Homepage -Family

Go To Search
TwitterFacebook
YouTube
 

View Other Items in this Archive | View All Archives | Printable Version

CITY OF ST. CLOUD

DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES

 

DATE OF MEETING:      September 4, 2003

 

LOCATION:                   Municipal Services Complex 1st Floor Conference Room

                                    2901 17th Street, St. Cloud

 

CALL TO ORDER:         2:00 P.M.

 

CHAIRMAN:                  John Groenendaal, Planner

 

SECRETARY:               Marty Hobbs, Development Officer

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:

Rick Mauro                    Eric Holloway                Mark Luthie                   Dave Ennis                   

John Groenendaal          Tom Hurt                       Angelo Perri                  Dave Pierson

 

NEW BUSINESS:

 

1.         Case #3-111.01 – Home Depot

Commerce Center Drive

Replat

 

Mr. Shawn Hindle and Mr. Stan Carroll were present to represent the application.

 

BUILDING DEPARTMENT

INFORMATION:

1.         This case has no effect on the building department.

 

PUBLIC WORKS

CONDITIONS:

1.         The dedication section of the plat indicates an easement “L”.   We cannot find this on the plat.

2.         Is Tract C which is the stormwater water management area for Blackberry Creek part of this plat?

 

Easement “L” was discussed using a set of plans.  None of the discussion between Mr. Luthie and Mr. Hindle was audible and no locations were specified.  Mr. Hindle noted that it was possible that it was a typo and he would look at it further before resubmittal of revised plans.

 

Mr. Hindle noted that the easement had been included in the legal description.  He explained that the owner was requesting that the easement be made into a tract that could be turned over to the Blackberry Creek HOA.  That was why it had been changed from a drainage easement to Tract “C”.

 

Mr. Luthie asked if the HOA had been notified that they were now going to be responsible for it.

 

Mr. Hindle noted that he was not sure and that Mr. Schoolfield was handling everything.

 

LINES DIVISION

CONDITIONS:

1.         Please provide a minimum 15’ utility easement centered over the water main and services up to the meters and a minimum 20’ utility easement centered over the sewer main.

 

Mr. Hindle requested that he be allowed to make that dedication based on the as-builts to insure accuracy.

 

Mr. Mauro noted that would be acceptable.

 

FIRE DEPARTMENT

INFORMATION:

1.         Approval of this case will not cause an adverse affect on fire rescue department operations.

 

OUC (ELECTRIC UTILITY)

Page 2, DRC Minutes – 09/04/03

 

 

CONDITIONS:

1.         No comment.

 

PLANNING

CONDITIONS:

1.         Provide a survey of the parcel as it exists now including all easements.

2.         Simplify notes by simply noting what lots are responsibility for what easements. Example Drainage Tract E is dedicated to Lots 1 and 3.

3.                   What and Where is Tract D

4.                   Is note 4 required? If Home depot does give use and maintenance to an other party they will not be able to use it for signage.  Why would Blackberry Creek want it? If there is a reason why is it not permitted to use it now?

5.                   Move the dedication of Tract B to the notes.

6.                   Tracts J and K should not be dedicated to the public. What is Tract L

7.                   On note 4 which, Tract A is to be maintained by Blackberry Creek and St. Cloud Commerce Center Master Association, Inc.?

INFORMATION:

8.                   Revised plans must be submitted within sixty (60) days of this review.  Revised plans submitted after the allotted time frame will require a new application including payment of additional fees.

9.                   All submitted plans must be folded at the time of submittal.  Rolled plans will not be accepted.

 

PARKS & RECREATION

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1.                   The St. Cloud Parks & Recreation Department recommends approval of this request.

 

FINDING:

The DRC recommended approval with conditions.  The applicant will submit a revised plat for forwarding to the Planning Board and City Council.

 

 

 


Page 2, DRC Minutes – 09/04/03

 

 

2.         Case #3-111.02 – Home Depot

                                                Commerce Center Drive

                                                Site Plan

 

Mr. Shawn Hindle and Mr. Stan Caroll were present to represent the application.

