04/06/93 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Ms. Sylvia Frolik August 5, 1992 Page 2 description was ever changed, but I do not believe it was. It was the intention of the developer at that time that high density residential development would in fact occur on the 3.75 acre parcel, resulting in 18 to 36 units being developed on that parcel. Since the approval of the PUD which occurred in 1984, two tkings have happened which have led us to consider a change in the high density residential portion of the PUD. First of all, the Metropolitan Council has indicated that it may be willing to consider package treatment plants serving private developments in unsewered areas outside the MUSA line, for outer-ring suburban communities in Anoka County. This would mean that it may be possible for us to go ahead and develop the high density residential using a central water facility and a package treatment plant for sewage disposal. We do have a preliminary site plan indicating the feasibility of a 36-unit townhouse development with such facilities. However, the second development concerns the responses of some of the area residents. In broaching this subject, we have met with extreme resistance to the concept of high density housing, even though that concept has been approved by the City for this parcel. We feel, quite frankly, that were we to propose this concept now, or 10 years from now, it would be met with very stiff neighborhood opposition. The retail value of 36 townhouse sites, at $15,000.00 per site, is $540,000.00. Obviously, the return of that sum of money for a 3.75 acre site, even including the development costs for a sewer and water facility, makes pursuing this concept quite attractive. On the other hand, we (Tom Anderson and myself) live in the area, and are not anxious to antagonize the neighbors. We have always obtained the optimum degree of cooperation from the City in this project, and believe that we have produced a project which is a valuable asset to the City. A recent development in the Majestic Oaks PUD in the City of Ham Lake has sparked some interest in an alternative proposal. A portion of the Majestic Oaks PUD was developed with attractive townhomes arranged in a fairly low density setting. These consist of several pairs of townhouses'.arranged around a private street, involving an owners' association and protective covenants for maintenance and the like. The sites all have individual septic systems, but the adjacent golf course fairways are available for backup if needed. The townhomes retail for approximately $150,000.00 each, including the lot, and are very attractive and compatible with the adjoining homes. The City does not have any ownership or responsibility of anything within