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
CITY OF ST. CLOUD
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES
MEETING: February 22, 2007
LOCATION: 1300 9th Street - 1st Floor – DRC
Conference Room; St.
ORDER: 2:00 P.M.
(Acting): Ted Kozak,
Planner, Planning and Zoning
(Acting): Pam Murray, Planning and Zoning Technician
Ken Peck Ron Trowell Kevin Felblinger Bob Friend
Ted Kozak Jonathan Kutche David Ennis Cindy
John Groenendaal Veronica Miller Tommy
– National Day of Prayer
Ms. Bertha Chase, Coordinator for National Day of Prayer,
was present to represent the application.
No one was present to represent staff.
Ms. Chase was grateful for fees waived by Mr. Hurt. She is
concerned about how effective the advertising will be with no banner. She has only
small yard signs, but would like a larger sign.
Mr. Howe inquired whether they still had the old banner?
Ms. Chase will find out, and would like to use it. Also, she
would like to put it up as soon as possible (not just a week in advance). She
plans to take the banner down the day after.
Mr. Kozak noted that if done in the past, it would probably
Mr. Howe concurred.
Ms. Spanglo followed up about the insurance.
Ms. Chase mentioned that they are working with Cornerstone
church for being added onto their insurance policy.
Ms. Spanglo noted contact would be made to make sure it’s
Ms. Chase inquired about the electricity and that they used
to be given a key to the restrooms?
Mr. Howe noted that the electrical box as well as the chairs
are still available.
Ms. Chase wondered about tables.
Mr. Howe followed up with an inquiry of how the chairs will
be put out. His department will erect the tents, but someone else needs to
set-up the tables.
Ms. Chase in interested in adding smaller tents for prayer
FINDING: DRC recommended approval with conditions.
– Deer Creek West (Ted Kozak, Planner)
West of Canoe Creek Road and east of
Final Plat, 28.16 acres, 91 lots and
Ms. Pat McCurdy and Mr. Jeremy Kibler were present to
represent the application.
Mr. Kibler agrees with conditions, but would like to
add—prior to the 6-month expiration, they would like to extend another 6 months.
Mr. Kozak noted that that would be okay.
Mr. Kibler and Ms. McCurdy inquired about the dedication in
Mr. Kozak would prefer notes moved to front page, and change
“dedicated“ to “reserved.” It’s more location than symantics, but to please put
notes on front page.
Ms. McCurdy inquired about Item #3, area to east, that she
was not aware that it has not been recorded. She could not find phase 2 on
Mr. Kozak noted that the updated plans have changed the road
to curved. Unless that is reflected in the revised plat, he prefers to have the
drawing of the road to be as it was in previous plans.
DISCUSSION OF PLANS ensued.
Mr. Kibler was concerned with Item #4, the remaining rows. Also,
he wants ordinance recorded at the same time as the plat.
Mr. Kozak was concerned about keeping the old abandoned
drawn lines along with the newly implemented ones.
Ms. McCurdy noted that they didn’t intend to show the old
Mr. Kibler noted that with Item #6, certificate of titles,
they didn’t intent to submit it for the record.
Ted suggested that Item #6 be for “information only.”
#07-42.01 – Rummel Downs (Ted Kozak, Planner)
Rummel Road west of Narcoossee Road
Final Plat, 26.10 acres, 7 lots
Mr. William Hart, of Franklin, Hart and Reid, was present to
represent the application.
Ms. Miller submitted additional comments not previously
Mr. Hart is not in agreement with all conditions.
Ms. Miller noted that the conditions were required.
Mr. Groenendaal inquired about a Final Master Plan.
Mr. Hart was concerned about the reason.
Mr. Groenendaal and Mr. Kozak wanted clarification on
whether this project were part of the Turtle Creek project.
Mr. Hart noted—although not entirely sure—that this project
was splitting out from the Turtle Creek project and its PUD designation.
Ms. Miller suggested that Mr. Nearing, Director of Planning,
be involved in the decision of the splitting out, since it is not shown on previous
Mr. Hart noted that he will resolve these concerns after this
meeting, and continued with the next condition, condition #2 under Public
Works: the sidewalk.
Mr. Felblinger noted that it is not something that will keep
the project from moving forward.
Mr. Hart presented a copy of recorded easement to talk about
Comment #5. The applicant is okay with dedicating a portion of the parcel to
Ms. Miller inquired about how lot 7 is showing the
DISCUSSION WITH STAFF AND APPLICANT OVER PLANS.
Ms. Miller noted that the site is incorrect.
Mr. Hart noted that the correct description was in a discussion
he had with staff, if not on plans, but is willing to rededicate, if necessary.
Ms. Miller noted that she would like to discuss the dedicated
land further after this meeting.
Mr. Kozak inquired about the wording.
Mr. Hart noted that there be will no rewording, and is
preparing a warranty deed with a clean title.
Ms. Miller was concerned with cross-access, i.e., 30’ at the
County-owned retention pond, and inquired about which are not finalized.
Mr. Hart noted that that is what the County needs to sign,
but it is not yet prepared, and he has yet to find out who to submit it to, so
the timeline is not clear. As for the Comment #2 for Planning, move to front
page, he is not sure what is required.
Mr. Kozak noted that that comment was for making sure the notes
are not scattered throughout the plans, but are in one convenient location. So,
as in previous applicant, he noted that it should be moved to “information only.”
Mr. Hart noted that he usually waits for the title to be
record at the Final Plat stage. Also, It is not a joinder. Lastly, on Comment
#7 for IT, preparing a payment, Mr. Hart inquired what it was for.
Mr. Peck noted that it is the only way to assess the impact fees.
If construction plans take effect, then the fees will be collected at that time.
Mr. Groenendaal concurred adding that it best time for
Ms. Miller wanted confirmation of the actual acreage of both
easements after meeting.
Mr. Hart agreed.
Mr. Hart and staff discussed PSPs, Construction Plans, Master
#07-43.01 – Canoe Creek Woods (Jonathan Kutche, Planner)
Canoe Creek Woods Subdivision
Abandonment of Easements
The City of St. Cloud
staff was present to represent the application.
Mr. Groenendaal noted that the parcel is not being abandoned,
but rather is just taking care of an obstruction.
FINDING: DRC recommended approval.
Meeting Adjourned: 3:07 pm
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
and 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
Americans 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 (FS286.26) Michelle Orton (407) 957-8428 – email@example.com.