10.1. SR 02-01-2021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

TALL PINES 2 LLC 350 W. Burnsville Pkwy., #515 ♦ Burnsville, MN 55337 ♦ 952.830.0161 ♦ Fax: 952.830.1320 NARRATIVE We have secured an option on the property (two parcels) to the south and adjacent to our Tall Pines 2 development. We need to determine a land use that will be compatible with the surrounding area, be financially feasible, and acceptable to the City. I am hoping that you will give me some direction after discussing various possible land uses that I am presenting here. The site is a challenge because it is so narrow and contains a wetland (see Attachment A). The narrowness of the site precludes building a road down the middle with our Bridgeport townhome design on each side (see Attachment B). Instead, to build the Bridgeport design, a road would have to be constructed along the edge of the property, thereby doubling the land and development cost per lot, because the road would be only single loaded. That precludes us from the easy solution of just building more homes with the same design that we are offering at Tall Pines and Tall Pines 2. Because Line Avenue will be cul-de-saced, any commercial or industrial land use would need to be a "destination" use. Here are the land uses that we can think of: • Public storage. (See Attachment C.) There are many apartments and townhouses in the area whose residents we believe would use such storage facilities if available. • Apartment building. (See Attachment D.) We could construct a 48-unit three-story apartment building for senior citizens with underground parking. I believe having seniors as renters would be compatible with Tall Pines; however, the height of the building would be a consideration. • Attached two-story townhomes. (See Attachment E.) A single loaded private street could accommodate two two-story eight -unit townhome buildings for families. This would increase the density from 10 units for Tall Pines -type townhomes (Bridgeports) to 14-16 units, so that the additional lot costs would be reduced from $35,000-$40,000 per lot to $15,000-$20,000. These building types are usually offered at an affordable price, so attempting to charge a premium because of our additional lot costs probably would not be feasible. • Unique one -level townhome design. (See Attachment F.) Here is a plan that I like the best and believe it may work financially but would require variances for the front yard setback and the fire turnaround that would encroach on the wetland buffer area. We are currently building Cambridge townhomes in Red Wing. Those lots have a huge hill in the rear, so the buildable area is very shallow. Instead of the normal townhome design that is narrow across the front but very deep, this design is shallow from front to back but very long across the front (like a typical single-family rambler). The Cambridge is 71 feet wide, in contrast to the Bridgeport's 30-foot width. With this shallow depth design, a road up the middle of the property will work if the front yard setback is 15 feet instead of 20 feet. We are currently building the Cambridge in Red Wing with a 15-foot front yard setback. This design has a garage inset instead of protruding to