Laserfiche WebLink
-�- -- � - -,.. � <br />. � <br />; � : --�> - L:-' ,. �._.--- - - .. -- --�um..:._ �- f <br />Mounds View Planning Commission <br />Regular Meeting <br />March 1, 2000 <br />Page 19 <br />Consideration of Resolution 607-00, a Resolution Recommending Approval ; c�£; a Zo <br />of Bridges Golf Course Parcels from I-1 and CRP to PF. ; " <br />.�-.. <br />Applicant: City of Mounds View .��,�;�yy :. <br />.�;�€:,�;&� t�<, <br />Planning Associate Ericson gave the staff report as follows: <br />This item is consideration of Resolution 607-00, which is �` <br />the rezoning of Bridges Golf Course parcels from I- i 5' <br />Recreation, and Preservation, to the PF, Public Faciliti�� <br />reviewing the City's application for billboards on the golf c <br />the zoning of the golf course is not consistent with the �� <br />explicitly pernutted uses within either the CRP or I-1 �ot�i�� <br />Planning Associate Ericson stated there has b��'li .. <br />members that the City initiated a rezoning a�tiq�°�on <br />this had not taken place. He stated the pra �i'sed use <br />golf course. He advised that the PF Zo�fg District; <br />, :>. �,::: <br />one of the parcels associated with th� �o�f cours�;�s <br />He explained that the proposal befo�-e ili�'Planntt�� �c <br />� <br />parcels associated with the golf �purse �°r�or�� ����ir <br />designation. <br />they �,,c����e: �;� <br />proposed �y� <br />the e�sting <br />proposal wc <br />fact that� � <br />���•.;-• <br />Plan ��t�na <br />���, and <br />���s��ict <br />y �;�c�� E� <br />I�istrici:�: ' <br />CRP, Conser!�?-�#��y, <br />. In the cou� �c; ai <br />��taff discovered that <br />�olf courses are not <br />� � ;�;�.? ;�ion oin �:1�� '��art of City staff <br />����� �:���r �everal„�ears earlier, however, <br />7�� ����������ar��e with the zoning on the <br />� F;�:I� `+.��t��~ses as a permitted use, and <br />ntl� under the PF zoning designation. <br />s�ci'�3�would rezone those parts of those <br />t�ig CRP and I-1 zoning, to the PF <br />f�2c; Eric�c�� ����ti�E�x�;c� lZesoliatit�� �f�7�00 recommends to the City Council that <br />���ffac�; ��5; ��rl����� ��p:���c�v�s zhe rezoning of the golf course parcels. He stated the <br />:��:���� ����-�i�r���ic�F�; �� ��� :t ���i�?ng with the proposed Comprehensive Plan, whereas <br />�„���;�aa��z, �±s r�o� `f��������d ��;f"'�consistent with the Plan. He explained that this <br />�°��,�������r ���r; ��.��� �th��E ����� ���� is not consistent with the Zoning Code, and also the <br />�or�i��� :,:�r;,�r��iox�� would not be consistent with the proposed Comprehensive <br />i for the�� rx<��{;`��r�. <br />rson Peterson s��tec�. a portion of the wetland between the Sysco property and the <br />al Park is curre�tl� zoned PF, as well as a portion of the golf course around the ninth hole. <br />4Y:::_� <br />;d he believed;C�utlot A, of the North Star Industrial Park 2°d Addition, is currently zoned <br />:�>;;,<.� <br />should be,iti�l�tcled in the rezoning as well. <br />���r����,g,��, �'-�<>�>��i�4:� Ericson stated they could include this property in the ordinance, and change <br />ihc* r�j>����; ���aYn �.�1 to PF, which would make sense, given its more park-like purpose. He stated <br />th�Y � w�� � �:wo outlots, and the parcel Chairperson Peterson was referring to was Outlot A, North <br />Star Industrial Park 2nd Addition, as opposed to Outlot A, SYSCO. <br />Chairperson Peterson inquired if a formal description of this property was available. Planning <br />Associate Ericson stated it was. <br />