Laserfiche WebLink
CASSELBERRY CITY COMNIISSION <br />Minutes of June 27, 2016 — Regular Meeting <br />Page 8 or 16 <br />E. Council of Local Governments in Seminole County (CALNO) Report <br />No report. <br />F. Seminole County Redevelopment Planning Agency Report <br />No report. <br />9. RESOLUTIONS <br />No items were presented for consideration on this agenda. <br />A. Ordinance 16-1445 — Amendments to the City Code Regarding Body Art <br />Establishments <br />The City Clerk read Ordinance 16-1445 by title as follows: <br />"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CASSELBERRY, FLORIDA, AMENDING SECTION 2-5.3, <br />LAND USE BY DISTRICT, OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES, PART III, UNIFIED LAND <br />DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS; AMENDING SECTION 2-7.26, SEMINOLA BOULEVARD <br />OVERLAY DISTRICT DESIGN GUIDELINES OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES, PART III, <br />UNIFIED LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS; AMENDING SECTION 2-7.30 NON- <br />TRADITIONAL USES OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES, PART III, UNIFIED LAND <br />DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS; AMENDING SECTION 3-10.13 COMMUNITY <br />REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT URBAN DESIGN STANDARDS, OF THE CITY CODE OF <br />ORDINANCES, PART III, UNIFIED LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS; AMENDING <br />SECTION 5-21.2 GLOSSARY OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES, PART III, UNIFIED LAND <br />DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION, CONFLICTS, <br />SEVERABILITY, AND EFFECTIVE DATE." <br />Staff Presentation: Development Services Manager Randy Woodruff gave an overview of Ordinance 16- <br />1445, explaining that the proposed ordinance amended portions of the City of Casselberry Unified Land <br />Development Regulations (ULDR) which prohibited or restricted body art establishments within the City. He <br />further explained that this was being done in response to the United States Court of Appeals ruling in the case <br />of Beuhrle vs. City of Key West which had determined that tattooing/body art is a form of artistic expression <br />and therefore is protected by the First Amendment and any banning or restricting of location for these <br />establishments is unconstitutional. <br />