Homepage -Family

Go To Search
TwitterFacebook
YouTube
 

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

CALL TO ORDER:                          6:30 P.M.

 

LOCATION:                                      ST. CLOUD COUNCIL CHAMBERS

                                                            1300 NINTH STREET, 3RD FLOOR

 

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

 

ROLL CALL:                                    Kimberly Paulson       (Chair)            P

                                                            Carl Beigel                 (Vice)              EA

                                                            Pete Placencia                                    P

                                                            Greg Norris                                        P

                                                            William Spinola                                  EA

                                                            Robert Paulsen          (Alt)                 P

 

In absence of Carl Beigel, Robert Paulsen is acting as a voting member.

 

STAFF MEMBERS:                         Mr. John Groenendaal, Planner

                                                            Jack Morgeson, City Attorney

                                                            Sherry Taylor, Secretary

 

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:            July 12, 2006

 

Ms. Paulson noted on Page 5, about ¾ of the page down, for clarification, she requested that a correction be made on her last name, it should be Paulson. 

 

Mr. Placencia made a motion to approve the minutes as amended.

 

Mr. Norris seconded the motion.

 

The minutes were approved with the corrections noted.

 

NEW BUSINESS:

 

1.  Requests for Variances

 

(a) CASE NUMBER:            2006-13

APPLICANT:                   Robin & Steve Smith

OWNER:                          Robin & Steve Smith            

ADDRESS:                      3151 Pawley’s Loop North

 

VARIANCE PETITION DETAILS:  The Applicant is requesting a variance to the requirements of the Planned Unit Development (PUD), Ordinance #2003-68, page 8 of 20 to allow a reduced rear setback for a pool and pool enclosure in the PUD Zoning District.

 

Mr. Groenendaal and Mr. Smith were sworn in at this time.

 

Mr. Groenendaal presented the case.  All criteria have been met.  Staff recommends approval.

 

Mr. Norris asked Mr. Groenendaal why this was coming before the BOA and why the PUD could not be changed.

 

Mr. Groenendaal noted that the Staff Report that Mr. Nearing wrote alludes that the applicant could have requested a PUD amendment but that would have changed the zoning for the whole POD of Stevens where this is a particular case for the Board of Adjustment and is a better fit where you have a site specific hardship.  The neighbors could request the same thing but they just built their pools smaller.  The applicant is the last homeowner who backs up against the conservation area.

 

Mr. Norris asked if the other 3 neighbors have pools.

 

Mr. Groenendaal noted that was his understanding.

 

Mr. Norris asked if the other pools had been designed to stay within the 10’ setback.

 

Mr. Groenendaal noted that is correct.

 

Mr. Norris asked if any work had been started on this pool.

 

Mr. Steven Smith introduced himself to the Board.  Mr. Smith explained that their 3 neighbors had their pools put in and are not full size pools, they are called cocktail pools and his basically is mainly for the decking to extend into the 10’.   The pool company drafted the drawing but no work has been started as of yet. 

 

Ms. Paulson asked if there was any feedback from the neighbors or problems with the setback.

 

Mr. Groenendaal noted Staff has not received any negative feedback.

 

Mr. Norris asked if the pool could be built 1 ½’ smaller.

 

Mr. Groenendaal noted that could be the determination of the Board.  Staff is pointing out that the applicant is on a 50’ conservation easement and that is the special circumstance and Staff feels this is the grounds for granting this variance.

 

Mr. Smith noted his pool was not any bigger than anyone else’s but the floor plan of the house is 2800 square feet and sits back deeper on the lot.  The neighbor has a smaller home but the lot is much larger.

 

Ms. Paulson asked Mr. Morgeson if the Board had enough members.

 

Mr. Morgeson explained that it would take 3 members voting in favor of the variance for approval.  The Board’s size was reduced down to the size of a 5-member regular Board in which the quorum would be three. 

 

Mr. Groenendaal noted historically the Chairperson has given the option thatif there was not a full Board to continue until there was a full sitting Board in the event it would result in failure and as such would then create some consequence to the applicant procedurally.  That can be made available to the applicant.

 

Mr. Morgeson explained to the applicant that three (3) affirmative votes and there is one member that is missing from the Board in terms of voting.  When there is less than 100% attendance, the applicant is given the option to go forward or to table it for 30 days.

 

Mr. Smith noted he would proceed with the case.

 

Mr. Norris noted that he would like to refer to #2 and #3 criteria that are outlined in the Staff Report:  #2:  The Special Circumstances do not result of the actions of the applicant.  The applicant chose that size pool and that size deck to put back there.  He could choose a smaller pool and he would be within the setbacks; #3: Literal Interpretation of the provisions of the zoning regulations.  Numerous homes in the Stevens Plantations have pools.  None of the neighbors have come forward asking for a variance on a setback.

 

Mr. Morgeson noted under the Land Development Code, the Board cannot consider neighboring properties in the same area or the conforming properties in another area of the City when deciding this case.  The Board is to consider this application to the 6-criteria with the facts presented to come up with a decision.

 

Mr. Smith noted the majority of the houses that have pools went through the builder and are basically custom designed and are cocktail pools.

 

Mr. Paulsen noted on page #1 of the Staff Report it refers to a pool and a screen enclosure.  He asked if the pool would have a screen enclosure.

 

Mr. Smith noted it would be an open pool with no screen enclosure. 

 

Mr. Placencia noted his concerns dealing with zoning issues in this and other developments and going before the BOA vs. the Planning Board. 

 

Mr. Morgeson noted this was an avenue that was available to the applicant and the most direct and conducive to the site specific issue and as opposed to a raising issues about the entire development through the zoning issue which is broader in Staff’s perception.  The Board is to consider this application to the 6-criteria with the facts presented to come up with a decision. 

 

Mr. Norris asked, if a home builder had 20 lots, could that go before the Board of Adjustment instead of the Planning Board. 

 

Mr. Groenendaal noted that the PUD would have to be amended. 

 

Mr. Morgeson noted non-conforming properties within your area or conforming properties in another district or neighborhood in determining whether something should or shouldn’t be granted a variance.  The LDC really wants to be target into the property, lined up with the criteria.  It tries to keep a narrow focus on the variance of the subject property, site specific.

 

Chairperson Paulson asked if there was a motion.

 

Mr. Morgeson noted whatever motion is made; expressly state that the 6-criteria were considered.

 

Mr. Placencia made a motion to approve the variance.  All 6-critera have been met.

 

Mr. Paulsen seconded the motion.

 

All Ayes 4-0 to approve the variance. 

 

The variance was approved 4-0.

 

The meeting adjourned at 7:02 P.M.

 

 

ADJOURNMENT

 

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)

 

In 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)

 

Sherry Taylor, Secretary                        City of St. Cloud

Board of Adjustment                             1300 Ninth Street

(407) 957-7203                                      St. Cloud, FL  34769