Loading...
1966 Beach Avenue ZVAR20-0014 Packet (Owens)ZVAR20-0014 Agenda Item #4.C.15 Sep 2020 Page 17 of 64 Agenda Item #4.C.15 Sep 2020 Page 18 of 64 Agenda Item #4.C.15 Sep 2020 Page 19 of 64 Agenda Item #4.C.15 Sep 2020 Page 20 of 64 Agenda Item #4.C.15 Sep 2020 Page 21 of 64 Agenda Item #4.C.15 Sep 2020 Page 22 of 64 CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 4.C CASE NO. ZVAR20-0014 Request for a variance from Section 24-81(n) to allow the deviation for measuring the height of the building from the average calculated grade at 1966 Beach Avenue. LOCATION 1966 Beach Avenue APPLICANT Montell Williams DATE September 8, 2020 STAFF Brian Broedell, Principal Planner STAFF COMMENTS The applicant is Montell Williams, who is in the process of purchasing the vacant lot at 1966 Beach Avenue. This lot is at the southwest corner of Beach Avenue and 19th Street. The applicant is planning to construct a single-family home on the lot. The lot has a topographical change of about 9 feet from the east to the west property lines. The eastern property line adjacent to Beach Avenue is 23 to 25 feet NAVD while the western property line is about 15.5 feet NAVD (see survey in application package). For lots with a topographical variation of more than 2 feet, Section 24-81 requires the overall height of the house to be measured from the average calculated grade of the buildable area of the lot. According to a survey dated 8-26-2020, the average calculated grade of the buildable area of this lot is 19.9 feet NAVD. Per Section 24-81, this means the overall height of a new home cannot exceed 35 feet as measured from this average grade. In other words, the new home cannot exceed 54.9 feet NAVD. The applicant is requesting a variance from this section to allow the overall height of the new home to be measured from 24.77 feet NAVD, instead of 19.9 feet NAVD for a total difference of 5.87 feet in elevation. Page 2 of 3 ANALYSIS Section 24-65 states that “applications for a variance shall be considered on a case-by-case basis, and shall be approved only upon findings of fact that the application is consistent with the definition of a variance and consistent with the provisions of this section.” According to Section 24-17, Definitions, “[a] variance shall mean relief granted from certain terms of this chapter. The relief granted shall be only to the extent as expressly allowed by this chapter and may be either an allowable exemption from certain provision(s) or a relaxation of the strict, literal interpretation of certain provision(s). Any relief granted shall be in accordance with the provisions as set forth in Section 24-65 of this chapter, and such relief may be subject to conditions as set forth by the City of Atlantic Beach.” Section 24-65(c) provides six distinct grounds for the approval of a variance: (1) Exceptional topographic conditions of or near the property. Applicant states that there are unusual topographic conditions on this property. Survey showing topography of 1966 Beach Avenue Page 3 of 3 (2) Surrounding conditions or circumstances impacting the property disparately from nearby properties. Applicant states the erosion of grade due to the increased elevation of the home located on the southern property line. (3) Exceptional circumstances preventing the reasonable use of the property as compared to other properties in the area. Applicant states that the zoning does not match current lot dimensions. (4) Onerous effect of regulations enacted after platting or after development of the property or after construction of improvements upon the property. (5) Irregular shape of the property warranting special consideration. (6) Substandard size of a lot of record warranting a variance in order to provide for the reasonable use of the property. Applicant states that this property is zoned RG-M with minimum lot dimensions of 75’ X 100’. This property does not meet the said minimum dimensions. To add, this property is located on a corner which reduces the buildable area by an additional 5’ in building width. REQUIRED ACTION The Community Development Board may consider a motion to approve ZVAR20-0014, request for a variance from Section 24-81(n) to allow the deviation for measuring the height of the building from the average calculated grade at 19266 Beach Avenue upon finding this request is consistent with the definition of a variance, and in accordance with the provisions of Section 24-65, specifically the grounds for approval delineated in Section 24-65(c) and as described below. A variance may be granted, at the discretion of the Community Development Board, for the following reasons: (1) Exceptional topographic conditions of or near the property. (2) Surrounding conditions or circumstances impacting the property disparately from nearby properties. (3) Exceptional circumstances preventing the reasonable use of the property as compared to other properties in the area. (4) Onerous effect of regulations enacted after platting or after development of the property or after construction of improvements upon the property. (5) Irregular shape of the property warranting special consideration. (6) Substandard size of a lot of record warranting a variance in order to provide for the reasonable use of the property. Or, The Community Development Board may consider a motion to deny ZVAR20-0014, request for a variance from Section 24-81(n) to allow the deviation for measuring the height of the building from the average calculated grade at 1966 Beach Avenue upon finding this request is not consistent with the definition of a variance. Request for a variance from Sec 24-81(n) to deviate from measuring the height of the building from the average calculated grade at 1966 Beach Ave. ZVAR20-0014 1966 Beach Ave (vacant lot) Site Context and