CC Minutes 06/13/2005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Commission Meeting June 13, 2005 Page 5 Audience Input: I) Bernard Fudim, 906 Niblick Drive, Casselberry, Florida, stated that the job description for the new Utilities Manager, because ofthe position's interaction with the St. Johns River Water Management District and the control of water quality for the City, it should be completely isolated from political pressure because decisions have to be based upon what is best for future residents of the City and not for political obligations. Mr. Fudim also congratulated the City Employee Service Award winners. MOTION: Moved by Commissioner Linda Hart to approve Item E of the Consent Agenda, Public Works Department Reorganization & Paygrade Adjustments, as presented. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Susan Doerner and carried unanimously by voice vote. (5 - 0) IX. Old Business A. Public Hearinl! & Second Readinl! of Ordinance 05-1152 - Board of Adiustment AD Deal Process The City Clerk read ordinance 05-1152 by title as folIows: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CASSELBERRY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CASSELBERRY CODE OF ORDINANCES, PART III, UNIFIED LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, ARTICLE II, SECTION 1-2.1(D)(5),JUDICIAL REVIEW OF DECISIONS AND ADDING SUBSECTION 6, PROCEDURE FOR APPEALS; AMENDING SECTION 1-2.7(F)(5), JUDICIAL REVIEW OF DECISIONS BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND ADDING SUBSECTION 6, PROCEDURE FOR APPEALS, TO PROVIDE FOR APPEAL TO THE CITY COMMISSION; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION, CONFLICTS, SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE." Staff Presentation/Recommendation: Mr. Wells stated that Ordinance 05-1152 provides for the appeal of decisions made by the Board of Adjustment to the Commission rather than directly to the Seminole County Circuit Court, which provides the applicant an additional review at the City level before going to Court. As originalIy constructed the ordinance proposed a de nova review by the City Commission, which meant that all evidence and testimony from the Board of Adjustment hearing and any new evidence that the applicant wished to bring forward would be reheard by the City Commission. The City Commission voted to send the ordinance back to Planning and Zoning for another look at the appropriateness of a certiorari review rather than de nova. Certiorari review by the Commission would be based solely on evidence that was presented to the Board of Adjustment. The Planning & Zoning Commission submitted their recommendation in the form offour (4) motions.