                                   

BUILDING DEPARTMENT

CONDITIONS:

1.         At least one accessible route (special emphasis crosswalk) shall be provided from public transportation stops, public streets or sidewalks to the accessible building entrance per     section 11-4.3.2 (1) of the Florida Building Code 2001

 

PUBLIC WORKS

CONDITIONS:

Sheet 5 of 22:

1.         The proposed stormwater management pond at the rear of the Home Depot is greater in width than the drainage easement “E” shown on the plat.

 

Mr. Hindle explained that this had been a part of the original Black Berry Creek plat.

 

Mr. Luthie asked if it was to be removed.

 

Mr. Hindle noted that it was not and that this had been included as a means to designate responsibility for it.

 

Sheet 6 of 22:

2.                   The statement regarding the City’s reimbursement of the cost of overlay and re-striping of Commerce Center Drive should be revised to reflect the letter written to Chris Logan of Greenberg Farrow.  The letter states that the City will pay $2.70 per square yard for the 1-inch overlay.  No mention was made of sharing in the striping of the street.

 

Mr. Hindle noted that he wasn’t sure why it was there.

 

Mr. Luthie recommended that it be removed.

 

3.         The typical section on Sheet 11 of 22, indicates a finished floor elevation of the building at 62.25 and the plan view on Sheet 5 of 22, indicates a 63.30 finished floor elevation.

 

Mr. Hindle noted that he had already made this change to the plan.

 

LINES DIVISION

CONDITIONS:

1.                   The existing water main located at the cross access easement is a 12” main, change the note to “connect to 12” water valve”.

2.                   A double detector check is required on the fire line.

3.                   Polyethylene tubing is required on the 2” water service line, change note to indicate “SDR-9 P.E. tubing”.

4.                   Show location and sizing of water meter w/ a reduced pressure backflow preventer for all service lines.

5.                   Reclaimed water is available for irrigation. Remove irrigation tap & meter on the potable water and show the connection to the existing 12” reclaimed water main at Kissimmee Park Rd. intersection.

6.                   Remove note “C908 DR18 “and change to C900 DR-18.

7.                   An in-line gate valve is required on the water main every 500 LF.

8.                   Indicate the size of main and fittings on the stub-out for future development site.

9.                   Under the General Utility Construction Notes: remove items no. 1 and 2, change the phone number on item no. 6 to 407-957-7283 and change note no. 30 to a 20’ and a 15’ easement.

10.               Water and Sewer D.E.P. permits are required.

11.               Provide sanitary sewer profiles sheets.

12.               The manhole numbering is required to utilize the City of St. Cloud numbering system. Please use manhole numbers 33-69 through 33-74.

Page 4, DRC Minutes – 09/04/03

 

 

13.               Explain the two water lines that dead end into the driveway.

14.               Provide irrigation plans.

 

The dedication of the main was discussed.

 

FIRE DEPARTMENT

CONDITIONS:

1.         Fire hydrants in commercial, industrial, and high-density residential areas shall be spaced no greater than three hundred fifty (350) feet apart and shall be connected to mains no less than eight (8) inches in diameter.  In addition, hydrants shall be located so that the radius of one hundred seventy five (175) feet from the hydrant shall strike a portion of the structure, as well as strike the same radius of the next hydrant on the property. The required distance between all hydrants shall be measured along the road right-of-way and shall not be measured across private property not designated and used as a road right-of-way. No individual hydrant shall be designed to deliver more than 1000 GPM of required fire flow.  (L.D.C. 7.9.2.b.1)

2.         Before and during construction, when combustibles are brought onto the site in such quantities as deemed hazardous by the fire official, paved roads to provide access for fire vehicles and a suitable water supply for fire protection acceptable to the fire department shall be provided and maintained.  (L.D.C. 6.1.21.3)

INFORMATION:

3.         Site plan shows three FDC points, one for the separate retail building on site and two for Home Depot. It was the Fire Rescues understanding there would be one FDC with four 2.5 inch couplings. Which plan will be used? The Fire Rescue Department requests one manifold type connection.