Details Currently vacant lot on the corner of 19th Street & Beach Avenue The lot has a grade change of about 9 feet from the east (higher side) to the west (lower side) of the lot. Zoned for a single family home Site Context and Details Proposed Plan & Need for Variance The applicant is planning to build a single-family home on the lot in the near future For lots with over 2 feet in grade change (this one has 9 feet), City Code requires that the overall height the house be measured from the average grade of the buildable area of the lot. A recent survey calculated this average grade at an elevation of 19.9 NAVD By code, the city’s 35 foot height limit is measured from this elevation Proposed Plan & Need for Variance The applicant is requesting that the maximum height of the house be measured at 24.77 feet NAVD, instead of the overall height being measured at 19.9 feet NAVD (the average grade of the buildable area) This results in a difference of 5.87 feet allowed for the overall height of the house. The 24.77 NAVD is the measured elevation at Beach Avenue Considerations This variance request is only regarding where the overall height is measured, it is not a request for any grade changes (fill). Sec 24-65.-Variances: In most cases, exceptional practical difficulties or undue hardship results from physical characteristics that make the property unique or difficult to use. The applicant has the burden of proof. The Community Development Board must determine that granting the request would not cause substantial detriment to the public good and would not be inconsistent with the general intent and purpose of the land development regulations The Community Development Board is authorized to grant relief from the strict application of certain land development regulations where, due to an exceptional situation, adherence to the land development regulations results in “exceptional practical difficulties or undue hardship” upon a property owner Grounds for Decision APPROVAL-existence of one or more of the following (Section 24-65 (c)DENIAL- 1.Exceptional topographic conditions of or near the property. 2.Surrounding conditions or circumstances impacting the property disparately from nearby properties. 3.Exceptional circumstances preventing the reasonable use of the property as compared to other properties in the area. 4.Onerous effect of regulations enacted after platting or after development of the property or after construction of improvement upon the property. 5.Irregular shape of the property warranting special consideration. 6.Substandard size of a lot of record warranting a variance in order to provide for the reasonable use of the property. The CDB may consider a denial upon finding that none of the requirements in 24-65 (c) exist. From:Greg West To:Broedell, Brian; Askew, Amanda; Durden, Brenna Cc:montellandlisa@gmail.com Subject:Opposition by Susan Hill and Gregory West to ZVAR-20-0014 at 1966 Beach Avenue (September 15, 2020Meeting) Date:Tuesday, September 08, 2020 1:01:34 PM Sent by email only to all but Janet Powell. Please confirm receipt of email. From: Susan Hill and Gregory West, owners of 57 19th Street (gregorykwest@gmail.com, 904-993-9444) To: Brian Broedell, Principal Planner (bbroedell@coab.us) Amanda Askew, Director of Planning & Community Development (aaskew@coab.us) Brenna Durden, City Attorney (bdurden@coab.us) Copy: Montell Owens (montellandlisa@gmail.com) Janet Powell (by US mail, First Class, to the "Return and Record" address set forth on the Warranty Deed attached to Variance Application ZVAR-20-0014) Re: Opposition by Susan Hill and Gregory West to ZVAR-20-0014 at 1966 Beach Avenue (September 15, 2020 Meeting) Variance Application ZVAR-20-0014 seeks two variances: changing the driveway of 1966 Beach Avenue from Beach Avenue to 19th Street and increasing the grade (thereby increasing the allowable building height). Although we would certainly be happy to see the vacant corner lot at 1966 Beach Avenue developed with a home appropriate to the size and character of the property, we oppose both zoning variances for the reasons set forth below. We respectfully request that the Community Development Board deny both since there are sufficient grounds for denial of both variances as provided in Section 24-64(c). We have lived at 57 19th Street diagonally across the street from 1966 Beach Avenue for more than 25 years. We spoke at the City Commission meeting on April 26, 1993 when the Commissioners unanimously approved the current 19th Street parallel parking plan and 6’ wide sidewalk in anticipation of the residential development of the north side of 19th Street. Driveway Access Applicant states that he does not want the driveway on Beach Avenue because it would be near a “relatively busy intersection”. But 19th Street is much busier. Beach Avenue is a one-way one-lane north-bound Street; 19th Street is a two-way two-lane street. Both Beach Avenue and 19th Street have stop signs at that intersection. Beach Avenue is used primarily by the Beach Avenue residents living between 18th and 19th Streets; 19th Street is also used by the Beach Avenue residents living between 18th and 19th Streets, but is also heavily trafficked by the many beach-goers parking and cruising in search of parking on 19th Street, especially during busy weekends and holidays and the even more busy summer months. As the City’s website description of the current 18th Street Enhancement Project states: “By all accounts, the number of 18th and 19th street beachgoers has increased steadily through the years. On most days throughout the year, the public parking area is orderly; on many days, however, the area is crowded with vehicles and traffic is heavy.” The variance seeking the movement of the driveway should not be granted on the