71 Coral Street (RT Law) 03.31.2010
March 31, 2010
Wyman R. Duggan
Rogers Towers
1301 Riverplace Boulevard, Suite 1500
Jacksonville, Florida 32207
Re. 374 8th Street (RE# 169942-0000)
Dear Mr. Duggan:
In reply to your attached letter, the six-unit multi-family use located at 374 8th Street is construed to
be a lawfully existing and lawfully created nonconforming use, but not permitted by right or by
exception. Property records reveal that the original structure was constructed in 1915, long before
zoning was established in the City and prior to the 1990 adoption of the City’s first Comprehensive
Plan, which established residential densities. It appears that the structure was probably first
constructed as a single-family home and then the second structure added with a conversion to four
and then six dwelling units during the 1970s. Property files do not contain complete Building Permit
data prior to the 1980s, and in deference to the property owner, the City will make no judgment as to
proper permit history prior to that time. The property is zoned RS-2 (Residential, Single-Family)
with a land use designation of RL (Residential, Low-density.) As such it is highly non-conforming
with current designations. Nonetheless, the six units are permitted to remain and be properly
maintained subject to the following provisions of the City’s Land Development Regulations.
Sec. 24-85. Nonconforming Lots, Uses and Structures.
(c) Nonconforming Structures.
(6) Residential Structures which were lawfully existing, but Nonconforming with respect to
required Building Setbacks may be reconstructed within the previously existing footprint,
provided that where any exterior side wall is reconstructed, a minimum five (5) foot side
yard Setback shall be required. This provision shall apply only to reconstruction
following damage that has occurred from an unintended act, including fire and weather
related events, and not from an intentional act of the property owner or occupant, in
which case the required Building Setbacks of the particular Zoning District shall be
required.
(d) Nonconforming Uses.
(1) Continuation of Nonconforming Uses. Uses of Land which were lawfully created at the
time such Uses were established, but which would not be permitted by the restrictions
imposed by these Land Development Regulations or by restrictions imposed by the
City of Atlantic Beach
Building and Planning
800 Seminole Road
Atlantic Beach, Florida 32233-5445
Telephone (904) 247-5826
Fax (904) 247-5845
http://www.coab.us
Page two, Mr. Duggan
March 31, 2010
Comprehensive Plan, may be continued so long as they remain otherwise lawful and in
compliance with the provisions of this Section.
With respect to replacement, the following provisions explicitly address this issue.
Sec. 24-87. Replacement of Lawfully Existing Residential Uses including those damaged
or destroyed by fire, weather related or other unintended acts.
The following provisions clarify when a residential Use, which may be a Nonconforming Use, can be
replaced following an event which results in the loss of a Dwelling or substantial damage to a
Dwelling such that replacement is desired by the property owner. These provisions shall apply only
to damage occurring from an unintended act, including fire and weather related events and not from
an intentional act of the property owner or occupant.
(a) Multi-family 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 adopting the original Comprehensive Plan for the City
of Atlantic Beach, shall be deemed a Vested Use such that the Multi-family Dwellings may
be replaceable. 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.
I would note that the above provision does not exempt future redevelopment from other applicable
regulations. Current parking, stormwater, height, other requirements would be applicable to future
development in the event of replacement for any reason. In other words, the property may not be of
sufficient size to accommodate replacement of six units in accordance with current building codes
and development regulations.
As of this date, there are no pending code enforcement actions related to this property. There have
been no recent applications for building permits which would require inspections, so the City cannot
represent that there are no housing or building code violations. There is history of past violations at
this property, but none reported within recent years. This is certainly a desirable location, and all
may be in good order, but if your inquiry is related to the sale of this property, any prospective buyer
contemplating purchase of this property would be well advised to have a thorough inspection of the
property performed since the City does not have a full permit history on the property. You may call
me at 247-5826 with any questions.
Sincerely,
Sonya Doerr, AICP
Planning Director