4.         Further conditions and recommendations will be addressed during the construction process.

 

The location of the fire hydrants was discussed.

 

Mr. Hindle noted that the intention was to loop the twelve inch (12”) around the building and then stub out an eight inch (8”) for the hydrant.

 

Here and there were used to describe the location of the main and hydrant stub out.  No specific location was verbalized for inclusion in these minutes.

 

OUC (ELECTRIC UTILITY)

CONDITIONS:

1.         The owner will install all primary conduit and the concrete transformer pad.  The secondary conduit, wire and terminations will be the responsibility of the owner.

2.         A utility easement will be required once the location of the transformers and primary run is determined.

3.         Please have the electric conduit, boxes and concrete transformer pads installed and passed inspection by OUC inspectors 4 weeks before you need electric service.

4.         There may be costs to provide electric service to this project.  Please contact Bill Ellwood.

5.         OUC can provide parking lot lights for this project.  Please contact Bill Ellwood.

6.         Please send all site and electric information to OUC Development Services.

            Bill Ellwood, Development Services          (407) 236-9652; Fax (407) 236-9628

            500 South Orange Avenue                      Email: developmentservices@ouc.com

            P.O. Box 3193

            Orlando, FL  32802

7.         Once all information is obtained by Development Services, an Engineer will be assigned to the job.

 

The following Planning conditions are incorrect.  Revised comments from Planning were submitted at the meeting.  The applicant did not receive those comments prior to the meeting.

 

PLANNING

CONDITIONS:

1.                   Please rectify the legal description of the subject property against the legal provided for the rezoning. There seems to be discrepancies.

2.                   Add the 4 foot landscape island in parking lot or apply and receive a site variances.

3.                   Need Trip Generation

Page 5, DRC Minutes – 09/04/03

 

 

4.                   Correct all notes on page 1 to reflect the Home Depot lot and less out the retail out parcel.

5.                   The plat must be recorded before this site plan can be approved.

6.                   Show The Handicapped Parking with the required minimum depth of 20 foot.

7.                   Show the bicycle parking.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

8.         I have noticed that Home Depot will often have a food vendor that operates in the front canopy. The City will allow a vendor if it is addressed as part of a site plan. Thought to this use may be addressed now or will require a new site plan if desired later.

INFORMATION:

9.         Revised plans must be submitted within sixty (60) days of this review.  Revised plans submitted after the allotted time frame will require a new application including payment of additional fees.

10.        All submitted plans must be folded at the time of submittal.  Rolled plans will not be accepted.

 

The following are the updated Planning comments the applicant was given at the meeting:

 

CONDITIONS:

1.                   Please rectify the legal description of the subject property against the legal provided for the rezoning. There seems to be discrepancies.

2.                   Add the 4 foot landscape island in parking lot or apply and receive a site variances. Provide some compensation in the form of larger landscape islands and larger plantings if the variance is requested.

3.                   ITE places approximately 3500+ ADT and will require a Traffic Impact Study

4.                   Remove the retail center from the drawing and specs. .

5.                   The retail out parcel property lines need to be shown.

6.                   The plat must be recorded before this site plan can be approved.

7.                   Show The Handicapped Parking with the required minimum depth of 20 foot.

8.                   Show the bicycle parking. You may want a variance to reduce the required amount from 50 to 10 spaces.

9.                   The project intent and proposed land use differ with regard to the retail center.

10.               Show the proposed drainage easement, it appears the proposed pond will not fit in the drainage easement.

11.               Show the required landscape buffer to the retail center.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

12.        I have noticed that Home Depot will often have a food vendor that operates in the front canopy. The City will allow a vendor if it is addressed as part of a site plan. Thought to this use may be addressed now or will require a new site plan if desired later.

INFORMATION:

13.        Revised plans must be submitted within sixty (60) days of this review.  Revised plans submitted after the allotted time frame will require a new application including payment of additional fees.

14.        All submitted plans must be folded at the time of submittal.  Rolled plans will not be accepted.

 

Mr. Hindle noted that there would be a variance request submitted for both the islands and the bicycle parking.

