CC PACKET 03272018 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Statement by Perry Thorvig, 3112 Townview Ave. St. Anthony, MN 55418 Lowry Grove Development, March 27, 2018 Mayor and Council Members, Last fall I appeared before you and addressed a number of issues. Most of those have been resolved. Tonight, I want to address three issues. First, I concur with the recommendations of our planning commission except for the additional setback along the east property line. I disagree with my friends from the Kenzington who requested and received an additional setback recommendation from the planning commission. The Kenzington folks have a taller building and are only about 20 feet off the property line. It is unreasonable for them to ask for a setback up to four times what they have in their building. The staff support of their request was arbitrary and is not backed up by any, I repeat ANY, logical or practical explanation. Fortunately, the revised site plan (3/19/2018) setback does not fully comply with the planning commission recommendations. The architects have been able to increase one setback from 65' to 83' on the north wing of the east building. The south wing is only set back three more feet from 70 to 73 feet. I agree with this solution. If both wings had been pushed to the west by a full 20', the road would have had to be shifted to the west resulting in a loss of about 30 parking spaces in the general rental building south of the road. You need to change the wording in your resolution to state that the setbacks be as shown in the revised site plan dated 3/19/2018. Second, the St. Anthony code requires new developments to dedicate open space to the city for additional park space or to pay a fee in lieu of dedication. Dedication of land means that the land is given to the city at no cost so that park facilities can be developed to satisfy the need generated by the new development. The city's subdivision regulations suggest a 10% of lot area dedication. That means that the lot gets smaller and the density increases because part of the original parcel is no longer in control of the developer. In this case, the developer doesn't propose any dedication or conveyance of land. They want to make a payment instead of dedication. BUT, they want the city to give them a monetary credit for development costs of the path around their buildings against the park dedication fee that they would normally have to