Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves preliminary plat and PUD for 119‑unit townhome project with conditions and 12‑month final‑plat window
Summary
The Inver Grove Heights City Council approved a preliminary plat and preliminary planned unit development (PUD) for a 119‑unit townhome rental project at the southwest corner of Argenta Boulevard and 60th Street, subject to conditions including a 12‑month deadline for final plat approval and staff review of screening and access details.
Get email alerts on the Residential Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Inver Grove Heights City Council on motion approved the preliminary plat and preliminary planned unit development (PUD) for a 119‑unit townhome rental project (North 61 Degree) on approximately 20.53 net developable acres at the southwest corner of Argenta Boulevard and 60th Street.
The council’s approval includes conditions listed in the resolution and a modification negotiated during the meeting that sets a 12‑month timeline for the developer to submit and obtain approval of a final plat. Council also directed staff to work with the developer to evaluate additional screening and fencing along the project’s southern property line and to review access/turning‑movement options on the roadway network, including the feasibility of a right‑turn only movement to limit cut‑through traffic onto the adjacent neighborhood.
Why it matters: The development will add 119 rental townhome units in a part of the city guided for residential growth under the Northwest area plan and Shoreland Overlay. The council’s decision balances the developer’s request for PUD flexibilities with neighborhood concerns about tree clearing, traffic, buffering and stormwater.
Project details and staff findings The site comprises two parcels totaling roughly 23.9 acres gross and about 20.53 acres net after excluding right of way and wetlands. Staff reported the proposal would provide 7.97 acres (about 39%) of open space where 20% is required under the Northwest area rules, but requested flexibility on the required amount of undisturbed open space. The developer is asking four PUD variances: a 3‑foot reduction to a 20‑foot front setback on the sidewalk side (to 17 feet), an increase in impervious surface within the shoreland area (from a 25% shoreland limit to 36.4% overall), reduced undisturbed open space (12.6% vs. the 50% undisturbed requirement in the Shoreland PUD rules), and up to six units per building where the code standard is four.
Staff and the planning commission recommended approval of the preliminary plat and PUD subject to the conditions in the resolution. Staff said the R3A zoning and the city’s development capacity analysis supported the proposed 119 units (the zoning range was described as roughly 82 to 164 units based on lot‑size calculations). The developer also presented a landscaping and tree‑replacement plan that would meet the city’s mitigation requirement for removed trees.
Developer response and changes requested Dave Stouffer, director of development for Eastland Holdings, said the project is designed as a long‑term rental community and emphasized the developer’s experience managing similar projects. He said buildings along the southern border would be lower‑density (four‑unit buildings) with the larger six‑unit buildings concentrated to the north, and that the team is willing to investigate additional vegetative screening and a fence along the southern property line.
Public concerns and staff replies Several nearby residents spoke at the council meeting, raising concerns about tree removal, stormwater and flood capacity, traffic and pedestrian safety, the scale and design of two‑story/three‑story townhomes adjacent to mostly one‑story, owner‑occupied houses, and the loss of privacy. Residents asked that a fence or berm be required along the shared southern lot line and requested guarantees that the existing drainage improvements will not be overloaded by additional runoff.
City staff said the county’s prior drainage improvements were sized for a more intense development scenario than currently proposed, and that the project is required to treat and retain stormwater on site. Staff confirmed that final engineering will address peak flows, and that the city engineer would review proposed stormwater basins and models as part of final plat and infrastructure review. On access, staff said county spacing rules limit where additional accesses may be placed on 60th Street and that a second access will be from Argenta Trail; staff will evaluate right‑turn‑only pavement markings or other measures in coordination with the developer.
Council direction and final conditions Council amended the draft resolution to set the validity period for the preliminary plat at 12 months for the developer to obtain final plat approval (the code default is 3 years, but the council exercised its discretion to shorten the timeline). The council added direction that final PUD plans may be revised after staff review to address additional screening/landscaping and access modifications recommended by city engineers and public works staff. The developer agreed to explore fence/landscaping options for the southern boundary and to continue traffic coordination with Dakota County regarding access geometry.
Votes at meeting: Council made and seconded the motion to adopt the preliminary plat and preliminary PUD with the added conditions; the motion carried (vote recorded in the council minutes as unanimous on the motion). The motion also included the 12‑month condition for final plat submittal.
What happens next: The developer said construction will proceed in two phases, with about 60 units and the clubhouse in phase one. Final plat, grading, engineering and final PUD development plan reviews will return to the city for approvals; the council directed staff to negotiate the southern buffering and access items and include them as conditions on final plans if determined necessary by staff engineering review.
Ending: Residents who spoke said they want clearer commitments on tree preservation, screening and stormwater; staff and the developer said they would continue to coordinate and that final, engineered plans and any required permits will be reviewed before construction begins.
