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:      June 26, 2003

 

LOCATION:                   Municipal Services Complex 1st Floor Conference Room

                                    2901 17th Street, St. Cloud

 

CALL TO ORDER:         2:00 P.M.

 

CHAIRMAN:                  David Nearing, Planning/Zoning Director

 

SECRETARY:               Marty Hobbs, Development Officer

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:

Dave Nearing                 Rick Mauro                    Kim Duffy                      Mark Luthie                  

John Groenendaal          Eric Morgan                   Ron Trowell                   Major Faucett

 

NEW BUSINESS:

 

1.         Case #3-88.01 – Cross Creek Estates

E side of Canoe Creek Road, N of Sawgrass Subdivision

Subdivision Variance

 

There was no one present to represent the application.

 

Mr. Nearing noted that the existing fencing was acting as a retention wall for approximately 18 inches of fill on the applicant’s side and that removing it was going to cause a big problem.

 

Mr. Luthie asked if it would be a Code Enforcement issue if the fencing fails.

 

Mr. Nearing noted that it would be.

 

Mr. Trowell asked why fencing rather than a wall was installed and the issue was discussed.

 

Ms. Duffy explained that there had been a variance granted to allow chain link fencing for the park for security purposes.

 

Mr. Nearing directed Mr. Groenendaal to contact the applicants to see if they wanted to proceed to public hearing with a recommendation for denial.  He noted that while they could not get a refund for their application fee, they could prevent having to pay for the certified mailings that would need to be sent prior to the public hearings before Planning Board and City Council

 

There was no further discussion by the committee regarding this case.

 

BUILDING DEPARTMENT

INFORMATION:

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

 

PUBLIC WORKS

CONDITIONS:

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

 

Page 2, DRC Minutes – 06/26/03

 

 

PLANNING

CONDITIONS:

1.         The screen type is a communal responsibility.  Granting a variance to place the responsibility with the individual property owners would not be fair. If all of the individual property owners agree to maintain the fence in place of the HOA than this request can be considered further.

INFORMATION:

2.                   The Buffer Yard Minimum Screen Type A was reduced from a masonry wall to a wood fence with a subdivision variance under resolution 97-77R

 

PUBLIC WORKS

CONDITIONS:

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

 

PLANNING

CONDITIONS:

1.         The screen type is a communal responsibility.  Granting a variance to place the responsibility with the individual property owners would not be fair. If all of the individual property owners agree to maintain the fence in place of the HOA than this request can be considered further.

INFORMATION:

2.                   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.

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

4.                   The Buffer Yard Minimum Screen Type A was reduced from a masonry wall to a wood fence with a subdivision variance under resolution 97-77R

 

PARKS & RECREATION

CONDITIONS:

1.                   The St. Cloud Parks & Recreation Department does not agree with this request.

    • This department maintains property that abuts the board-on-board fence. Adjacent homeowners have caused additional maintenance for the City of St. Cloud tax payers.
    • This department is also required to maintain its fence in lieu of a wall, per an approved variance.
    • Kimberly Duffy, SCPR representative was part of the sign-off of the Cross Creek Estates site. At that time, the fence was not a concern comparing it to a required wall.

 

Question:  Is the wall and/or berm with plantings (that run adjacent to Canoe Creek Road) or, the plantings (that run adjacent to Pine Tree Road) also going to be dedicated to the adjacent homeowners?

 

FINDING:

 

The DRC recommended denial of the applicant’s request for a variance.  The applicant will be contacted for a determination as whether or not the case will be moved forward to public hearings with a recommendation for denial.

 

ADJOURNMENT:           The meeting was adjourned at 2:15 P.M.