HomeMy WebLinkAboutSATURN OF FORT COLLINS PUD REFERRAL OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGE - 34 90A - LEGAL DOCS - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL (3)s
City Attdh'iey •
City of Fort Collins
DATE: March 16, 1995
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: W. Paul Eckman, Deputy City Attorney
THRU: Steve Roy, City Attomey��
RE: Appeals Procedure -- Saturn of Fort Collins P.U.D. (Administrative Change Referral)
A Notice of Appeal has been filed by Eugene A. Markley as owner of Markley Motors, Inc. with
respect to the February 6, 1995 decision of the Planning and Zoning Board ("the Board") denying
the Saturn of Fort Collins P.U.D. (Administrative Change Referral).
ISSUES ONAPPEAL:
The allegations of error in this appeal are:
I. That the Planning and Zoning Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant
provisions of the Code and Charter (Section 2-48[1]).
II. That the Planning and Zoning Board failed to conduct a fair hearing by considering
evidence relevant to its findings which was substantially false or grossly misleading (Section 2-
48[21[c]).
ANALYSIS:
I. Failure to properly interpret and apply the law.
This allegation permits the Council to substitute its judgment for that of the Board with respect to
the interpretation of the Code and Charter. The staff, in its report to the Planning and Zoning Board,
properly focused on Criterion A-2.7 (Architecture) in the Land Development Guidance System.
Likewise, the Planning and Zoning Board in its decision and the Appellant in its Notice of Appeal,
have focused on Criteria A-2.7. That criterion can be found on page 37 of the Land Development
Guidance System.
300 LaPorte Avenue • P. O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (303) 221-6520
0
§ 2-51 FORT COLLINS CODE
Sec.2-51. Amended notice of appeal per-
mitted.
An amended notice of appeal may be filed by the
appellant at any time prior to the time for mailing
by the City Clerk of notice of the appeal to other
parties -in -interest as contained in § 2-54. Such
amended notice of appeal shall contain all of the
information required under § 2-49 for the original
notice of appeal. Amendments to the notice of ap-
peal need not be limited to those defects, if any,
which have been identified by the City Attorney.
(Code 1972, § 3A-6; Ord. No. 111, 1989, § 3, 8-1-89;
Ord. No. 59, 1994, § 2, 4-19-94)
Sec. 2-52. Cost of appeal.
In all appeals except those filed by members of
the City Council, the appellant shall he charged a
fee of one hundred dollars ($100.) for the cost of
the appeal, to be paid to the City Clerk at the time
of the filing of the notice of appeal.
(Code 1972, § 3A-7; Ord. No. 23, 1990, § 4, 4-3-90)
Sec. 2-53. Record on appeal.
Any appeal to the City Council shall be an ap-
peal on the record of the hearing before the board
or commission. The record provided to the City
Council shall include the following:
(1) Detailed minutes of the proceedings before
the board or commission from which the ap-
peal has been taken;
(2) All exhibits, including, without limitation,
all writings, drawings, maps, charts, graphs,
photographs and other tangible items re-
ceived or viewed by the board or commission
at the proceedings;
(3) A verbatim transcript of such proceedings
before the board or commission. The cost of
the transcript shall be borne by the city.
(4) If available, a videotape recording of such
proceedings before the board or commission.
The cost of reproducing any such videotape
for review by the City Council shall be borne
by the city. Additional copies shall be pro-
vided to any party -in -interest requesting the
same within a reasonable period of time
prior to the date for hearing the appeal, at a
cost not to exceed the actual reproduction
costs incurred by the city.
(Code 1972, § 3A-8; Ord. No. 174, 1988, § 1, 12-
20-88; Ord. No. 23, 1990, §§ 5, 6, 4-3-90; Ord. No.
59, 1994, § 3, 4-19-94)
Sec. 2-54. Scheduling of the hearing.
In the event of an appeal, the City Clerk shall
schedule a date for hearing the appeal before the
City Council as expeditiously as possible. The City
Clerk shall provide the appellant and all other
parties -in -interest fourteen (14) days' written no-
tice of the date, time and place of the hearing as
well as the grounds for the appeal as contained in
the written notice of appeal.
(Code 1972, § 3A-9)
Sec. 2-55. Procedure at the hearing.
