Agenda - Council - 08/22/1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

,At the Planning Commission meeting on June 6, Mr. Gerald Schmidt, a resident and owner of the parcel immediately adjacent to the goff course on the south expressed concern that the development /)f a maintenance building on the golf course proper should at a minimum require an amendment to "the development agreement and a rezoning of property to allow for this additional commercial use Outside of the commercial outlots designated on the PUD site plan. He also expressed concern that the development of the mainfgnance building would be reducing the open space of the Planned Unit Development (PUD). ~ response to Mr. Schmidt's comments, the Planning Commission explained that a rezoning is not ;necessary because the property is already zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD) for which a ;mixture of uses was previously approved, including commercial, golf course, single family, and ~ultiple family housing. The goff course maintenance building is considered a commercial use 'accessory to the golf course. However, the Commission did table any action on the application for site plan approval and directed City Staff to schedule a public hearing for June 21, 1995, to consider amending the PUD development plan to specifically allow for the establishment of a maintenance building on Outlot G of the Rum River Hills PUD. iThe final development plan for the PUD approved by City Council in December of 1984 stated that ithere would also be an out building developed on the property in which to store power carts. The iamount of reduction to golf course open space caused by the construction of the maintenance ibuilding and bituminous parking and maneuvering area mounts to .075% of the golf course. !Mr. Schmidt's transmittal of June 12, 1995 refers to the need for a rezoning application and 'resubmissi0n of a preliminary site plan based on procedures established in Section 170.016k of the !Ramsey City Code. Under the current City Code numbering system, 170.016k (Planned Unit iDevelopment, Major Changes) is 9.20.31 (Subd. 4). What this section is describing is the ~procedure for making changes to a PUD plan mid-stream in.processing. Much like when we iapprove plats, if the final plat submitted does not substantially conform to the preliminary plat iapproved, the applicant must go back to a public hearing and gain approval of revised preliminary iplat prior to pursuing final plat approval. This PUD was processed some 10 years ago and the zoning and site plan are finalized; our Code does not set out specific instructions on how to amend a finalized, established PUD. For lack of anything better to follow, we can refer to procedures laid :.out in Subdivision 4 (Major Changes) to amend a finalized plan, but then to be consistent, we ~:would also have to consider Subdivision 5 (Minor Changes). i ', ;iOn June 21, 1995, the Planning Commission conducted the public hearing and tabled action on the application and directed that members of City Staff, Planning Commission, area residents, and golf icourse personnel meet at the golf course site to review the alternative sites considered for the imaintenance building. iOn Wednesday, June 28, 1995, Commissioner Terry Hendriksen, Zoning Administrator Sylvia iFrolik, Golf Course Manager Jeff Toilette, contractor Bob Schwabolski, and area resident, Jerry iSchmidt toured the golf course to look at the various sites that were considered for the maintenance ibnilding. Following the tour, the general consensus was that the best site is a commercial lot just northwest of the clubhouse which is currently not for sale. It was further agreed that of the 3 sites available on the Rum River Hills Golf Course, the proposed site in the southwest corner of the :~property is the most logical. At the end of the tour, it was decided that Mr. Toilette and Mr. iSchmidt would be at the Planning Commission meeting on July 5 with a mutually acceptable :.proposal for the development of the maintenance building in the southwest corner of the site, ;ishould it be approved. =~On July 5, 1995, Mr. Jerry Schmidt and Jeff Toilette, golf course manager, were present at the !Planning Commission meeting. It was reported at that time that the two parties had not quite icompleted negotiations for a site plan that would satisfy both Mr. Schmidt and the golf course iboard of directors. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the amendment to the i~PUD development plan and a site plan acceptable to both Mr. Schmidt and the golf course. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I