CC 12/18/1989 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council December 18, 1989 that consideration be given to requiring conveyance of the title prior to final development plan approval. Mr. Richmond disagreed, title is conveyed when the facilities are complete. Mr. Charles Oglivie, Carmel - by -the -Lake Condominium President, stated that the association would prefer that the conveyance be effected after the amenities are complete. Mr. McIntosh said the City would abide by the wishes of the Condominium Association. Mr. Campbell said based on a standard regarding concurrency, he recommended that approval of SPR -81-03 be contingent upon the following: "This project is not vested regarding the provisions of Section 163.3177(10) (H) of the Florida Statutes and the concurrency management system requirements of Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code, as they shall be amended from time to time." Mr. McIntosh said in communications with the City of Orlando, the City of Kissimmee, Osceola, Hillsborough, Orange, Pinellas, Volusia, Brevard and Seminole Counties, and language suggested by these entites who are dealing with the subject of Chapter 163, which says that a City is subject to terms, provisions and restrictions of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, as amended concerning moratoria on issuing building permits under certain circumstances, the City has no lawful authority to exempt any private entity or public entity from the application of such State Legislation and nothing herein shall be construed as such an exemption. Mr. McIntosh said this language would protect and preclude the City of Casselberry from having to pay for concurrency improvements brought about by developers/ developments. Mr. Richmond said he was would abide by the concurrency statement as outlined by Mr. McIntosh. Mr. Campbell said the stages of development was resolved by the letter dated December 14, 1989 submitted by Mr. Richmond. Mr. Campbell said in addition, approval should be contingent upon revised drawings being submitted and approved prior to submittal of final development plans and that approval for splitting the PUD be contingent upon the approval for The Vinings. (4)