PC PACKET 120822 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

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