeowners to utilize
their properties for short-term rental purposes while preserving the City's
existing licensing, inspection, and nuisance enforcement mechanisms. Short
term rentals allow flexibility for homeowners by providing an opportunity to
generate supplemental income from their property. Staff finds that the
amendment supports the Comprehensive Plan's goals related to housing
choice and flexibility while maintaining appropriate safeguards for
neighborhood compatibility.
Staff finds that this criterion is met.
2. Whether the proposed Development Code text amendment corrects an
error or inconsistency or will help meet the challenge of a changed or
changing condition.
The proposed development code amendment responds to experience gained
through administration of the City's short-term rental regulations since
adoption of the 2022 Zoning Code update. Through review of two Conditional
Use Permit applications, staff has found that the Conditional Use Permit
process is not ideally suited to regulating short-term rentals because many of
7
the concerns associated with these uses relate to operational characteristics
and the behavior of future guests rather than objective land use impacts. Staff
finds that allowing short-term rentals as a permitted use in neighborhood
zoning districts, while retaining the City's licensing and operational
regulations, provides a more consistent and effective regulatory framework
and better positions the City to adapt regulations in response to changing
conditions over time.
Additionally, the proposed amendment would eliminate the need for a
discretionary Conditional Use Permit approval while maintaining existing
licensing, inspection, and enforcement requirements. Staff finds that a
licensing-based approach provides a more efficient and predictable process
for property owners while continuing to provide the City with the tools
necessary to monitor compliance, address nuisance concerns, and enforce
operational standards.
Staff finds that this criterion is met.
Alternatives:
The proposed amendment is a legislative action and the City Council has broad
discretion in establishing land use regulations that promote the public health, safety,
and general welfare. The Council may:
• Approve the first reading of the Ordinance as proposed
• Approve the first reading with modifications to specific neighborhood zones.
Any further additions would likely need to be considered as a separate
ordinance following appropriate procedures with the Planning and Zoning
Commission.
• Deny the proposed Ordinance amendment
NEXT STEPS
If the City Council approves the first reading of the Ordinance, a second reading will be
scheduled for the August 3, 2026 City Council meeting. Upon adoption the ordinance
will become effective once published in the City’s official paper.
1
CITY OF HOPKINS
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 2026-1234
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE HOPKINS DEVELOPMENT CODE ALLOWING
SHORT TERM RENTALS AS A PERMITTED USE IN NEIGHBORHOOD ZONES
SECTION 1. Article 5, Section 102-510 (a), Table 5-1 is hereby amended by deleting the
striken language and adding the double-underlined language, as follows:
Table 5-1. Principal Use Table
ZONES
Reference MX-TOD MX-D MX-N MX-S RX-TOD RX-D RX-N IX-TOD I-TOD IX-S I1 N1, N2 N3-A N3-B NX1 NX2 P1 P2 RESIDENTIAL 102-530
Household Living, 1 unit ◓ ◓ ◓ ◓ ● ● ● – – – – ● ● ● ● ● – –
Household Living, 2 units ◓ ◓ ◓ ◓ ● ● ● – – – – – ● ● ● ● – –
Household Living, 3–4 units ◓ ◓ ◓ ◓ ● ● ● – – – – – – – ● ● – –
Household Living, 5+ units ◓ ◓ ◓ ◓ ● ● ● – – – – – – – – ● – –
Manufactured Home Park – – – – – – – – – – – – ○ ○ ○ ○ – –
Group Living (except as below) ◓ ◓ ◓ ◓ ● ● ● – – – – – – – ○ ○ – –
Residential Facility, Small ● ● ● ● ● ● ● – – – – ● ● ● ● ● – – 102-580 (h)
Residential Facility, Large ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ – – – – – – – ○ ○ – – 102-580 (h)
COMMERCIAL 102-540
Adult-Oriented Business – – – ● – – – – – ● ● – – – – – – –
Animal Boarding – – – – – – – ● ● ● ● – – – – – – –
Consumer Service ● ● ● ● ◐ ◐ ◐ ◐ ● ● ● – – – – – – ◐
Day Care, Adult ● ◓ ● ● ◐ ◐ ◐ ◐ ● ● – – – – ○ ○ – ●
Day Care, Small ● ◓ ● ● ◐ ◐ ◐ ◐ – – – ● ● ● ● ● – –
Day Care, Large ● ◓ ● ● ◐ ◐ ◐ ◐ – ● – – – – ○ ○ – –
Entertainment Venue, Large – – – ● – ● – ● – ● – – – – – – ○ ●
Funeral & Mortuary Service – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Lodging (except as below) ● ◓ ◓ ● ● ● ● – – ● – – – – – – – –
Short-Term Rental ◓ ◓ ◓ ◓ ● ● ● – – – – ○● ○● ○● ○● ○● – – 102-580 (h)
Office ◑ ◑ ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● – – – – – – – 102-580 (d)
Personal Credit Establishment ○ – – ○ – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 102-580 (g)
Retail & Entertainment (except as
below) ● ● ● ● ◐ ◐ ◐ ◐ – – – – – – – – – ◐
Brewpub – ● ● ● – ◐ ◐ – – – – – – – – – – – 102-580 (a)
2
Firearms Sales Establishment – – – ○ – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 102-580 (b)
Liquor Sales, Off-Sale ● ● ● ● ◐ ◐ ◐ ◐ – – – – – – – – – – 102-580 (e)
Tobacco Sales Establishment ● ● ● ● ◐ ◐ ◐ ◐ – – – – – – – – – – 102-580 (j)
Self-Service Storage – – – – – – – ○ – – ○ – – – – – – – 102-580 (l)
Vehicle Sales & Service (except as
below) – – – ○ – – – – ○ ○ ○ – – – – – – – 102-580 (n)
Major Vehicle Repair &
Maintenance – – – – – – – – ○ ○ – – – – – – – 102-580 (n)
MANUFACTURING & INDUSTRY 102-550
Manufacturing, Artisan ● ● ● ● ◐ ◐ ◐ ● ● ● ● – – – – – – –