 

Mr. Groenendaal also advised the applicant that a traffic impact study was needed.

 

Mr. Hindle noted that this building was smaller that that indicated on the original plan.

 

The handicap parking was discussed with Mr. Hindle noting that he would revise the plan as needed.

 

PARKS & RECREATION

 

Additional comments were submitted at DRC and were not provided to the applicant in advance.

 

CONDITIONS:

1.                   The St. Cloud Parks & Recreation Department cannot review this site. The tree survey is incomplete and part of the Landscaping Plans is missing from the packet.

NOTE: ADDITIONAL COMMENTS WILL BE SUBMITTED AFTER REVIEWING THE TOTAL LANDSCAPING PLAN PACKAGE.

 

Page 6, DRC Minutes – 09/04/03

 

 

The following are comments from Parks & Recreation that were submitted at the meeting.

 

Ms. Duffy was not present for the discussion and the applicant was advised to contact her with any concerns.

 

Mr. Hindle noted that he would contact Ms. Duffy.

 

CONDITIONS:

1.                    Please revise the submitted tree survey. Upgrades, access drives and/or utilities are shown within the City rights-of-way. The survey is missing a large amount of trees that meet Article VIII, Section 8.2.1.1 and some are identified wrong. This department’s concern is with the trees that will receive an impact by the proposed construction.

2.                    Sheet 22 Landscaping Details are missing from the plans packet.

3.                    Please show a tree barrier zone for all of the trees located upon City rights-of-way, in accordance with Ordinance #2001-51, Section 51-21 Tree Protection.

4.                    The required hedge material is missing from the Northeast corner of this project. Please add the additional plantings in accordance with Section 8.8.7.2 Required landscaping adjacent to public rights-of-way.

5.                    Please shift all plantings/trees north that are proposed within the Southeast buffer (adjacent to Hess and Goodyear sites).

6.                    This department has a concern with the proposed Live Oaks (Quercus virginiana) shown on both sides of the center access drive off of Commerce Center Drive…and…the proposed Live Oaks shown on the North side of the Southern access drive off of Commerce Center Drive. Please select another type of tree that is more interior friendly, for these areas.

 

SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

CONDITIONS:

1.         A South Florida Water Management District permit is required for this project.

 

The applicant’s desire to build prior to filing of the plat was discussed with Mr. Groenendaal noting that the plat must be filed first.

 

Joinders for the plat were briefly discussed.

 

Mr. Groenendaal recommended that Mr. Hindle discuss the issue of the food carts with the applicant.

 

The issue of the variances was further discussed with Mr. Groenendaal noting that they needed to be submitted right away. 

 

Signage for the site was discussed with Mr. Hindle noting that Mr. Nearing advised him that he was going to be revising the sign ordinance to allow for additional signage for this type of business.

 

The issue of signage was briefly discussed.

 

FINDING:

The DRC recommended approval of the site plan with the conditions as stated.  The applicant will resubmit revised plans within 60 days of this review.
Page 7, DRC Minutes –
09/04/03

 

 

3.         Case #3-71.02 – Steven’s Plantation (City of St. Cloud)

                                                2400 W. Nolte Rd & 3150 Bailey Rd

                                                Annexation

 

Since this is a “City Project” there was no one present to represent the case and there was no discussion.

 

BUILDING DEPARTMENT

INFORMATION:

1.         This case has no effect on the building department.

 

PUBLIC WORKS

INFORMATION:

1.         No comment.

 

LINES DIVISION

INFORMATION:

1.         No comment.

 

FIRE DEPARTMENT

INFORMATION:

1.         Upon annexation, this site will receive fire protection from the St. Cloud Fire Rescue Department.  In order for the site to receive the ISO rating inherent with the rest of the City, a hydrant must be located within 1000 feet of any existing structures.  Furthermore, any future development will require standards set forth according to the LDC 7.9.3

 

OUC (ELECTRIC UTILITY)

CONDITIONS:

1.         No comment.

 

PARKS & RECREATION

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1.         The St. Cloud Parks & Recreation Department recommends approval of this request.

