CC Minutes 04/11/2005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Commission Meeting April 11, 1005 Page 6 REGULATIONS, TO DEFINE THE TERMS "CANOPIES" AND TENT-LIKE STRUCTURES"; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATION, CONFLICTS, AND EFFECTIVE DATE." Staff ReDort: Ordinance 05-1158 provides a definition for "canopies" and "tent-like" structures and clarifies the type of structures that cannot be used as permanent structures. The Planning and Zoning Commission referred the ordinance to the City Commission on a 5 -I favorable recommendation. The City Commission approved Ordinance 05-1158 on March 14, 2005 on a 3 - 2 vote. The required legal advertisement ran in the Orlando Sentinel on Thursday, March 31, 2005. Mr. Wells made a correction to page 2, Line 2 under definition of canopies as follows: "....covering either full enclosed or not wmplct¿.{ comoletelv enclosed, used as a carport or for...." Staff Recommendation: Approval on second reading. Audience InDut: 1) Bernard Fudhim, 906 Niblick Drive, Casselberry, Florida, 32707, declined to opine on the issue because he did not have a chance to review the ordinance because it was not available on the City's website. 2) Robert McKee, 1051 Crestview Lane, Casselberry, Florida, 32707, spoke in opposition to Ordinance 05-1158, stating that a "canopy" is not a "tent-like structure" and should not be classified as illegal because it trampled on his property rights. Canopies can easily be taken down and pose no safety threat during hurricane season. 3) Sandy Solomon, 6 Bayberry Branch, Casselberry, Florida, 32707, spoke in favor of Ordinance 05- 1158, stating that canopies are temporary structures, most of which are not well maintained and they detract from the appearance of the neighborhood. MOTION: Moved by Commissioner Susan Doerner for approval of Ordinance 05-1158, Defining "Canopies and Tent-Like Structures", as presented with correction on page 2 (changed completed to completely.) The motion was seconded by Commissioner Colleen Hufford. Discussion on Motion: Mayor Goff questioned the City Attorney as to whether adding the definition of Canopy to the ordinance would grandfather existing canopies under the current code. Ms. Reischmann said it would have to be detennined on a case-by-case basis, i.e. whether a permit was obtained and whether it met building code specifications. Commission Policy was for aesthetics and determined that tent-like structures could not serve as accessory structures. Ms. Reischmann also stated that adding the word "canopies" to the Code does not change the code but simply tries to define what is already in the code, i.e., a tent-like structure could encompass canopies.