basis of applicant’s suggestion that Beach Avenue is busier than 19th Street, since it is not. The Commission should deny the request to move the driveway from Beach Avenue to 19th Street because the variance would create more traffic safety issues than leaving it on Beach Avenue. The proposed driveway would also pose a danger to the many beach-goers walking on the sidewalk on the south side of 19th Street to avoid the heavy street traffic, particularly to older adults and families who use 19th Street Beach access because there are no wooden steps to climb. The uninterrupted sidewalk on the south side of 19th Street was part of the 1993 Commissioners’ plan instituting safe parallel parking. It was intended to be a safe uninterrupted way to get to the beach from cars and from the neighborhood west of Seminole. Allowing applicant’s driveway would add an unnecessary danger to the many pedestrians, since not only would applicant use it but, perhaps more importantly, other cars would undoubtedly turn around in it when leaving the beach (as they now often do each day in our driveway and our other neighbors’ driveways on the north side of 19th Street). Removing motorcycle parking would also undermine the City’s current unified parking plan for 18th, 19th and 20th Streets, effectively reducing the number of car parking spaces, since motorcycles would then take some of the limited parking needed by families and senior citizens and others using the 19th Street beach walk-over. The motorcycle parking area often has motorcycles and scooters parked in it now. Finally, removing the palm tree and its island would remove one of the few beautification components of the City’s plan for 19th Street. Even though keeping applicant’s driveway on Beach Avenue might be less convenient for applicant since applicant would have a more circuitous route to his house up 18th Street and then north on Beach Avenue (rather than just turning off of Seminole onto 19th Street), the Commission should not grant applicant's request for the convenience of applicant when there are parking, traffic safety and other public safety concerns raised by applicant's variance request. Grade Increase 19th Street has inadequate drainage and is prone to flooding in bad storms. Applicant in the application acknowledges that there has been past flooding from 1966 Beach Avenue. The application suggests that the grading as proposed will increase flooding from 1966 Beach Avenue onto 19th Street with possible runoff onto our property and the other low lying neighbors on 19th Street because the application states that the increased grading will reduce flooding to the neighbors to the north and west of 1966 Beach Avenue. Those runoff waters being diverted from the neighbors to the north and west will have to flow somewhere, and the only available direction for the diverted runoff will be north into 19th Street and perhaps onto the lower-lying properties on the north side of 19th Street, since the water that will be diverted from the west and south in a bad storm by applicant is certainly not going to run uphill east toward Beach Avenue. Applicant has not offered any professional study or other evidence to show that the increased grading will not cause additional flooding to 19th Street or to us or any of the other lower-lying neighbors. That burden of showing no harm from the variance should fall to applicant. Applicant in his application has not even nominally met that burden of showing no harm. Applicant’s variance should be denied until such a study is prepared and the affected neighbors and the Commission are both given a reasonable opportunity to review and approve it. If the Commission does determine that such a study should be prepared before further consideration of the variance request, we would ask that a copy be sent to us contemporaneously with its submission to the Commission. PUBLIC NOTICE To whom it may concern, Notice is hereby given to all property owners within 300 feet of the address below, and as shown in the map below, that a Public Hearing regarding the case described in this notice will be held by the Community Development Board (CDB) in a hybrid quasi-judicial format that will allow for both virtual participation and in- person participation. All board members will be participating virtually. Virtual participation can be accessed via https://www.coab.us/506/Meeting-Videos. You will be prompted to register. You must register to watch/listen or to provide public comment. In person participation will be held in Commission Chambers located at 800 Seminole Road. PROJECT Property Location Map Item No: ZVAR20-0014 Address: 1966 Beach Ave. (RE #169525-0000) Applicant: Montell Owens PUBLIC HEARING(S) Body: Community Development Board Date September 15, 2020 Time: 6:00 PM Request: Request for a variance from Section 24-81 (n) to allow the deviation for measuring the height of the building from the average calculated grade. Summary: The applicant is requesting a variance from Section 24-81 (n) start the maximum building height from an increase to average grade. This property is significantly higher on Beach Ave. and slopes down away from the street. Pursuant to Section 286.0105, Florida Statutes, a person deciding to appeal any decision made by the Commission with respect to any matter considered at the meeting or at any subsequent meeting to which the Commission has continued its deliberations is advised that such person will need to insure that a verbatim record of all proceedings is made, which must include the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. All information related to the item(s) above is available for review on the city of Atlantic beach webpage under Public Notices https://www.coab.us/960/Public-Notices. The city will hold a “hybrid” quasi-judicial hearing as outlined in Resolution No. 20-32. The city will use following format as defined in Resolution 20-32 for these type of meetings: 1. Communications Media Technology (CMT) means any alternative forms of audio, video, electronic, or digital communication transmitted or hosted via telecommunications or computer web-based platform services. These procedures for quasi-judicial hearings are "hybrid," in that they allow for both virtual participation and in person participation, subject to the provisions below. 