Manufacturing, Limited – – – – – – – ● ● ● ● – – – – – – –
High-Impact Industry – – – – – – – – – – ● – – – – – – –
Urban Farm – – – – – – – ● ● ● ● – – – – – ● – 102-580 (l)
Warehousing & Distribution – – – – – – – – ● ● ● – – – – – – –
CIVIC & INSTITUTIONAL 102-560
College ◓ ◓ ◓ ◓ ● ● ● ● – – – – – – – – – ●
Community Assembly ◓ ◓ ◓ ◓ ● ● ● – – – – – – – – – – ○
Cultural Facility ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● – – – – – – ● ●
Community Garden ● – ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 102-580 (c)
Detention or Correctional Facility – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – ○
Hospital – – – – ○ ○ – – – – – – – – – – – ●
Parks and Open Space – – ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ○ – – – – ● ● 102-580 (f)
School ◓ ◓ ◓ ◓ ● ● ● – – – – – – – – – – ○
Utilities & Services, Minor ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 102-580 (m)
Utilities & Services, Major ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ 102-580 (m)
OTHER 102-570
Wireless Communication Facility 102-580 (o)
Tower – – – – – – – – – – ○ – – – – – – – 102-580 (o)
Cannabis Businesses
Cannabis & Hemp Retail ● ● ● ● ◐ ◐ ◐ ◐ – – – – – – – – – – 102-580 (p)
Cannabis Cultivation, Small-scale ● ● ● ● ◐ ◐ ◐ ● ● ● ● – – – – – – – 102-580 (p)
Cannabis Cultivation, Large-scale – – – – – – – ● ● ● ● – – – – – – – 102-580 (p)
Cannabis & Hemp Product
Manufacturing, Small-scale ● ● ● ● ◐ ◐ ◐ ● ● ● ● – – – – – – – 102-580 (p)
Cannabis & Hemp Product
Manufacturing, Large-scale – – – – – – – ● ● ● ● – – – – – – – 102-580 (p)
Cannabis Wholesale &
Transportation – – – – – – – – ● ● ● – – – – – – –
KEY: ● = Permitted ◓ = Permitted in Upper Stories Only ◐ = Limited to No More than 25% of Building Area ◑ = Limited on first floor to buildings on the interior of a block see 102-580 (d) ○ = Requires Conditional Use Approval – = Prohibited
SECTION 2. In accordance with Section 3.03 of the City Charter and Minn. Stat. §
412.191, subd. 4, due to the significant length of this Ordinance, City staff shall have the
3
following summary printed in the official City newspaper in lieu of the complete
ordinance:
On August 3, 2026, the Hopkins City Council adopted Ordinance 2026-1234 that
amends Article 5 of the Hopkins Development Code to reclassify Short Term Rentals as
a permitted use in Neighborhood Zones.
A printed copy of the ordinance is available for inspection during regular business hours
at Hopkins City Hall and is available online at the City’s web site located at
www.hopkinsmn.com.
SECTION 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this ordinance shall be the date of
publication.
First Reading: July 14, 2026
Second Reading: August 3, 2026
Date of Publication: August 3, 2026
Date Ordinance Takes Effect: August 13, 2026
By:
____________________________
Patrick Hanlon, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Amy Domeier, City Clerk
CITY OF HOPKINS
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2026-024
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE 2026-1234
AMENDING THE HOPKINS DEVELOPMENT CODE TO RECLASSIFY SHORT TERM
RENTALS AS A PERMITTED USE IN NEIGHBORHOOD ZONES
WHEREAS, the Hopkins Development Code is intended to establish the development
standards to implement the community vision and enact the vision, goals and policies of the
2040 Comprehensive Plan – Cultivate Hopkins; and
WHEREAS, the Plan’s Housing Section provides goals for maintaining the quality safety
and character of the existing housing stock, and maintaining a choice of quality housing
options, including those meeting the needs of a variety of household types and life stages; and
WHEREAS, the Plan’s Land Use Section provides goals of creating and developing
mixed use centers and districts throughout the city to support livability and community vitality,
including accommodating economic growth of destination uses and to patron businesses and
centers; and
WHEREAS, N1, N2, N3-A, N3-B, NX1, NX2, Neighborhood Zones were established to
accommodate varying suburban, traditional residential detached houses, semi -detached
houses, two-unit houses, and attached houses; and
WHEREAS, Short-Term Rentals are currently listed as a conditional use with
supplemental use regulations in the N1, N2, N3-A, N3-B, NX1, NX2, Neighborhood Zones; and
WHEREAS, City staff, on behalf of the Planning and Zoning Commission, has drafted
Ordinance 2026-1234, a Development Code Text Amendment to reclassify Short-Term Rentals
as a permitted use in Neighborhood zones to encourage fulfillment of the goals and vision of
the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the procedural history of the Development Code Text Amendment is as
follows:
1. That the above stated Development Code Text Amendment was initiated by the City;
and,
2. That the Hopkins Planning & Zoning Commission, pursuant to published notice, held
a public hearing on the application and reviewed such application on June 23, 2026
and all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard; and,
3. That written comments and analysis of City staff were considered; and,
WHEREAS, staff recommended the Planning & Zoning Report Commission
recommend approval of the above stated application based on the analysis provided in the
City Council Report 2026-074 dated July 14, 2026.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Hopkins
hereby recommends that the City Council approve a first reading of Ordinance 2026-1234
based upon the following findings:
