Create an Account - Increase your productivity, customize your experience, and engage in information you care about.
View Other Items in this Archive |
View All Archives | Printable Version
CLOUD COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Placencia noted that the Chairman has resigned and an Acting Chairman needs to
informed Acting Chairman Placencia that roll call needed to be done.
ROLL CALL Pete Placencia (P)
Morgeson informed the Board that since the Chairman has resigned from the
Board, Mr. Placencia was nominated and elected the Acting Chairman for the last
meeting and suggested that Mr. Placencia remain in that capacity until the next
board organizational meeting. At which time, there can be an election for Board
members for the coming year.
Placencia noted he would be open to someone else being the Acting Chairman.
Beigel made a motion for Mr. Placencia to remain as Acting Chairman.
Placencia made a motion for Ms. Wallace to be in that capacity until the
Morgeson noted that the Board could second either motion or move in that
Beigel seconded the motion for Ms. Wallace to be Acting Chairwoman.
in favor of Ms. Wallace acting in capacity of Interim Chairwoman say Aye.
Ayes to approve the vote 4-0.
Nearing, Director of
Planning and Zoning
Michelle Orton, Planning Technician
Morgeson, City Attorney
OF MINUTES: October
Morgeson asked for a change to be made on Page 7, reference a comment that he
made, approximately the middle of the page. Mr. Morgeson noted that “one of
the Board members needs to make a motion with what they feel is appropriate and
discuss it after a second.” It should read, “After a second to the motion”,
under the motions terms, as opposed to, after a second motion.
Placencia made a motion that the minutes be approved as stated.
Beigel seconded the motion.
Ayes to approve the minutes 4-0.
(a) CASE NUMBER: 2005-01
Walter, & Associates, Inc.
corner of Narcoossee
Road and US 192
Applicant is requesting a variance to the requirements of the Land Development
Code; Section 3.18.4 to allow less bicycle parking on the site than is
noted he had not spoken to the applicant but perhaps Mr. Nearing can advise the
Board if he has been in touch with the applicant. Procedurally speaking, when
a Board is consisting of less than the full 7-member Board, the Board gives the
applicant the option of proceeding forward with the request or asking for a
continuance until such time the Board is fully convened. Given the vacancies
with the Board, and the issue on the table tonight, he said he couldn’t speak
for the applicant but it becomes the Board’s decision of whether they would
like to move forward and hear the case. There is no-one present on behalf of
the applicant to request that the matter be tabled and it remained on the
made a motion that the item be tabled and continued until the next meeting.
noted that perhaps it would be advisable to question Mr. Nearing whether he’s
had any conversation with the applicant and/or what the ramifications of the
continuance in terms of the project.
informed the Board that Staff has had no contact with the applicant. One of
this case, the applicant has a tentatively approved site plan awaiting final
signature and the last decision that needs to be made is the variance and if
the variance is approved, it can be signed off on tomorrow and they can begin
construction shortly. If it’s denied, they will have to change out some pages
to show the appropriate number of bicycle parking spaces. Again, they will be
able to move forward. The continuance means that the plans cannot be signed
off on as they are currently drawn until after the variance has been
asked Mr. Nearing if it would be appropriate to assume on the issue at hand and
the effect of the continuance, it would be reasonable to assume that the
applicant would want to move forward, weather or not the approval were granted.
noted, not having spoken to the applicant, he would assume their rush to get
into the ground, they probably would want to move forward.
Wallace asked how they could go forward if the applicant was not present and why
they are not present.
explained that there is a Memorandum which was presented to the Board. The 6
factors have to be met and the Board has to consider and to make a decision on
the request. In the event the variance is denied, the applicant would have two
alternatives, possibly three. Legally, there would be an appeal that could be
filed. It is possible with an affirmative vote of the Board, per the Land
Development Code, it may be reconsidered. Another option per the Land
Development Code is for the case to go through the Planning Board.
noted since this is part of Article 3; this Board has the final say.
noted he would have to repeat his motion to table the item and give the
applicant an opportunity to be heard on the questions that the Board may have.
seconded the motion.
noted he watched Friday, Saturday and Sunday how many bicycles were on the property.
He noted he thought the City should consider changing the code.
Wallace asked Mr. Nearing if that needs to be changed in the Land Development
noted when going to shopping centers in the area, you rarely see a bicycle.
noted a point of procedure, reviewing the Land Development Code and not to suggest
which direction the Board should go on this but in the event the Board heard
the case, and was dissatisfied with the 6-factors being met, for whatever
reason, and voted against the variance, pursuant to the Land Development Code,
the applicant could seek reconsideration before the Board within less than 12
months if they received 3 affirmative votes of the BOA when the action was
deemed necessary to prevent in justice or facilitate property development. If
the Board decides to go ahead and one member of the Board decides to vote
against it, there would be potential recourse for
but not until next month.
Wallace asked if the applicant would have to pay the fee again.
noted he felt that the applicant could go before the Board and get
reconsideration and the City would likely waive the cost.
asked if the applicants would be present in case the Board had questions.
noted that the applicant could amend the plan to show the bicycle parking. If
the variance is approved, the plans could be signed off; there could be a minor
Wallace asked for a vote on the motion to continue this item until the March
All Ayes to
continue this item until the March meeting 4-0
Wallace called for a motion to adjourn the meeting.
made a motion to adjourn the meeting.
seconded the motion to adjourn the meeting.
All Ayes to
adjourn the meeting 4-0.
adjourned at 6:50 P.M.
If a person
decides to appeal any decision made by the Committee/Board, with respect to any
matter considered at such hearing/meeting, such person will need a record of
the proceedings and that, for this purpose, such person may need to ensure that
a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the
testimony evidence upon which the appeal is to be based, and which record is
not provided by the City of St.
Cloud. (FS 286.0105)
accordance with the American with Disabilities Act, persons needing assistance
to participate in any of these proceedings should contact the Secretary/Clerk
of the Committee/Board (listed below), prior to the meeting. (FS 296.26)
Taylor, Secretary City of St. Cloud
of Adjustment 1300 Ninth Street
957-7203 St. Cloud,