(a) At the hearing on the appeal by the City
Council, the presentation of argument on the mer-
its of the appeal shall be made in the following or-
der, subject to such limitations in time and scope
as may be imposed at the discretion of the Mayor:
(1) Explanation of the nature of the appeal and
presentation by city staff;
(2) Presentation of argument by the appellant
and any party -in -interest in support of the
appeal;
(3) Presentation of argument by any party -in -
interest who is an opponent of the appeal;
(4) Rebuttal presentation by the appellant and
any party -in -interest in support of the ap-
peal;
(5) Rebuttal presentation by any party -in -inter-
est who is an opponent of the appeal; and
(6) Motion, discussion and vote by the City
Council.
(b) No person making a presentation to the City
Council shall be subject to cross-examination ex-
cept that members of the City Council and the
City Attorney may inquire of such person for the
purpose of eliciting information and for the pur-
pose of clarifying information presented.
Supp. No. 31 162
D
ADMINISTRATION
(c) In the event of multiple appeals involving
the same decision of a board or commission, the
Mayor, in his or her discretion, may modify the
procedure contained in subparagraph (a) above so
as to expedite the hearing of such appeals.
(Code 1972, § 3A-10; Ord. No. 124, 1987, § 2, 9-1-
87; Ord. No. 174, 1988, §§ 2, 3, 12-20-88; Ord. No.
111, 1989, § 4, 8-1-89; Ord. No. 23, 1990, § 7, 4-3-
90; Ord. No. 139, 1990, 1-15-91; Ord. No. 59,
1994, § 4, 4-19-94)
Sec.2-56. New evidence; scope of review;
alternative actions available to
the City Council; date of final ac-
tion.
(a) The City Council shall consider an appeal
based upon the record on appeal, the relevant pro-
visions of the Code and Charter and the grounds
for appeal cited in the notice of appeal. New evi-
dence shall not be considered on appeal except to
the extent that such new evidence is offered in
support of or in opposition to an allegation under
§ 2-48(2)c that a board or commission considered
evidence relevant to its findings which was
substantially false or grossly misleading. Any such
new evidence shall be limited to that which di-
rectly rebuts or supports the allegedly false or mis-
leading evidence. The Mayor, upon the advice of
the City Attorney, shall determine the admissibil-
ity of all evidence at the hearing on appeal, which
determination may be overturned by majority vote
of the members of the Council present at the hear-
ing.
(b) In considering an allegation that a board or
commission failed to properly interpret and apply
the relevant provisions of the Code or Charter as-
serted under § 2-48(1), the City Council shall de-
termine how such provisions should, in the Coun-
cil's judgment, be applied to the evidence con-
tained in the record on appeal.
§ 2-71
(c) At the conclusion of such hearing, the City
Council shall uphold, overturn or modify the deci-
sion of the board or commission; provided, how-
ever, that the City Council shall instead remand
the matter for rehearing if it finds that the appel-
lant was denied a fair hearing before the board or
commission for any of the reasons stated in § 2-
48(2). No later than the date of its next regular
meeting, the City Council shall adopt, by resolu-
tion, findings of fact in support of its decision. The
date of passage of such resolution shall be the date
of final action of the City Council for the purpose
of any subsequent judicial review of the decision of
the City Council.
(Code 1972, § 3A-11; Ord. No. 124, 1987, § 3, 9-1-
87; Ord. No. 23, 1990, § 8, 4-3-90; Ord. No. 67,
1993, § 3, 7-20-93; Ord. No. 59, 1994, § 5, 4-19-94)
Secs. 2-57-2-70. Reserved.
ARTICLE III. BOARDS AND
COMMISSIONS*
DIVISION 1. GENERALLY
Sec. 2-71. Meetings defined, open meetings
required; exceptions.
(a) The following words, terms and phrases,
when used in this Division, shall have the mean-
ings ascribed to them in this Section:
Meeting shall mean any gathering of a quorum
or three (3) or more members, whichever is fewer,
of any board or commission of the city, or any
committee of such board or commission, at which
any public business is discussed or at which any
formal action may be taken, but shall not mean
any chance meeting or social gathering at which
the discussion of public business is not the central
purpose.
*Charter references -Appointive boards, Art. IV, § 1; Water
Board, Art. XII, § 7.
Cross references -Open meetings, § 2.621 et seq.; Liquor
Licensing Authority established, § 3-31; Board of Elections cre-
ated, § 7.26; Massage Licensing Authority created, § 16-16;
Personnel Board created, § 21-26; Board of Trustees of the
Firefighters' Pension Plan created, § 21-42; Retirement Com-
mittee created, § 21-86.