1. The proposed zoning text amendment is in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan.
a. The development code amendment is consistent with the goals and policies of
the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The Plan’s Land Use Section identifies a goal of
creating and developing mixed use centers and districts throughout the city, to
support livability and community vitality. Furthermore, the plan seeks to
accommodate growth and expansion of the destination specialty market, which
includes entertainment, arts, and experiential businesses. The proposed
amendment accommodates economic growth of destination uses by providing
accommodations for visitors to patron businesses and centers and also stay
short-term in Hopkins.
b. Additionally, the proposed development code amendment supports the Plan’s
Housing Section provides goals for maintaining the quality and safety of the
overall housing stock, and maintaining a choice of quality housing options,
including those meeting the needs of a variety of household types and life
stages.
c. The proposed amendment maintains opportunities for homeowners to utilize
their properties for short-term rental purposes while preserving the City's
existing licensing, inspection, and nuisance enforcement mechanisms. Short
term rentals allow flexibility for homeowners by providing an opportunity to
generate supplemental income from their property. Staff finds that the
amendment supports the Comprehensive Plan's goals related to housing choice
and flexibility while maintaining appropriate safeguards for neighborhood
compatibility.
d. The proposed zoning text amendment helps address a changed or changing
condition.
2. The proposed Development Code text amendment corrects an error or inconsistency
or will help meet the challenge of a changed or changing condition.
a. The proposed development code amendment responds to experience gained
through administration of the City's short-term rental regulations since adoption
of the 2022 Zoning Code update. Through review of two Conditional Use Permit
applications, staff has found that the Conditional Use Permit process is not ideally
suited to regulating short-term rentals because many of the concerns associated
with these uses relate to operational characteristics and the behavior of future
guests rather than objective land use impacts. Staff finds that allowing short-term
rentals as a permitted use in neighborhood zoning districts, while retaining the
City's licensing and operational regulations, provides a more consistent and
effective regulatory framework and better positions the City to adapt regulations
in response to changing conditions over time.
b. Additionally, the proposed amendment would eliminate the need for a
discretionary Conditional Use Permit approval while maintaining existing
licensing, inspection, and enforcement requirements. Staff finds that a licensing -
based approach provides a more efficient and predictable process for property
owners while continuing to provide the City with the tools necessary to monitor
compliance, address nuisance concerns, and enforce operational standards .
3. The proposed amendment promotes the public health, safety, and general welfare
by regulating short-term rentals through a licensing and enforcement framework that
provides ongoing oversight, supports consistent administration, and enables the City
to address operational impacts and community concerns.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Hopkins this 14th day of July, 2026.
__________________________________
Patrick Hanlon, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Amy Domier, City Clerk
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender.
From:A Dapper
To:Ryan Krzos
Subject:Airbnb in Interlachen Park
Date:Monday, July 6, 2026 8:45:01 AM
Dear Mr Krzos,
I have lived in Hopkins for 5 years. We have a true Mayberry feel in our small residential
neighborhood. Kids freely roam, dogs are walked, and babies pushed throughout of charming
and well connected neighborhood. We have a historic neighborhood association which hosts
family friendly events throughout the year.
There are many families seeking safe, friendly neighborhoods to call home. Let’s not take
permanent housing away from families who need it.
Allowing a home to be rented out for short term stays violates all the great features we enjoy.
Many large and small cities have banned these short term rentals due to the demonstrated risks
from allowing frequent transient guests in established neighborhoods/buildings. There are
many hotels available to any guests seeking accommodation. Any violation we note will the
need to be reported to the police, which will consume precious resources and change the safety
and security of our homes and streets.
I respectfully ask you to reconsider any allowance for short term rentals in Hopkins. Hopkins
is so friendly and charming. Let’s protect something so good in this crazy world.
Anna C Dapper
249 Interlachen Road
www.vannurdenlaw.com
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender.
From:ACS
To:Ryan Krzos
Subject:Concern
Date:Tuesday, July 7, 2026 5:12:29 PM
Dear Ryan,
I am a resident of the Interlachen Park neighborhood and am writing to
express my concern regarding the proposed changes that would allow
short-term rentals in residential neighborhoods without the current
Conditional Use Permit requirement.
Interlachen Park is a close-knit neighborhood with many young families,
children playing outside, and neighbors who know and look out for one
another. We already experience significant traffic from Blake School, the
new church in our neighborhood and Meadowbrook Golf Course events
and activities. Adding a revolving door of short-term guests raises concerns
about additional traffic, parking, safety, and preserving the character of our
neighborhood.
