10.1. SR 02-01-2021it ci
Elk*
River
Request for Action
To
Item Number
Mayor and City Council
10.1
Agenda Section
Meeting Date
Prepared by
Work Session
February 1, 2021
Zack Carlton, Planning Manager
Item Description
Reviewed by
Concept Review: 18409 Line Avenue, Roger
Cal Portner, City Administrator
Reviewed by
Derrick
Action Requested
Review the proposed projects and provide the applicant with informal/non-binding feedback.
Background/Discussion
Case No. CR 21-01
The Applicant, Roger Derrick, is seeking comments from the City
Council regarding potential development of the properties located at
18409 Line Avenue. The applicant is currently developing the property
immediately north of the subject site and has developed another
residential project southeast of this site. The current proposal includes -
options for residential development as well as a potential mini -storage
project.
Please provide the applicant with informal, non -binding, feedback on RR
the development proposals for the site Hwy 10
Planning Commission
The Commission discussed the application on February 26 and
preferred the modified detached townhome design. The public storage
option was a close second. The Commission felt an apartment building
or connected townhome building would look out of place for the area.
The applicant spoke and stated his preference for the modified
detached townhome design.
Mission/Policy/Goal Figure I
The request supports growth of the business community within Elk
River.
Financial Impact
None
The Elk River Vision
A n elcoming community with revolutionary and spirited resourcefulness, exceptional
service, and community engagement that encourages and inspires prosperity.
1
CR 33 -
z
CR 12
P I I E I 1 0 IY
NATURE
Updated. August 2020
Attachments
■ Location Map
■ Applicant's Narrative
■ Plans and Photos
N:\Public Bodies\Agenda Packets\02-01-2021\Final\x10.1 sr Roger Derrick.docx
7t� J1 LA
lz �
�75-135-2345;.'►.
•�
75-42A 150 75-i3dr4i16
75-d23 -0140 =
75-423-D010 75-13 5200
• 75-135_-3201
7 5-423 -013 0• ..
75-423-0620 r_
75-423-0120
' 75�23-0034
75-423-0110 - 'OJA r
_ - 75-d23-0044
1 '
75-7423-0100
75 w 23 -0060 a
75-123-Q0 75-738 -0105
r ,
-
a
y
}
s
Pines at ElkRiver Cd Case No. C l 2 1 01 .�
Concept. Review River
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
Tall Pines 3 Narrative
January 13, 2021
Page 2
the front, so the driveway is 22 feet long. This is an upscale building that is selling well in Red
Wing at a higher price. We believe it will also be successful in Elk River. The total number of
homes is still only ten, five on each side instead of ten in a row, but the elegant design I think
will be pleasing to buyers.
It is my hope that we can effectuate a workable development plan for this site so I can exercise
my option to purchase. Thank youjnr advance for your consideration and input.
Respectfully
Roger erri
RDD:sja
ATTACHMENTA:
Aerial showing property location.
ATTACHMENT B:
Photo of Bridgeport townhome design.
ATTACHMENT C:
Streetscape of public storage facility.
ATTACHMENT D:
Photo of three-story apartment building with underground parking.
ATTACHMENT E:
Photo of six- and eight -unit two-story attached townhomes.
ATTACHMENT F:
Photo of Cambridge townhomes built in Red Wing. (Please note building is 15
feet from the street. The driveway is 22 feet long.)
ATTACHMENT G:
Site plan showing ten Cambridge townhomes on the site.
1
OMc�� 1
ILA � R � - ' �V •' y� � !� . ` i'.1,� . e , ^i_ Vta�� r �, `� I�����' y�
P • a �. ;3 j ^ it p " } ---- � - � L" t-�_ Y ':.,� 'i.'. �.��
�i;, ,ter. i ��yw �qr• _ ,fi' - : • _:' _ ���,
f�, F � �_ - Il ill*+��►� r. j#�.,.
ige
■ i.
w„rr
e'
t:
LIJ
L W-
ZAO
.f�+�
� 1
-cz J.."
04
M A I e0
wi. ni ii-m. "�LA!
77-
a.,^ v.'..ib M„y++••))..r"�' � � ` v(� � t i,r , ay'"r. ''yyi,�,��. :1i {^ram' �' F�% `F'�;� :. -
^�j1 � i �h 4R`a 9 � AIM. r`$ �,•j�e Y `JP T(\Y� � Z � �'p`y Y�F'�l: spy,
_ �{)1 S?� �''r�"tY��sy.P�� � ��).•• �r#�'F 9.�`li �`d� ��•N, �K 6fR.1"
•, \\ _ 'hr�y�r .1si:��i� { �1 �`�5,,v it '`,` t ► , _ • ^�f E` �` r ri � a�''` . ly ,
;ii ` •E•;{£+1,. J,r fir` ��' pH` f 1k { °•,��. °g .y 1 {.
.
- � - 1 .i� ) t� v' 't, "1 i\f. I,i � \ aW( ,,_-; at��� rrr.: ✓a 1'•'. �
71
-77
4 - e
j✓a - -_ i Kai
r
.. y
—
_ _ s' s
I
I I
I I I
TYPICAL LOT
OI. AY
3
I
PFOPOSEO CONCFEO: 'APO OF OE(S(
6 7 8 9 �0
ATTACHMENT G
SEND:
PROP64D ASPNKT PAVFNFM
0 ]0 BO B0
IN
'E GENERAL NOTES
�AIX �NPPFNAPP":
• SII{pN6 LOT ff SET BAG(A YMYW IX /! AEEi fAW
PIE REM LOi 1/R4 BAd(IX LVt&/NE -VAP:
Nl
QR/YEN'A YS Lil3i PARKMC AREAS ANO P(BUC
m=WAY.
uNw 01, IO fEEi BfTNfD! RE90'a')iK SPRCiIAES
wEiuNP e/sPm-u'
• ME'MNO RIPPER gJSAIX-20'
I
I
20'
..—..—..—
1
DUTL
a i
9
A.a
J
5 POND 'I 1
.
..
1
r
z J
N
Q > W Z
a
m oFr a
In Ic r
tnW W W
Ld
ate¢ 0o
J? W U
r
J _ Z
F�a
SHEET NO.
CI