Supp. No. 31
163
Mayor and Members of City Council
March 16, 1995
Page 2
The Appellant has, in the Notice of Appeal, included some quotations from Criterion A-2.7, which
are underlined in the Notice of Appeal. (A copy of the Criterion is attached.) The first quotation
is found in the "Purpose" guideline, the second quotation is found in the "Architectural Character"
guideline, and the third quotation is found in the "Building Materials" guideline. As you will note,
the actual criterion itself, which is posed in the form of a question, reads as follows:
Is the architecture proposed for the project appropriate for the
uses and activities that are planned and does it contribute to the
neighborhood's appearance in a positive way?
The guidelines cited by the Appellant are intended to assist decisionmakers in interpreting the
criterion. This information helps keep the Board, (and the Council on appeal) from being arbitrary
and arriving at a decision that has no rational basis. As in any quasi-judicial decision making
process, it is critical that the decision be rationally based so as to avoid a challenge of arbitrary and
capricious decision -making.
The City's Ability to Regulate Aesthetics.
The Council may be concerned about the propriety of a governmental agency dictating to a property
owner the color that can be applied to a privately owned building. The question of whether a
governmental agency ought to have the power to regulate the aesthetic impact (including the color)
of private property has been addressed (and answered in the affirmative) by both the U.S. and
Colorado Supreme Courts. The Courts have required, first, that aesthetic regulations be drafted so
as not to be unconstitutionally vague or overbroad. I believe that Criterion A-2.7 passes these
constitutional tests. Secondly, as mentioned above, decisionmakers must rationally base their
decisions upon facts in the record so as to avoid an allegation of arbitrary or capricious decision -
making. If this is done, then the government is able, legally, to regulate aesthetics. In the case of
Berman v. Parker, 348 U.S. 26 (1954), the U.S. Supreme Court stated that:
The concept of the public welfare is broad and inclusive .... The values it represents
are spiritual as well as physical, aesthetic as well as monetary. It is within the power
of the legislature to determine that the community should be beautiful as well as
healthy, spacious as well as clean, well-balanced as well as carefully patrolled.
Again, in 1978, the U.S. Supreme Court in Penn Central Transportation Co v New York Cites, 438
U.S. 104 (1978) that:
...we emphasize what is not in dispute .... this Court has recognized, in a number
of settings, that states and cities may enact land use regulations or controls to
Mayor and Members of City Council
March 16, 1995
Page 3
enhance the quality of life by preserving the character and the desirable aesthetic
features of a city....
Also in 1978, the Colorado Supreme Court, in South of Second Associates v. Georgetown, 580 P.2d
807 (Colo. 1978), upheld the town of Georgetown's ability to review the aesthetics of the
construction of new townhouses to determine what effect the proposed construction might have upon
"the general historical and/or architectural character of the structure or area". The Court noted that
the phrase "historical and/or architectural significance" was defined in the ordinance and that the
ordinance set forth six specific criteria that focused the attention of the planning commission and
applicants on objective and discernable factors. The Court attached particular relevance to one
criterion that directed the commission to consider the "architectural style, arrangement, texture and
materials used on existing and proposed structures, and their relation to other structures in the area"
reasoning that "these objective and easily discernable factors give substance to the ordinance's
historical and/or architectural character" language.
In view of this case law, examining the aesthetic impacts of the building in question under Criterion
A-2.7 is, in my opinion, legally permissible, and the Council decision should be legally defensible
so long as it has a rational basis.
II. That the Planning and Zoning Board failed to conduct a fair hearing by considering
evidence relevant to its findings which was substantially false or grossly misleading.
The Appellant has indicated in the Notice of Appeal that he plans to present slides or photographs
for the purpose of showing that the staff presented to the Planning and Zoning Board substantially
false or grossly misleading evidence. New evidence is generally prohibited at these hearings, subject
to the exception discussed below. "New evidence" would be any new testimony, documents or
exhibits presented for the fast time to the Council to establish the existence or non-existence of facts.
("Argument," on the other hand, is merely a course of reasoning as to what conclusions should be
reached from facts already in the record. In short, new argument is permissible, new facts are not.)