I respectfully ask the City to pause the July 14 vote and take more time to
consider reasonable guardrails, such as owner-occupancy requirements or
other protections that balance property rights with the interests of
established residential neighborhoods. Thank you for your time and
consideration, and for listening to the residents who call Hopkins home.
Sincerely,
Angie Simons
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender.
From:Dan Marx
To:Ryan Krzos
Subject:Hopkins Short Term Rental concerns
Date:Thursday, July 2, 2026 9:01:32 AM
Hi Ryan,
I'm writing to you as a concerned homeowner in the Interlachen Park neighborhood of our
awesome city of Hopkins. It has become known to us that STRs in residential zones are up for
a vote on July 14, we are adamantly against this proposal as residential neighborhoods need to
be cherished. Studies have shown STRs have a negative effect on homeownership rates,
neighborhood disruption and safety concerns due to underlying social dynamics
disruption (studies linked below). We ask that you pause the vote, acquire and analyze more
data and make an informed decision with us as residents and taxpayers.
Thank you,
Dan and Laura Marx
44 Meadowbrook Rd, Hopkins, MN 55343
1.Airbnb and neighborhood crime: The incursion of tourists or the erosion of local social
dynamics?
2.The Effects of Short-term Rentals on Communities and How to Legislate Them: An
Expanded Literary Review
--
Dan Marx
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender.
From:katie dalton
To:Ryan Krzos
Subject:Hopkins Short term rentals
Date:Thursday, July 2, 2026 7:46:31 AM
Dear Ryan,
My name is Katie Almquist and I live in Interlachen Park neighborhood on Holly Rd. I
am writing you today to voice my strong concerns about short term rentals in
residential zones. We bought our house for the neighborhood and community feel
that Interlachen Park offers, with safe streets for kids & the idea that neighbors all
know each other and look out for each other. This community feel along with the
neighborhood events put on by the neighborhood association (which we pay for) are
at risk with introducing short term rentals. Our home value decreases, our kids safety
decreases (random strangers in and out of the neighborhood), and we lose the
community feel. We strongly urge Hopkins City Council to pause on the July 14th
vote and add guardrails around the use of short term rentals that are similar to
neighboring cities-Edina, St Louis Park and Minnetonka.
There are already plenty of rental properties in Hopkins and our neighborhood has
remained attractive to buyers because of this neighborhood. This is all in jeopardy by
allowing short term rentals here. Short term rentals will be one more reason for a
buyer to purchase a home one block over in Edina or St. Louis Park. Not adding
guardrails to the use of short term rentals will also further deplete from the Hopkins
public schools-less families moving in and more landlords taking over this historical
neighborhood, renting to people just passing through.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Katie Almquist
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender.
From:helen chang
To:Ryan Krzos
Subject:Interlachen Park resident
Date:Wednesday, July 8, 2026 12:37:04 PM
Dear Mr. Kryzos,
I am writing to inform you as a resident and homeowner of Interlachen Park, Hopkins that I
strongly oppose STR in our residential area. I can assure you my belief is not in the minority.
Thank you for all you do and for taking the time to read this.
Sincerely,
Helen Haertzen
Dear Mayor and Members of the Hopkins City Council,
I am writing to respectfully support the proposed amendment to allow short-term rentals as a
permitted use in neighborhood zones, subject to the City’s existing licensing, inspection, and
operational regulations.
I appreciate that the proposed amendment would not remove City oversight or eliminate rules for
short-term rentals. My understanding is that it would remove the Conditional Use Permit
requirement while retaining the City’s licensing, inspection, and operating standards. I believe that is
a reasonable and balanced approach. It creates a clear permit process for responsible owners while
still protecting neighbors through rules around noise, occupancy, parking, safety, nuisance behavior,
and compliance.
I recently purchased the home at 125 Oakwood Road because I genuinely love the area, the
neighborhood, downtown Hopkins, Interlachen Park, and the broader community. This is not a
property I bought to operate carelessly or as a high-turnover rental investment. I bought it as a home
I plan to personally use and enjoy over the coming years.
At the same time, because I live out of state for much of the year, being able to rent the home when I
am not using it is important to own, responsibly maintain, and continue improving the property.
By most accounts, the property had previously been in very poor condition and detracted from the
neighborhood. It previously been valued at $360,000 before it completed significant remodeling and
rebuilding work. I purchased the property for $665,000 and have already invested approximately
$50,000 more into improvements, furnishings, and design. I intend to continue investing in the home
because it is both a personal home for me and a long-term investment in the Hopkins community.
I understand why neighbors may have concerns about short-term rentals. As a neighbor, I would
want strong safeguards in place: responsible guest screening, clear rules, no parties, limits on noise
and occupancy, parking expectations, professional management, and immediate accountability if a
guest creates a problem. Those are exactly the standards I am putting in place.
The property will be professionally managed by The Works BnB, a local Twin Cities property
management company. Safeguards will include exterior security cameras, noise monitoring devices,
smart locks with unique guest access codes, guest verification including government-issued ID
checks, signed rental agreements, clear house rules, strict fines for violations, and a zero-tolerance
policy for parties, disruptive behavior, or nuisance guests.
I support reasonable short-term rental regulations and believe the City should keep strong rules in
place around licensing, inspections, occupancy, parking, noise, safety, and enforcement. I would
respectfully ask that the City avoid adding overly restrictive requirements, such as a homestead
requirement or minimum-stay rules, without careful consideration of the impact on responsible
owners.
