HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002 03 25 Regular G Modify Policy's Concerning Recommendations of Appointed Boards
',f
;1.
COMMISSION AGENDA
ITEM G
Consent
Informational
Public Hearing
Regular X
~
March 25, 2002
Meeting
Mgr. / Attor /
Authorization
J
~
REQUEST:
The Community Development Department requesting the City Commission to reconsider its current
policy required for Commission consideration of actions reviewed by City Boards
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this item is to request the City Commission to modify its policy concerning the
recommendations of appointed boards
APPLICABLE LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY:
Section 20-59 of the Winter Springs Code of Ordinances states, "The recommendations of the
Planning and Zoning Board to the City Commission shall be in writing... .As soon as convenient,
after recommendations are received by the City Commission, the City Commission shall call for a
public hearing regarding the regulation, restriction or boundaries at which parties in interest and
citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard."
Section 20-82 of the Winter Springs Code of Ordinance states, "The Board ofadjustment shall fix a
reasonable time for the hearing... .and make recommendations to the City Commission.... within a
reasonable time."
CONSIDERA TIONS:
I. Applications received by staff generally require a minimum of thirty (30) days to
process for the consideration of appointed boards.
CDD/March 20. 2002/11:22 AM
~
'$l-
"\
March 25, 2002
REGULAR AGENDA ITEM G
Page 2
2. Regular meetings of appointed boards are conducted monthly.
3. Recommendations by each board are withheld pending their approval in the official
minutes, which generally delays the consideration of applications by the City
Commission thirty (30) days. The following examples of the current and
recommended application processes, as applied to a typical small-scale
comprehensive plan amendment, are presented for consideration:
Current Application Process:
a. February 2002 Application filed for Small-Scale Plan Amendment
b. March 6, 2002 Application considered by LP A
c. April 3, 2002 March 6, 2002 Meeting Minutes adopted by LP A
d. April 8, 2002 Application considered by City Commission (first
reading of ordinance)
e. April 22, 2002 Application considered by City Commission (second
reading and adoption of ordinance)
Recommended Application Process:
a. February 2002 Application filed for Small-Scale Plan Amendment
b. March 6, 2002 Application considered by LP A
c. March 11,2002 Application considered by City Commission (first
reading of ordinance)
d. March 25, 2002 Application considered by City Commission (second
reading and adoption of ordinance)
4. Staff has received a number of complaints and suggestions from applicants
concerning this additional delay.
FINDINGS:
1. The withholding from City Commission consideration of applications previously
considered by appointed boards pending formal approval of minutes, unnecessarily
delays the application process by thirty (30) days.
2. Applications immediately referred to the City Commission for action, with
unapproved minutes from appointed boards would eliminate application "down-time"
and greatly improve service delivery to the citizen customer.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Commission consider amending its policy regarding the requirement for
approved minutes by appointed boards and accept unapproved minutes as an attachment to agenda
CDD/March 20. 2002/1 0:27 AM
'~
.,.
..
March 25,2002
REGULAR AGENDA ITEM G
Page 3
items. This policy change would accelerate the review and approval process by thirty (30) days.
COMMISSION ACTION:
CDD/March 20. 2002/10:27 AM