The only exception to the prohibition against new evidence is that, pursuant to Section 2-56(a), new
evidence may be introduced in support of or in opposition to evidence at the original hearing that
was allegedly substantially false or grossly misleading. Any such new evidence must be limited to
that which directly rebuts or supports the earlier false evidence. Because there is an allegation of
false or misleading evidence in this case, I believe that the slides or photographs would be
admissible so long as they are used for the limited purpose of showing that the staff "misrepresented
that the buildings in the neighborhood are predominantly brick and dark in color."
•
Mayor and Members of City Council
March 16, 1995
Page 4
PROCEDURE FOR RECEIVING EVIDENCE
Section 2-55 of the Code prescribes the following manner in which presentations are to be made,
subject to such limitations in time and scope as may be imposed at the discretion of the Mayor:
(1) Explanation of the nature of the appeal and presentation by City staff;
(2) Presentation of argument by the appellants and any party -in -interest in support
of the appeal;
(3) Presentation of argument by any party -in -interest who is an opponent of the
appeal; and
(4) Rebuttal presentations by the appellants and any party -in -interest in support of
the appeal;
(5) Rebuttal presentation by any party -in -interest who is an opponent of the appeal;
and
(6) Motion, discussion and vote by the City Council.
RECORD ONAPPEAL
Section 2-53 provides that the appeal shall be "on the record," which record includes the minutes of
the Board meeting, as well as all exhibits received or viewed by the Board, the video tape of the
proceeding and the verbatim transcript of the proceedings pertaining to the appeal.
APPLICABLE LAW
In addition to the appeals provisions of the Code, a copy of which is attached to this memorandum,
the applicable law for the Council to consider in this appeal consists of Section 29-526 (The Land
Development Guidance System).
RECOMMENDATION AS TO FINDINGS
After hearing all of the presentations, the Council should first decide whether the Board failed to
conduct a fair hearing either because it considered evidence relevant to its findings which was
Mayor and Members of City Council
March 16, 1995
Page 5
substantially false or grossly misleading. If the Council determines that the Board did fail to conduct
a fair hearing for the aforesaid reason, the Council shall remand the matter to the Board for
rehearing as required by Section 2-56(c) of the Code.
If the Council determines that the Board did not fail to conduct a fair hearing, then the Council
should address the issue of whether the Board failed to properly interpret and apply the relevant
provisions of the Code and Charter, and either uphold, overtum or modify the decision of the Board.
If the Council finds that the Board did not properly interpret the Code and/or Charter, it would be
necessary to specify the particular laws that were not properly interpreted and applied.
At the next Council meeting, I will have a resolution summarizing the Council's findings and
decision.
SJR/WPE:med
Attachments (Appeal Provisions of Code)
cc: Greg Byrne, Director of Community Services and Environmental Planning
Bob Blanchard, Chief Planner
Steve Olt, City Planner
•
CHART A-2. NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY CRITERIA
A-2.7 Architecture
Is the architecture proposed for the project appropriate for the uses and
activities that are planned and does it contribute to the neighborhood's
appearance in a positive way?
PURPOSE
The purpose of this criterion is to ensure that the
function, quality and appearance of the proposed
structure(s) is acceptable when considered within the
context of the neighborhood. The appropriateness of
the architecture will not be evaluated in isolation.
How the architecture relates to other site design
considerations and elements will be considered. The
following information and illustrations delineate what
aspects of architectural design are most important to
the neighborhood and the community.
LAND USE TRANSITION
The City encourages a gradual transition between
land uses, but recognizes that gradual transitions are
not always possible and not always in the best interest
of the community. When land uses with significantly
different visual character are proposed adjacent to
each other every effort should be made to create
architectural compatibility through careful
consideration of scale, form, materials and colors.
SIZE - HEIGHT, BULK, MASS, SCALE
The size of a building is an important consideration
in determining whether or not a building is a good fit
within the context of a neighborhood. In general,
buildings should be similar in size to other buildings
in the neighborhood, however, buildings can be made
to be architecturally compatible through skillful
design and careful orientation.
31"7l.Iallll"
Thls
\\\\\\ \\\\\ \\\\-Ilr \�\NOT THtS
Issues that relate specifically to buildings greater than
40 feet in height are covered in Criterion Number 2.8
Building Height / Views.
ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
Building character is extremely important in a
neighborhood that has developed a distinct
architectural character. For example, the east and
west side historic neighborhoods adjacent to
downtown have a distinct historical character.