A clear permit process with strong operating standards is the right balance. It protects neighbors,
preserves City oversight, and allows responsible owners to continue investing in Hopkins.
My intention is to be a respectful owner, a good neighbor, and a positive part of the Hopkins
community for years to come. I appreciate the City’s thoughtful approach and respectfully support
the proposed amendment.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Josh Escobedo
Owner, 125 Oakwood Road
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender.
From:Renee Kessler
To:Ryan Krzos
Cc:Patrick Hanlon; Sam Gallagher; Kersten Elverum
Subject:Re: Planning and Zoning-Short Term Rental recommendation
Date:Thursday, July 9, 2026 10:37:36 AM
Attachments:image001.png
Thank-you Ryan. This information is very informative.
I remain opposed to relaxing the requirements for short-term rentals in single-family
neighborhoods.
Allowing short-term rentals without requiring a Conditional Use Permit removes an important
layer of oversight and could lead to unintended consequences for our residential neighborhoods.
Perhaps the reason the City receives so few applications for these permits is because the
requirement itself serves as a deterrent. If so, that is a good thing.
I hope to attend the City Council meeting on July 14 to hear the discussion and the Council's
vote.
Renee Kessler
On Thu, Jul 9, 2026 at 10:01 AM Ryan Krzos wrote:
Hello,
Thanks for reaching out.
I can assure you that we do track on housing and demographic data. For quick reference, the
Metropolitan Council has a handy dashboard of data on a range of topics including housing
(https://stats.metc.state.mn.us/profile/detail.aspx?c=02394417).
Hopkins is a largely built-out community, so changes in proportions of owner-occupied and renter-
occupied housing happen very gradually. While the proportion of rental housing may shift as new
multifamily developments are constructed, this has not been at the loss of single-family
neighborhoods to accommodate that growth since the 2021 data you reviewed – The 2020 Census
shows 3,207 owner-occupied units, and in 2024 that number was estimated by Census to be 3,487.
To date, the City has not observed a significant conversion of owner-occupied homes to short-term
rentals. However, the City has the ability to change course as deemed necessary.
You asked about the City Council's Strategic Plan strategy of supporting a range of housing options
and opportunities for affordability. Progress toward that strategy is measured by advancing the
action steps identified by the City Council as a part of that strategic planning effort. Current
examples include completing an in-progress Housing Plan to identify community housing needs and
strategies to address them, as well as working with the selected developer for Lot 800 to create new
homeownership opportunities (under the action step of ‘Continue to explore development options
for City property’), and working towards advancing the 325 Blake Rd redevelopment which
contained ownership townhomes, and senior co-op units. While the City has limited direct role in
dictating housing market outcomes, staff and the City Council work intentionally to expand
opportunities for homeownership whenever feasible. Beyond Council’s Strategic Plan, we also
recognize that there is a regional need for housing opportunities for all tenure types and income
levels. The City values both homeowners and renters as important members of the community and
recognizes that residents who rent contribute to the vitality and long-term success of the community.
Thank you again for taking the time to share your comments. I will include your feedback as part of
the public comments provided to the City Council for their consideration.
Regards,
-Ryan Krzos
From: Renee Kessler
Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2026 8:47 AM
To: Ryan Krzos
Cc: Patrick Hanlon
Subject: Re: Planning and Zoning-Short Term Rental recommendation
Dear Mr. Krzos, The data shared above is from 2021. It would be a worthy exercise to update these statistics for Hopkins and monitor them ongoing. In particular, given the City goal to "preserve the hometown feel of Hopkins" and related
Dear Mr. Krzos,
The data shared above is from 2021.
It would be a worthy exercise to update these statistics for Hopkins and monitor them
ongoing. In particular, given the City goal to "preserve the hometown feel of Hopkins" and
related strategy to "Support a range of housing options and opportunities for affordability".
How do you measure this and what does success look like?
I do not doubt current data will reveal an even greater and significant rental percentage for the
single family home stock and rental units overall in Hopkins.
Regards,
Renee Kessler
On Wed, Jul 8, 2026 at 9:53 AM Ryan Krzos wrote:
Hello,
Thank you for sharing your comments. Your feedback will be shared with the City Council for
their consideration on the proposed Ordinance Amendment at their July 14th meeting.
Meeting agendas and materials will be available on the City’s website in advance of the meeting.
Thank you again for taking the time to provide your input.
Sincerely,
-Ryan Krzos
Ryan Krzos, AICP
City Planner
Phone: 952-548-6342 | RKrzos@hopkinsmn.com
1010 1st Street S, Hopkins, MN 55343 | hopkinsmn.com
From: Renee Kessler
Sent: Wednesday, July 8, 2026 9:34 AM
To: Ryan Krzos
Cc: Patrick Hanlon; Renee Kessler
Subject: Planning and Zoning-Short Term Rental recommendation
vote against expanding short-term rentals in Hopkins'
Dear Mr Krzos,
I recently learned that the City Council plans to vote on July 14 regarding short-term rentals
in residential neighborhoods, including Interlachen Park. I urge the City Council to vote
against expanding short-term rentals in Hopkins' single-family neighborhoods.
Hopkins is proud of its small-town character and strong residential neighborhoods. Those
qualities are built on stable, owner-occupied homes, neighbors who know one another, and
families who invest their time and resources in the community.
