Laserfiche WebLink
Brian Pankratz, CBRE, stated part of it is market demand and he hopes there will be demand <br />created from the Armstrong Boulevard interchange but from a retail perspective, the demand is <br />rooftops and demographics, ease of development, and working together. Mr. Pankratz stated the <br />interchange is one thing that will create demand as will a change in FAR. He noted the City still <br />has control over design so the project will meet The COR's general standards. In addition, if this <br />project goes well it may attract another project. <br />Mayor Strommen agreed that the demand for rental units, parking structure, interchange, and <br />development requirements all influence the project and asked which would be the major factor. <br />Mr. Pankratz stated in COR -1, structured parking is a huge cost. He explained that the per stall <br />cost for surface parking is $3,000 to $6,000, for structured parking it is $13,000 to $17,000, and <br />for underground parking it is more than $20,000. He stated the rent that has to be achieved with <br />structured or underground parking is substantial and in some communities, like Ramsey, <br />communities have to subsidize the project to have structured parking. <br />Councilmember Kuzma stated with the proposed ordinance amendment, he would ask if adopted, <br />will it help bring more development to The COR. <br />Mr. Pankratz stated he definitely hopes so noting that a medical or office use may be options as it <br />will be less demanding if the .65 FAR is approved. In addition, it shows the City of Ramsey is <br />pro - development and willing to work with developers. <br />Councilmember Kuzma recognized the Planning Commission for taking a hard look at this <br />amendment and passing on that information. He stated it seems to him that the original Ramsey <br />Town Center plan was aggressive with density and it does not make sense to require structured <br />parking in this market. He stated there are not many developers coming forward so he supports <br />making a modification to move the project forward. <br />Councilmember Riley agreed no other developers have stepped forward and suggested the <br />market study has been going on for the last eight to ten years with no one coming forward to <br />purchase land that requires structured parking. He agreed with the importance of looking at the <br />entire area and listening to what the market is saying. Councilmember Riley also agreed that the <br />current market will not support structured parking without public subsidy, which he does not <br />support. He stated perception has been discussed and he thinks this amendment shows the City <br />is willing to listen and yield to what the market is saying but if not amended, gives the perception <br />the City is rule driven and not flexible. <br />Councilmember Backous stated he thinks the market will change with the overpass and then the <br />City will not have to subsidize anything. He stated that change in market conditions is close and <br />he does not want the City to make a deal based on urgency. Rather, he prefers to review <br />everything and wait to see what the overpass does to the market. Councilmember Backous stated <br />he has nothing against the project but wants to hear from the Planning Commission and it did not <br />have a quorum at the last meeting. He stated for those reasons, he will oppose the ordinance <br />amendment. <br />City Council / November 12, 2014 <br />Page 6 of 9 <br />