Storefront buildings in the downtown area also
provide a distinct architectural character to the
downtown "neighborhood." New buildings in these
historic districts should find ways to reflect and
contribute to the established character without
copying it.
New buildings in hiSfOM dlStriCts shouts req cr Me historic
character of the neighborhood through rper"ion of toot lines
perreros of door end window placement, end the use of
cherecrenstic entry features.
Commercial and business uses in residential
neighborhoods are more easily integrated when the
commercial or office buildings are designed to be
residential in character. This can be achieved
through repetition of roof lines, the use of similar
window and door patterns, and the use of building
materials that have colors and textures similar to
those existing in the neighborhood.
In areas where the existing architectural character of
the neighborhood is less defined, the architecture of
the new development should present an attractive
image and set a standard of quality for future projects
or redevelopment in the area.
Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments
The City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised March 1994
-37-
0
BUILDING MATERIALS
Generally building materials should be similar to the
materials already being used in a neighborhood
context. If dissimilar materials are being proposed,
other characteristics such as scale, form, architectural
detailing and color, should be examined to determine
if enough similarity exists for the building to be
compatible, despite the differences in materials.
Materials requiring low maintenance are
recommended over high maintenance materials. For
example, materials with integral color are generally
recommended over materials that need to be painted.
Building materials should not create excessive glare.
If highly reflective building materials, i.e.,
aluminum, unpainted metal, reflective glass, etc. are
proposed, the potential for glare will be evaluated to
determine whether or not the glare would create a
hardship for the adjacent property owner(s),
neighborhood or community. The effects of glare on
vehicular safety and outdoor activities will also be
considered (see page _). All sides of the building
should be equally attractive. Down -grading of
materials for side or back sides is generally not
acceptable.
COLOR
Color should be used as an extension of architectural
style to facilitate blending into the neighborhood, as
well as providing a way of unifying the development.
Usually, the color of building materials should draw
from colors that already exist in the neighborhood.
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT
Mechanical equipment associated with a building
should always be screened from public view. The
screen should be made of the same material and
reflect the same architectural style as the building.
Necnenical equipment on root screened worn prper w&#.
Plant material used to screen ground-mounrad m hw,ca/ equ.pmant.
Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments
The City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised March 1994
WE
It
•
§ 2-34 FORT COLLINS CODE
or City Council committees for which public notice
is required to be given by the provisions of the
Code. The posting shall include, where possible,
information about the availability of agenda ma-
terials.
(Ord. No. 91, 1992, § 8, 9-15-92)
Sees.2-35-2-45. Reserved.
DIVISION 3. APPEALS PROCEDURE*
See.2-46. Definitions.
The following words, terms and phrases, when
used in this Division, shall have the meanings
ascribed to them in this Section:
Appellant shall mean a party -in -interest who has
taken an appeal from a board or commission to
the City Council by the filing of a notice of appeal.
Applicant shall mean the person who or orga-
nization which submitted the application to the
board or commission whose decision has been
appealed.
Final decision shall mean the action of a board
or commission by a vote of a majority of its mem-
bers when no further rehearing is available before
such board or commission; provided, however,
that a recommendation to the City Council from a
board or commission shall not be considered as a
final decision of that board or commission.
New evidence shall mean any evidence relating
to the proposal or application which was the sub-
ject of final decision by a board or commission and
which was not presented at the hearing before
such board or commission.
*Cross references -Appeals from the Liquor Licensing Au-
thority, § 3-36; appeals from the Building Review Board may be
heard by the City Council, § 5-312; appeals from the decision of
the city regarding alarm permits to the City Council, § 15-36;
appeals from the determinations of the Building Review Board
regarding alarm permits to the City Council, § 1541(b);
disapproval of pawnbroker's license may be appealed to the
City Council, § 15-265(c); applicant for license regarding places
of entertainment may appeal the decision to the City Council, §
15-298; appeals from the denial of the secondhand dealer's
license to the City Council, § 15-318(d); appeals for denial of a
license for a mobile home park may be appealed to the City
Council, § 18-5(d).
Party -in -interest shall mean a person who or
organization which has standing to appeal the
final decision of a board or commission. Such
standing to appeal shall be limited to the fol-
lowing:
(1) The applicant;
(2) Any party holding a proprietary or posses-
sory interest in the real or personal property
which was the subject of the decision of the
board or commission whose action is to be
appealed;
(3) Any person to whom or organization to
which the city mailed notice of the hearing
of the board or commission;
(4) Any person who or organization which sent
written comments to the board or commis-
sion prior to the action which is to be
appealed;
(5) Any person who appeared before the board
or commission at the hearing on the action
which is to be appealed;
(6) The City Council as represented by the re-
quest of a single member of the City Council.