Publicly available housing data indicate that a substantial portion of Hopkins' housing is
already renter-occupied. The City has also encouraged significant multifamily housing
development, providing a wide range of rental opportunities. There is no compelling need to
further convert single-family homes into short-term rental properties.
Short-term rentals can increase turnover in neighborhoods, reduce the supply of homes
available for permanent residents, and gradually change the character of residential areas.
Even when responsibly managed, they are fundamentally different from homes occupied by
long-term residents who become part of the community.
If Hopkins is committed to preserving its family neighborhoods and maintaining the
qualities that attract people to live here, it should protect its limited supply of single-family
homes for long-term homeownership and long-term residency—not encourage their use as
short-term lodging.
I respectfully ask you to vote NO on this proposal and continue to prioritize neighborhood
stability, homeownership, and the long-term interests of Hopkins residents.
Publicly available housing data search:
Hopkins has about 10,100 housing units.
About 36.5% are owner-occupied and 63.5% are renter-occupied. That means
approximately 6,000–6,400 occupied housing units are rentals.
Most of those rental units are in apartments and other multifamily buildings, not
single-family homes. About 60% of Hopkins' housing stock is multifamily.
A frequently cited analysis of Twin Cities property records found that more than 25% of
Hopkins' single-family homes were owned by investors or owners who did not live
in the property around 2021. That category includes rental homes as well as some second
homes and other non-owner-occupied properties.
In summary:
All rental housing in Hopkins: roughly 6,000–6,400 rental units (about 63% of
occupied housing).
Single-family homes rented by landlords: there is no official city count, but
available analyses suggest more than one in four single-family homes may be
non-owner-occupied, many of which are rentals.
Renee Kessler, 210 Ashley Rd, Hopkins, MN
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender.
From:Jeff Phillips
To:Ryan Krzos
Subject:Please stop STRs in Interlachen Park
Date:Monday, July 6, 2026 4:35:38 PM
Hi Ryan
I’d like to ask you and the city council to pause the July 14 vote on STRs in
Interlachen Park and not to eliminate the CUP in a residential zone.
I, and most within Interlachen Park, have concerns over safety/ traffic/ noise; outside
investor owned STRs; home value decrease for immediate neighbors; overall impact
to neighborhood feel; monitoring and reporting responsibilities fall to residents.
Thank you for your consideration
Jeff Phillips
250 Interlachen Rd
Sent from my iPhone
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender.
From:MERRIL BUCKHORN
To:Ryan Krzos
Subject:RE: Short Term Rental in Interlachen Park
Date:Wednesday, July 8, 2026 3:52:51 PM
Attachments:image001.png
Thanks, Mr. Krzos, for your reply.
In terms of benefits, I understand that the city's businesses may benefit from STRs,
though I would guess that STRs in the downtown area may contribute more to increased
business, since Interlachen Park is on the edge of St. Louis Park and closer to gas
stations and grocery stores and restaurants in that city.
And while it's a nice little town and has improved over the 30+ years my husband and I
have lived here, I don't really think of downtown Hopkins as a main destination for out-of-
town guests. My husband and I are from the east coast and I don't think I've ever brought
any guests into downtown Hopkins.
In terms of benefits to Interlachen Park residents, I don't see any pros, just cons.
So, to me, if the city allows STRs in Interlachen Park, it will tell my neighbors that they
don't matter, that the city will do what they wish to the detriment of the residents here.
And I know that we all pay a decent amount in property taxes, so I would hope the city
would see us as partners.
With the number of different schools Interlachen Park residents send their children to
(buses going in all directions,) my guess is that IP residents will move to avoid those
taxes if their kids aren't attending Hopkins schools and the neighborhood cohesion starts
to fray because of STRs.
As a 32 year resident of Hopkins, I hope the city continues to appreciate its residents and
doesn't only consider the benefits of STRs through its own glasses.
I appreciate that you got back to me so quickly, and I'm hoping you might share my
thoughts from these emails with the city council.
Have a great afternoon and a nice rest of your summer.
Merril Buckhorn
Dean Buckhorn
25 Homedale Road
On 07/08/2026 10:46 AM CDT Ryan Krzos <rkrzos@hopkinsmn.com> wrote:
Hi Merril,
Thank you for reaching out. I'm glad to hear that you and your family have enjoyed
living in Interlachen Park for so many years.
I'd be happy to provide some background on the proposed ordinance amendment.
More broadly, the City has recognized that short-term rentals are a legitimate use
when they are appropriately regulated. They can provide accommodations for
visitors, support local businesses with people visiting family and friends or just
wanting to explore Hopkins, and provide homeowners with an opportunity to
generate supplemental income from their property. At the same time, the City has
adopted operational standards intended to minimize impacts on surrounding
neighborhoods, including regulations related to occupancy, restrictions on events, and
a licensing process.
Currently, establishing a short-term rental requires approval of a Conditional Use
Permit (CUP). The City is considering removing that requirement because a CUP is
intended to evaluate whether a land use is appropriate for a particular property based
on objective land use considerations. Many concerns associated with short-term
rentals, however, relate to how they are operated, such as noise, parking, and guest
behavior, rather than the physical characteristics of the property. That sets up
situations where applicants may be treated differently based on arbitrary
considerations, which put those decisions at risk of legal challenges.
