Laserfiche WebLink
Page 2 <br /> • Flexibility to allow a minimum front setback of 20 feet for a corner lot side yard, where 30 <br /> feet is required. <br /> • Flexibility to allow a minimum side yard setback of 7.5 feet, where 10 feet is required. <br /> • Flexibility to allow a minimum right-of-way width of 54 feet, where 60 feet is required. <br /> In exchange for this flexibility, the developer is: <br /> • Designing a more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the use of the <br /> standard R-3 zoning district. <br /> • Providing amenities (playground and shelter)to the proposed park that exceeds the City <br /> standards for park dedication requirements. <br /> • Providing a landscaping plan that exceeds City standards. <br /> • Creating a stormwater reuse irrigation project within the development. <br /> 2. BACKGROUND: <br /> The properties are generally located at the north end of Oneka Parkway. The plan shows 59 <br /> proposed residential lots, stormwater ponding areas, a passive park, sidewalk and trail <br /> connections, and road connections. The applicant is proposing the project to be built in one <br /> phase. The developer has indicated that an HOA will be established for the development to <br /> maintain the landscaping and the water re-use system. <br /> In the Summer of 2022, the Planning Commission and City Council reviewed a sketch plan for <br /> the development, at that time known as the "Drake Property or Oneka Prairie". The Planning <br /> Commission and City Council generally liked the variety of lot sizes and the trails within the <br /> development. The Planning Commission and City Council provided the following comments: <br /> • They highly encouraged stormwater reuse for irrigation throughout the development. <br /> • They liked the trails and proposed park dedication and improvement to the park. <br /> • Generally okay with the portion of Oneka Parkway to be built to the north property line <br /> with the development and not extending to 165th Street. <br /> The Parks Commission also reviewed the sketch plan and provided informal comments in <br /> regards to trails,park improvements, and park dedication. The plan at that time included a <br /> concept on how the park could be developed in an active way including a pavilion and <br /> playground equipment. The developer stated they proposed improvements to the park to meet the <br /> PUD criteria. In general, the Parks Commission liked the proposal, but realized there are details <br /> to work out for the design of the pavilion and playground equipment. The Parks Commission <br /> recommended approval of the proposed park dedication for the development. <br />