Item 8CAGENDA ITEM # 8C
MAY 29, 2007
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
CITY COMMISSION MEETING
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM: Distribution and discussion of proposed new Section 24-87 of the Land
Development Regulations to address the Redevelopment, Repair or Replacement of Lawfully
Existing Residential Uses including those damaged or destroyed by weather-related acts.
SUBMITTED BY: Sonya Doerr, AICP ,(~,LY
Community Development Director
DATE: May 21, 2007
BACKGROUND: During the "Community Character" process, the discussion of the replacement
of existing residential uses was a topic of much concern. The issue of replacement was clearly
addressed for the Old Atlantic Beach area that is subject to the new Residential Development
Standards, and Staff committed at that time to prepare revisions to Chapter 24 that would clarify this
issue for the entire City.
The assumption by most citizens is that if their home were to be destroyed or damaged by a hurricane,
flood or fire, it could be replaced as it had existed. While in most cases this would be true, the current
regulations are not entirely clear with respect to the replacement of residential uses, which may now
have some nonconforming characteristic, except for the replacement of existing two-family dwellings,
which is addressed in Section 24-86. The attached proposed new section is consistent with the
language of Section 24-86 and clarifies than any "legal "residential use can be re-established subject
to meeting other applicable regulations. Multi-family uses (includes condominiums) that were built
prior to the adoption of the 1990 Comprehensive Plan could also be replaced, but there could be no
increase in the number of units unless the density limit of the Comprehensive Plan was met.
The Community Development Board fully discussed whether a nonconforming structure should be
permitted to be replaced in its existing nonconforming footprint and concluded that the ordinance
should not automatically permit such replacement, but that new construction should where possible
meet current setbacks, and that such cases should be individually addressed through the Variance
process.
The Community Development Board considered this new section at their March 21st meeting and
unanimously recommended approval of proposed Section 24-87.
BUDGET: No budget issues.
RECOMMENDATION: Direction to staff to notice and schedule for action.
ATTACHMENTS: Minutes of the March 21st CD Board meeting; draft of proposed new section 24-
87 to be adopted as part of the Land Development Regu ations.
REVIEWED BY CITY MANA
May 29, 2007 regular meeting
AGENDA ITEM # 8C
MAY 29, 2007
Draft Minutes of March 21, 2007, Community development Board Meeting
b. Review and recommendation to the City Commission related to proposed revisions to the
Land Development Regulations including an update to Section 24-161, the parking
regulations, and also other general revisions.
Chairman Jacobson suggested that each change be discussed separately with a recommended
motion for each section. The Board concurred. Community Development Director Sonya Doerr
summarized the proposed Section 24-87 explaining that this issue was discussed during the
Community Character process when questions came up about whether a property owner had the
right to re-build their house if it got destroyed in the case that it was nonconforming. Ms. Doerr
explained that provisions were added to the Residential Development Standards to address that
area of Old Atlantic Beach, but we advised residents then, that the rest of the City would be need
to be addressed with a separate ordinance. This proposed new section is intended to do that and
is similar to Section 24-86 that addresses replacement of duplexes. This new section would
allow all legally existing residential uses to be replaced or repaired. Multi-family uses, such as
existing condominiums on the beach, could be replaced if they were legally built before the first
Comprehensive Plan was adopted, but only up to the existing number of units. No additional
units could be added. Ms. Doerr stated that to her knowledge, most all of the condominiums
near the beach, such as Sea Place, were built prior to the 1990 adoption of the Comprehensive
Plan.
The Board discussed whether a nonconforming structure should be permitted to be rebuilt in its
previously existing footprint or whether current setbacks should be provided with any new
construction. Following lengthy discussion, the Board agreed that if a building is replaced it
should meet the current zoning setbacks, and that if a property owner wanted to re-build in a
footprint that was nonconforming, this should be handled through the Variance process on a
case-by-case basis. The Board agreed that paragraph (d), which allowed a nonconforming a
house to be rebuilt in its footprint as long as at least a 5-foot setback was provided should be
deleted. Ms. Drysdale made a motion to recommend approval of new Section 24-87 as
written, with the deletion of paragraph (d). Ms. Woods seconded the motion. Motion
passed unanimously.
2
AGENDA ITEM # 8C
MAY 29, 2007
Section 24-87 -Community Development Board approved draft
April 18, 2007
Sec. 24-87. Redevelopment, Repair or Replacement of Lawfully Existing Residential Uses
including those damaged or destroyed by weather-related acts.
(a) Sin l~mily DwellingsAny lawfully existing single-family residential Use, which has been
constructed pursuant to properly issued Building Permits shall be deemed a Vested Use such that
the residential Use maybe r~aired or replaced su~ect to applicable building codes and other Land
Development Regulations including minimum Yard Requirements, which may control such
redevcl~ np lent.
(b) Two-Family Dwellings. Any lawfully existing Two-family (Duplex) Dwelling or Townhouse may
be replaced in accordance with the provisions of preceding Section 24-86.
(c) Multi-familX Dwellings. Any lawfully existing Multi-family residential Use, which has been
constructed pursuant to Building Permits properly issued prior to the December 13, 1990 effective
date of Ordinance 95-90-48 adoptin tg he original Comprehensive Plan for the City of Atlantic
Beach shall be deemed a Vested Use such that the Multi-family Dwellings may be replaceable
subLct to applicable building codes and other Land Development Regulations includin dg rainage
parking and minimum Yard Requirements which may control such redevelopment. In no case shall
the number of residential units be increased except in compliance with the applicable Density
limitation of the Comprehensive Plan, as may be amended.