 

SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

INFORMATION:

1.         The District has no comment regarding this case.

 

FINDING:

The DRC approved the request.  The case will be forwarded to the Planning Board and City Council for Public Hearings.
Page 8, DRC Minutes –
09/04/03

 

 

4.         Case #3-50.04 – Holiday Chevrolet

                                                1001 E. Irlo Bronson Memorial Highway

                                                Site Variance

 

Mr. Abe Linden was present to represent the application.

 

BUILDING DEPARTMENT

INFORMATION:

1.         This case has no effect on the building department.

 

PUBLIC WORKS

INFORMATION:

1.         No comment.

 

LINES DIVISION

INFORMATION:

1.         No comment.

 

FIRE DEPARTMENT

INFORMATION:

1.         Approval of this case will not cause an adverse affect on fire rescue department operations.

 

OUC (ELECTRIC UTILITY)

CONDITIONS:

1.         No comment.

 

PLANNING

CONDITIONS:

Provide a narrative on how this variance request meets these criteria:

1.         That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structures, or required subdivision improvements involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures, or required subdivision improvements;

2.         That a literal interpretation of the provisions of these regulations would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties with similar conditions;

3.         That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

4.         Consider requesting a lesser variance, waiving the wall along the north side of the property where residential property will and has developed is not a realistic request.

 

There was discussion of where on the site the wall could be waived.

 

Mr. Groenendaal noted that there were residents to the North that showed up objecting to the variance.

 

Mr. Linden noted that a six foot (6’) slatted chain link fence with a buffer would not be a problem but the wall or concrete fencing would be too expensive.

 

Mr. Groenendaal noted that cost could not be considered as a justification for a variance.  He noted that the City had already agreed to a compromise by allowing the concrete fencing in lieu of the wall and now was being asked to go even further by allowing fencing instead.

 

Here and there was used to discuss possible areas where the wall could be replaced by fencing without causing problems for adjacent residences.

 

Mr. Linden asked if it would help if he got notarized statements from some of the residents indicating that they would not have a problem with allowing the fencing.

 

Mr. Groenendaal noted that such statements could be submitted to support the case but the final decision would be up to the City Council.

Page 9, DRC Minutes – 09/04/03

 

 

Mr. Groenendaal noted that chain link around the pond with a masonry wall around the remainder might be a possible compromise.

 

Mr. Linden again noted that it would be too expensive.

 

INFORMATION:

4.                   Revised plans must be submitted within sixty (60) days of this review.  Revised plans submitted after the allotted time frame will require a new application including payment of additional fees.

5.                   All submitted plans must be folded at the time of submittal.  Rolled plans will not be accepted.

 

PARKS & RECREATION

CONDITIONS:

1.                   The St. Cloud Parks & Recreation Department would like to see drawings of the proposed fencing.

2.                   Why has the site shown the Retention Pond to be surrounded with this fencing? Safety?

INFORMATION:

3.         Our department is required to protect the existing trees (along the perimeter of this site); therefore, the required wall may cause a negative impact to these specimens. However, on August 14, 2003 Mr. Don Smucker, Project Superintendent stated that he was working under Arbor Permit #2003-02 when trees and protective tree barriers were removed for development of proposed retention pond. This Arbor Permit does not include the proposed retention pond and damage has been caused to the existing trees. Therefore, this department requests justification for the proposed fencing along the North property line.

 

Ms. Hobbs noted that it might be wise to recommend a continuance until some of the issues could be resolved.

 

Mr. Groenendaal noted that a continuance was not necessary.

 

Mr. Holloway noted that he was concerned with the vacant property adjacent to the site noting that once all of the undergrowth had been cleared out there could be some problems.

 

SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

INFORMATION:

1.         This project will require review by the City Engineering Department only.

 

FINDING:

The applicant will provide a narrative and revise the drawings.  He will also provide any supporting statements form adjacent property owners.  This case will be forwarded to the City Council for action at the next available meeting.

 

ADJOURNMENT:           The meeting was adjourned at 3:05 p.m.