Minutes - Planning Commission - 06/21/1995 - Special Meeting

Home

area would have to close par 3 - 15th hole - the building would be 100 feet on the property and would affect the hole plus all homeowners would be affected. Another option would be to go from that point across the 14th hole which is even more out of whack. We would have to physically cross two holes. These are the reasons we came to the conclusion that the proposed location is the only feasible site. The building could possibly be moved 30 feet farther north but we have to stay out of the easement. He stated the golf course wants to fence up to the easement. This site has the accessibility and affects the least possible homeowners. Commissioner Hendriksen did not doubt that the applicant would say that this is the only possible way to do it and added he would like a chance to come to that same conclusion. Commissioner Deemer expressed concern about tabling this and inquired when a decision would be made. Commissioner Hendriksen felt that a decision would be delayed only until the next meeting. Commissioner Deemer inquired of Commissioner Hendriksen if he agreed that a maintenance building is needed to which Commissioner Hendriksen replied yes. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Bawden, Commissioners Hendriksen, terry, Deemer and Thomd. Voting No: None. Absent: Commissioners Holland and LaDue. Discussion ensued about a scheduled time for the meeting at the golf course. Commissioners Hendriksen and Deemer volunteered as did Mr. Schmidt. Chairperson Bawden will attend if possible. Mr. Tollette requested the meeting take place as soon as possible. Commissioner Deemer stated he has been on the Planning Commission the longest of anyone. He has gone through this golf course with Wes Bulen. Some of the letters received are misconstrued. There's a lot separate from the golf course owned by Mr. Anderson and these are designated residential lots. The original intent for the golf course was a single outlot. It was determined that the club house had to sit on a lot alone for a liquor license0 The entire golf course is an ouflot - several different ouflots. PUD allows almost any use of the property. A representative of the golf course added that maybe if the building was moved further north and the area was treed, that may be acceptable to the homeowners. Mr. Bulen commented that the basic issue is common sense, good business and to forget personalities. Case g2: Consider Amending Thoroughfare Setback City Engineer Jankowski stated that back in the fall of 1993, the Planning Commission suggested that the City revise the thoroughfare setback requirements. About that same time, Anoka County was revising its advisory setback policy which they eventually adopted in May 1994. Mr. Jankowski explained that the City's policy for thoroughfares calls for a setback of 50 feet from the right-of-way line or 110 feet from the center line, whichever is greater. The County's policy results in a decrease in setbacks along county roads. As an example, he stated that a single-family home fronting on a county road in the rural district would be allowed 100 feet from the center of the right-of-way - 10 feet less than the current policy allows. Mr. Jankowski stated that Commissioner Deemer had suggested even a further-reduced setback of 83 feet from the center line or the zoning setback, whichever was greater. He explained there would be no difference between Commissioner Deemers proposal and the new County policy used on roadways where the desired 120 foot right-of-way had been required. Mr. Jankowski continued that he met with Commissioner Deemer on May 5, 1995, as a task force subcommittee, in an attempt to resolve this issue and agreed to a compromise thoroughfare setback policy which would be Planning Commission/June 21, 1995 Page 7 of 10