The proposed amendment would not change whether or not short-term rentals are
allowed or remove the City's oversight. Property owners would still be required to
obtain a City rental license, comply with all operational standards, and could face
enforcement action or license revocation if violations occur. To date, we do not have
any specific negative outcomes with short term rentals operating in Hopkins, but
certainly the City would have the ability to revisit the policies if the need presents
itself.
I hope this helps explain the purpose of the proposed amendment.
If you would like your thoughts or concerns shared with the Council you can submit
those to me.
Sincerely,
-Ryan Krzos
Ryan Krzos, AICP
City Planner
Phone: 952-548-6342 | RKrzos@hopkinsmn.com
1010 1st Street S, Hopkins, MN 55343 | hopkinsmn.com
From: MERRIL BUCKHORN <mbuckhorn@comcast.net>
Sent: Wednesday, July 8, 2026 10:18 AM
To: Ryan Krzos <rkrzos@hopkinsmn.com>
Subject: Short Term Rental in Interlachen Park
Good morning Mr. Krzos! My name is Merril Buckhorn and my husband Dean and I have lived in Hopkins' Interlachen Park since 1994. It's been an amazing place for us, our kids grew up here, and we thank the city for years of help in keeping the
Good morning Mr. Krzos!
My name is Merril Buckhorn and my husband Dean and I have lived in
Hopkins' Interlachen Park since 1994. It's been an amazing place for us, our
kids grew up here, and we thank the city for years of help in keeping the
neighborhood in great shape.
I just heard yesterday that there's a house on Oakwood Road in our
neighborhood whose new owner would like to use as a short term rental.
I heard, too, that the city is voting soon on whether to remove the CUP
process for homeowners who'd like to use their properties for reasons other
than as main residences.
What I'm unclear on, and I'm hoping you can clarify for me, is what the benefit
would be to the city and/or to the existing neighbors of removing the CUP
process and allowing an STR in a strictly residential neighborhood.
I've googled it and the only benefit I read was that the STR owner may
maintain the home well in order to rent it - so curb appeal. But well-
maintained homes don't seem to be problems in our neighborhood.
When you have the time, will you let me know what the city's thinking is in
terms of voting on possibly removing the CUP process?
I appreciate it. And I hope you have a good day.
Take care,
Merril Buckhorn
Dean Buckhorn
25 Homedale Road
Thank you for your time, your service to our community, and your thoughtful consideration of
this important issue.
David Almquist
201 Holly Rd
Hopkins, MN 55343
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender.
From:Sarah Dorion
To:Ryan Krzos
Subject:Short term rentals in Interlachen Park
Date:Wednesday, July 8, 2026 12:27:59 PM
Good afternoon Ryan,
I am writing to ask you to please PAUSE on the July 14th vote, and add guardrails around
STR's, similar to our neighboring cities.
STR Concerns in Residential Neighborhoods:
• Increased concern around safety, traffic, parking and noise
• Reduction of single family housing stock for residents
• Potential for outside investor-owned STR's
• Decrease in home values of immediate neighbors
• Monitoring and reporting falls back on residents
• Impact to the strong neighborhood community feel
We live in a very special neighborhood and anything that will interfere with our sense of
safety and community is greatly concerning.
Thank you,
Sarah Dorion
212 Homedale Rd, Hopkins, MN 55343
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender.
From:Peter Torvik
To:Ryan Krzos
Subject:Short Term Rentals
Date:Thursday, July 2, 2026 3:21:12 AM
To whom it may concern:
As a 26 year residents and an owners of 3 different homes in Interlachen Park, my wife
and I are strongly opposed to allowing short term air BNB-type rentals in our
neighborhood.
We will see you at the city council meeting.
Peter Torvik
Julie Holland
152 Ashley Road
Get Outlook for iOS
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender.
From:jillshop
To:Ryan Krzos
Subject:STR in Resident Zones
Date:Sunday, July 5, 2026 12:12:19 PM
Dear Mr. Krzos and Members of the Hopkins City Council,
I am a Hopkins resident writing to express my concern regarding the proposed
changes to the City’s Short-Term Rental ordinance that would allow short-term
rentals in all residential neighborhoods.
I respectfully ask that you pause the July 14 vote and take additional time to
gather community input before making a decision that could have lasting
impacts on our neighborhoods.
Like many residents, I chose to live in Hopkins because of its strong sense of
community, stable residential neighborhoods, and family-friendly atmosphere.
Allowing investor-owned short-term rentals throughout residential areas raises
several concerns, including:
Increased traffic, parking congestion, noise, and public safety concerns.
This is especially a concern for my neighborhood in Interlachen Park as
we are already dealing with parking congestion from the church each
Sunday and for multiple events.
The loss of single-family housing available for permanent residents.
The potential for outside investors to purchase homes solely for
commercial short-term rental use.
Negative impacts on neighboring property values and neighborhood
character.
Placing the responsibility for monitoring and reporting violations on
residents rather than ensuring proactive enforcement
Many neighboring communities have adopted thoughtful guardrails to balance
property rights with neighborhood preservation. For example, Minnetonka now
requires short-term rental owners to be homesteaded, while St. Louis Park and
Edina prohibit rentals of fewer than 30 days in residential neighborhoods. I
encourage Hopkins to consider similar safeguards rather than adopting a policy
that permits unrestricted short-term rentals in residential areas.
Please take the time to carefully evaluate the long-term impacts, and develop an
ordinance that protects both homeowners and the character of our
neighborhoods.