(Code 1972, § 3A-2; Ord. No. 67, 1993, § 1, 7-20-
93)
Cross reference -Definitions and rules of construction gen-
erally, § 1-2.
Sec.2-47. Certain appeals to be taken to
City Council.
Appeals from the following boards and commis-
sions, permitted under the provisions of this Divi-
sion, shall be taken to the City Council in the
manner as set forth in this Division:
(1) Building Review Board;
(2) Fire Board of Appeals;
(3) Landmark Preservation Commission;
(4) Planning and Zoning Board;
(5) Storm Drainage Board;
Supp. No. 24 160
• 0
ADMINISTRATION
(6) Zoning Board of Appeals
(Code 1972, § 3A-1)
Editor's note —Subsection (4) formerly referred to the Build-
ing Contractor Licensing Board, which is no longer in exis-
tence, being replaced by the Building Review Board pursuant to
Ord. No. 93, 1987. The editor has, therefore, deleted former
subsection (4) and has renumbered subsections (5)—(7) as
(4)—(6).
Cross references —Building Review Board, § 2.101 et seq.;
Landmark Preservation Commission, § 2-276 et seq.; Planning
and Zoning Board, § 2-351 et seq.; Storm Drainage Board, § 2-
411 et seq.; Zoning Board of Appeals, § 2-441 et seq.; Fire
Board of appeals, §§ 9-2, 9-5.
Sec.2-48. Appeal of final decision per-
mitted.
A party -in -interest may appeal to the City Coun-
cil the final decision of any board or commission
to which this appeal procedure applies in the
manner provided in this Division. Except for ap-
peals by members of the City Council, for which
no grounds need be stated, the permissible
grounds for appeal shall be limited to allegations
that the board or commission committed one (1)
or more of the following errors:
(1) Failure to properly interpret and apply rele-
vant provisions of the Code and Charter;
(2) Failure to conduct a fair hearing in that:
a. The board or commission exceeded its
authority or jurisdiction as contained in
the Code or Charter;
b. The board or commission substantially
ignored its previously established rules
of procedure;
C. The board or commission considered ev-
idence relevant to its findings which
was substantially false or grossly mis-
leading; or
d. The board or commission improperly
failed to receive all relevant evidence of-
fered by the appellant.
(Code 1972, § 3A-3; Ord. No. 124, 1987, § 1, 9-1-
87; Ord. No. 23, 1990, § 1, 4-3-90; Ord. No. 59,
1994, § 1, 4-19-94)
Sec. 2-49. Filing of notice of appeal.
§ 2-50
An appeal shall be taken by filing a notice of ap-
peal of the final decision of a board or commission
to which this Division applies with the City Clerk
within fourteen (14) days after the action which is
the subject of the appeal. Such notice of appeal
shall be signed by all appellants and shall include
the following information:
(1) The action of the board or commission which
is the subject of the appeal;
(2) The date of such action;
(3) The name, address, telephone number and
relationship of each appellant to the subject
of the action of the board or commission;
(4) For all appeals except those filed by mem-
bers of the City Council, the grounds for the
appeal, including specific allegations of error
and a summary of the facts contained in the
record on appeal which support those allega-
tions.
(Code 1972, § 3A-4; Ord. No. 111, 1989, § 1, 8-1-
89; Ord. No. 23, 1990, § 2, 4-3-90; Ord. No. 67,
1993, § 2, 7-20-93)
See.2-50. Review of notice of appeal by
City Attorney.
Within five (5) working days of the date of the
filing of the notice of appeal, the notice shall be
reviewed by the City Attorney for any obvious de-
fects in form or substance. The City Clerk shall
notify the appellant in writing by certified mail of
any such defect in the notice of appeal, which no-
tice shall be mailed no more than ten (10) working
days from the date of filing of the notice of appeal
and which shall specify the period of time within
which any amended notice of appeal must be filed
under § 2-51.
(Code 1972, § 3A-5; Ord. No. 111, 1989, § 2, 8-1-
89; Ord. No. 23, 1990, § 3, 4-3-90)
Supp. No. 31 161