The residents of Turtle Creek kept the owners of their subdivision from “compromising” on the parameters for their community, specifically the minimum size of future houses, after the St. Cloud City Council sided with them and rejected a proposed zoning change Thursday night.

Current residents showed up at the meeting to voice their concerns on the proposed change.

“We had hoped to keep the same type of look to our community,” resident Kerri Day said, explaining that the smaller homes could even bring in less property tax revenue to the city. “We don’t want to see any of that happen.”

In May last year, Central Meridian bought part of the Turtle Creek subdivision for $6 million through bankruptcy liquidation of Levitt & Sons LLC. Only 20 homes in the subdivision, originally platted for 433 single-family and townhouses, had sold before the Fort Lauderdale-based homebuilder went under.

Since then, Central Meridian has sold 25 of the 45 vacant homes it took over, Ralph Singleton, a principal with the company, said. He argued that flexibility within the poor housing market would help the remaining construction of the subdivision, and help residents in the long run.

As part of the compromise in the smaller house size, Central Meridian had agreed to build a 2,500-square-foot clubhouse promised to the residents by Levitt & Sons. The clubhouse was to be built on the other half of the subdivision, not owned by Central Meridian. The subdivision’s homeowners association, which was responsible for the clubhouse, didn’t have the build out to support the new construction.

Residents initially said the city’s planning advisory board had proposed to the council a fair compromise with which they could live.

Councilwoman Mickey Hopper said she was on the council when Turtle Creek was being annexed into the city, back when it was owned by Levitt & Sons.

“Turtle Creek was promised to be a top quality subdivision,” she said. “I’m not willing to give away a promise. Why would we want to change it just to sell more homes?”

Council members questioned several other aspects of the subdivision. As the debate wound down, Mayor Donna Hart asked the residents at the meeting to name one person to speak for them on the issues the council members had hashed out.

“We are willing to wait. We don’t need these amenities right now,” resident Thomas Costello said on behalf of his neighbors, essentially rejecting the construction of the clubhouse in favor of the current, larger square footage requirement for future homes. “We don’t want to sacrifice our quality of life.”

The motion to deny the zoning change passed 5-0.

Other issues discussed Thursday included:

Slowing down Lakeshore

After much debate and discussion, council members decided on a method of slowing down traffic on Lakeshore Boulevard. They rejected proposed speed tables that would have cost about $5,000 to $6,000 each, but directed staff to begin the process of expanding the sidewalk and painting stripes to mark crosswalks at five places along the road.

Council members said they wanted increased law enforcement to slow traffic in the pedestrian-heavy area.


Cyber Spot to be shut down Monday

Hopper said she wanted the residents of St. Cloud to vote on the future of Cyber Spot. Per a 3-2 vote from the council last year, the citywide free public Wi-Fi is due to be shut off as a cost-saving measure starting Monday.

The possibility of putting the issue on the ballot will be put on an upcoming agenda, per Hopper’s request. Since the council was discussing Cyber Spot again, Councilman Jay Polachek requested the city investigate a public-private partnership to keep the service running.


New Nolte Road construction method

The St. Cloud Council decided on the manager-at-risk method of contracting the expansion of New Nolte Road, instead of the traditional project bid method. Council members agreed that they could require a higher percentage of local subcontractors from a manager-at-risk.

The contractor manager-at-risk would oversee the construction, after giving the city a guaranteed maximum price for the entire project, rather than the city bidding out each portion.