Thank you for your consideration and for your service to our community.
Sincerely,
Jill Murray
Interlachen Park, Hopkins Resident
Sent from my iPhone
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender.
From:Nora Watts
To:Ryan Krzos
Subject:Hopkins Short Term Rentals
Date:Tuesday, June 23, 2026 3:42:12 PM
Nora and Charles Watts
133 Oakwood Road Hopkins
nora_watts@comcast.net
June 23rd, 2026
Hopkins City Council
1010 1st St S
Hopkins, MN 55343
RE: Opposition to the Proposed Short-Term Rental Ordinance
Dear City Council Members,
I am writing to you today as a dedicated resident of 26 years to formally express my
strong opposition to the current proposal that would allow or expand short-term
rentals (STRs) within our residential neighborhoods. I urge the City Council to deny
this proposal and instead prioritize the stability, safety, and long-term vitality of our
community.
Allowing short-term rentals in residential zones poses several risks to our quality of
life. My primary concerns regarding this proposal include:
Neighborhood Character & Safety: The introduction of transient, commercial
lodging disrupts the cohesion and peace of established family neighborhoods.
Unlike traditional neighbors, short-term guests have no long-term stake in the
community, often resulting in increased noise, traffic, and strain on
neighborhood parking.
Loss of Long-Term Housing: With housing affordability being a pressing issue,
converting residential properties into full-time, short-term lodging removes
available homes from the local market. This diminishes the housing stock for
families and long-term residents who wish to put down roots in Hopkins.
Lack of Accountability: Even with regulations in place, enforcing occupancy
limits, quiet hours, and property maintenance is incredibly challenging for
municipal staff. It creates a "mini-hotel" environment that shifts the burden of
policing absent investors onto permanent residents.
Hopkins is a vibrant and close-knit community. To preserve the very qualities
that make our city a great place to live, we must protect our housing for the
people who actually reside, work, and contribute to our local economy year-
round.
I strongly urge you to vote against the proposed short-term rental ordinance.
Thank you for your time, your public service, and for considering the concerns
of your constituents.
Best Regards,
Charles and Nora Watts
To: Planning and Zoning Commission Members, Ryan Krzos (City Planner) and Sam
Gallagher (Associate Planner)
From: Maggie Sedoff, Hopkins resident 122 Oakwood Road
Date: June 22, 2026
Subject: Short Term Rentals in Neighborhood Zones
I am writing to urge the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Hopkins to deny the
proposal to eliminate the need for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), thereby allowing Short
Term Rentals (STR’s) in neighborhood zones. I am asking that the City pause on issuing any
new CUP’s for short term rentals in progress to allow for additional investigation and public
feedback to shape a new proposal to our City Zoning Code/Ordinances.
While I agree the CUP is not a perfect mechanism to regulate STR’s long term, it currently
incorporates public notification and an opportunity for public input into the STR approval
process. Eliminating the CUP requirement, would essentially result in a rubber stamp for
any new STR’s, via the licensing process.
After reviewing the regulations of neighboring communities, I am concerned that Hopkins
is moving too quickly, and in the wrong direction with regard to STR’s. Our closest
neighbors St. Louis Park, Edina, Golden Valley, and Minnetonka all have much more
stringent regulations requiring rentals to be a minimum of 30 days and/or that the property
be homesteaded, eliminating investment property management in favor of local home-
owners. The argument for eliminating the CUP because it does nothing to deter violations
(operating a STR without a rental license) simply reinforces the need for strengthening
licensing and/or zoning regulations before approving this proposal.
Finally, I believe the review criteria used by Planning and Zoning could be interpreted
differently. The two criteria are: 1) Conformity with the Comprehensive Plan: the 2040
Comprehensive Plan states a goal is to maintain the quality and safety of the overall
housing stock, and maintaining a choice of quality housing options. 2) Whether the
proposed Development Code text amendment corrects an error or inconsistency or will
help meet the challenge of a changed or changing condition.
• STR’s are not housing options, they are marketed and aimed at visitors. I agree that
we want to “provide quality housing options to a variety of household types …”. This
goal actually supports the need to implement a requirement for minimum rental of
30 days.
• There is a shortage of housing stock in Hopkins, and an inability to expand causing
housing prices to increase. Therefore, single family homes should be preserved for
owners and long-term rentals who also have a vested interest in participating in the
cohesiveness and safety of our neighborhoods.
• The landscape of STR’s is changing, both locally and nationally. While a CUP may
not be the right tool to manage STR’s long term, we need further investigation and
discussion of additional options before removing it altogether and opening the door
to STR’s throughout Hopkins neighborhoods without recourse.
Summary of Recommendations:
• Deny the current proposal to eliminate the CUP requirement for STR’s
• Pause on granting any new CUP’s for Short Term Rentals to publicize and solicit
feedback from residents of Hopkins in neighborhood zones
• Modify zoning code to only allow Short Term Rentals in neighborhood zones for a
minimum of 30 days
• Require rental home-owners to be homestead in Hopkins or surrounding cities
• Expand the notification range from 500 ft to 1,000 feet
• Eliminate the need for a CUP which remains with the property even after it is sold
• Incorporate residential training program requirement every three years
• Require and inspection every three years
• Increase the penalty for operating a STR without a rental license
Thank you, for your consideration. Maggie Sedoff