PL PACKET 08182020 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

6390 Carlson Drive | Eden Prairie, MN 55346 | 651.406.8050 | www.interstatedevelopment.com Some of the project elements we have incorporated in our Project are a slight departure from current city zoning guidelines. Although the site is guided as high-density residential, the small in-fill location of the Project requires these variances to make the development economically viable. As the project is already located within a PUD, we are seeking the city’s approval of these elements within the flexibility of the PUD. The main project elements needing PUD flexibility are as follows: 1) Density - The 2040 Comprehensive Plan for St. Anthony has designated the Project site as high- density residential at up to 40/units an acre. At 0.85 acres, the guidelines would limit the Project density to 34 units. Under our Project application, we are requesting a density transfer within the PUD that would allow us to build 38 units which is equivalent to 44.7 units per acre. The higher density is necessary to reduce the per unit project development and operating costs. 2) Parking – Current R-4 parking code requires two parking spaces per multi-family unit. Under our Project application, we are showing a total of 1.2 spaces per unit for a total of 46 spaces, all of which will be uncovered. Based on research from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in the 5th edition of their Parking Generation Manual, the average demand generated for a suburban 3-story apartment project would have average peak parking demand of 1.31 spaces per unit. ITE also publishes average peak demand per bedroom as they do recognize that a project of one bedroom units (the Project is 79% one bedrooms) will have a lower parking demand than a project of two or more bedroom units. ITE projects the parking demand for a suburban apartment project with 95% confidence to be 0.80 spaces per bedroom, which would generate a demand much lower than the 1 space per bedroom supplied within the Project. When looking at both ITE calculations together, we feel comfortable the Project has a sufficient number of parking spaces to meet demand. If we are short of parking, as owners of the retail parcel to the south with an abundance of parking available, we will ensure the parking demand could be satisfied without the need for on-street parking. The other departure from parking code we are seeking flexibility on is the removal of the requirement of half of the parking to be covered. Due to this small in-fill location and our mission to create housing the majority of residents could afford, building a parking deck is not financially feasible. In addition, due to the modular construction design, we could only get a max of 18 parking spaces within the deck which falls well short of the parking code of 38 covered spaces. With covered parking spaces renting for $75/month at other communities, our total rents at our project will be that much further lower than our competition. Yes, we will lose some potential renters that want covered parking, but there are plenty of options for those residents to choose from in the neighboring apartment communities. However, we are confident that the first-class finishes we are offering and at a reasonable rent will be attractive enough for residents to be comfortable with the slight inconvenience of uncovered parking through the winter months. 3) Impervious Surface – The current R-4 standard for impervious surface area is 50%. Under our project application, our impervious surface area is projected to be 76.7% (0.65 acres of impervious surface area of the 0.85-acre site). Although this site had a similar impervious