My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC Minutes 04/12/2010
Laserfiche
>
City Clerk's Public Records
>
Minutes
>
City Commission Minutes
>
City Commission Minutes Archives
>
2010 City Commission Minutes
>
CC Minutes 04/12/2010
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/30/2011 3:02:54 PM
Creation date
5/7/2010 5:39:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Meeting Type
Regular
City Clerk - Doc Type
Minutes
City Clerk - Date
4/12/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
CASSI';LBI;RRY CITY COMMISSION <br />Minutes of April 12, 2010 -Regular Meeting <br />Page 8 of 13 <br />Public Hearing: The following individuals came forward to address Ordinance 10-1314: <br />1) Ms. Lilian Selph, 171 Quail Pond Circle, stated her property has a fiont driveway and a service <br />entrance on another street, and voiced concerns that the proposed ordinance does not address her <br />situation and being able to maintain both driveways. <br />2) Mr. James Fraleigh, 1290 Seminola Boulevard, spoke in opposition to Ordinance 10-1314. <br />3) IVlr. Craig Tull, 420 Ranch Trail, spoke in opposition to Ordinance 10-1314. <br />4) Mr. Andrew Gaba, 111 Lemon Lane, spoke in opposition to Ordinance 10-1314. <br />No one else came forward. Mayor Glancy closed the public hearing relative to Ordinance 10-1314. <br />MOTIOI~T: Commissioner Hufford moved to approve Ordinance 10-1314 on second and <br />final reading, as amended. Motion was seconded by Vice Mayor Solomon. <br />DISCUSSIOhT: Lengthy discussion ensued regarding limiting the number of utility hailers, <br />recreational equipment and motor homes that can be parked at each residence. The <br />City Attorney recormnended the public hearing be reopened and allow the public to <br />comment on limiting the number of recreational equipment and motor homes that can <br />be parked at each residence. <br />Public Hearing: Mayor Glancy reopened the public hearing relative to Ordinance 10-1314 to allow public <br />comment on limiting the number of recreational equipment and motor homes that can be parked at each <br />residence. The following individuals came forward to address Ordinance 10-1314: <br />1) Mr. Hank Lander, 445 Surrey Run, stated he didn't believe placing a limitation on the number of <br />items parked in the back yard would be enforceable, especially with the new provision of having <br />fencing up to eight feet tall, because code enforcement officials must be able to see a violation. <br />2) Ml•. James Fraleigh, 1290 Seminola Boulevard, stated he was opposed to limiting the number of items <br />that can be parked in the back yard, voicing concerns about enforceability. <br />3) Mr. Craig Tull, 420 Ranch Trail, spoke in opposition to limiting the number of items that can be <br />parked in the back yard and voiced concerns regarding the enforceability with the proposed screening <br />requirements. <br />4) Mr. Andrew Gaba, 111 Lemon Lane, voiced concerns regarding the current limitation of one <br />commercial vehicle per residence and there not being a limit on the number of recreational vehicles. <br />Mr. Gaba stated he did not feel there should be a limit on either commercial vehicles or recreational <br />equipment. <br />5) Ml•. John Casselberry, 700 Soufli Lost Lake Lane, voiced concerns regarding motor homes being <br />parked too close to the shore on lakefront lots, but was supportive of boats being parked closed to the <br />shoreline. <br />No one else came forward. Mayor Glancy closed the public hearing relative to Ordinance 10-1314. <br />DISCUSSION: Discussion ensued regarding the location of items stored in the back yard and code <br />enforcement issues relating to items stored in the back yard, as well as the <br />discrepancy of limit being imposed on the number of connnercial vehicles and no <br />limit imposed for recreational equipment. It was clarified that code enforcement <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.