2. Implementation of these CMT procedures may only be utilized during the pendency of a declared State of Emergency by the Governor’s office. The Executive Order of the Governor must allow for suspension of any Florida Statute requiring a quorum to be physically present. CMT procedures must comply with Section 120.54(5)(b)(2), Fla. Stats. 3. These CMT procedures will be available for meetings of the City Commission, Community Development Board, and any other City board or committee that may conduct a quasi-judicial hearing. 4. All applicants have the option of deferring their case to be heard at a future date under established non-emergency hearing procedures. 5. Any applicant choosing to have their case heard under these CMT procedures must complete the Acknowledgement and Waiver Form provided. This form must be completed by the Applicant, Agent, if any, AND the property owner if not the Applicant. The form must be sworn to or affirmed, and notarized. 6. Noticing provisions are not suspended. Noticing will be as required by the City Code and Florida Statutes. Noticing will include information on how the public or Applicants may participate by CMT. 7. Agenda packets and registration instructions will be available online at coab.us 8. The Commission Chambers will be open for public attendance consistent with City health and safety procedures published on the City’s website and provided with agenda notices. Physical attendance in the Commission Chambers will be prioritized as follows: a. Applicant and/or Applicant’s Agent/ Legal Counsel and Witnesses b. General Public 9. The members of the General Public and the Applicants and/or Applicant’s Agent that choose to attend the hearing physically in the Commission Chambers will be directed to speak into a laptop that is logged in to the zoom meeting. 10. Applicants and/or Applicants’ Agent may attend physically or by CMT. Witnesses and affected parties may appear by CMT or physically on a limited basis consistent with health and safety procedures established by the City. All testimony at quasi-judicial hearings will be sworn under oath. Please be advised that members of the public and witnesses may or may not be granted physical access to the inside of Commission Chambers until it is their specific time to speak at the discretion of the meeting moderator present in the Commission Chambers. A speaker located outside of Chambers will also broadcast the meeting. 11. Presentation materials, documents, witness lists, photographs, and other evidence and exhibits must be provided to the City Clerk’s Office if the quasi-judicial hearing is occurring before the City Commission, or to the Community Development Board staff secretary if the hearing will occur before the Community Development Board, no later than three (3) business days prior to the meeting to provide all applicants, staff, board members, attorneys and adversely affected parties to have the same information prior to the start of the meeting or quasi-judicial hearing. 12. Public comment and participation will be conducted with a 5-minute limit on all speakers. Members of the public who wish to participate using CMT will be requested to dial in to the announced phone bank number or connect to the zoom link for video and audio participation published on the specific agenda notice for that meeting. The participants will be placed on hold and queued for each agenda item public comment period or applicable public hearing. In the alternative, members of the public may provide written comment to the City Clerk or Community Development Board staff secretary prior to the hearing via U.S. Mail or email, no later than 6 hours before the meeting begins. The City staff present at the meeting or Board Chair will read any received written comments into the record. The City staff present at the meeting will receive and preserve all written comment consistent with Florida Public Records law but will only read into the record the equivalent of five minutes or 500 words. 13. An opportunity for persons to speak on each agenda item or case, virtually or in-person, will be made available after the applicant and staff have made their presentations on each item. All testimony, including public testimony and evidence by adversely affected parties, will be made under oath or affirmation. Additionally, each person who gives testimony may be subject to cross-examination. If you do not wish to be either cross-examined or sworn, your testimony will be given its due weight under Florida law. Applicants, City staff and adversely affected parties will be permitted to cross-examine witnesses and parties. However, the public may request the Board Chair or moderator to ask questions of parties or witnesses on their behalf. Persons representing organizations must present evidence of their authority to speak for the organization. 14. Applicants and/or Applicants’ Agent/Legal Counsel may rebut public comments through the Chairperson. 15. All other rules of decorum apply to the extent they do not conflict or are not applicable. The meeting moderator will monitor adherence to the Commission Rules of Procedure, these CMT Procedures or Robert’s Rules of Order and may mute any persons determined to be in violation. Please Note: Two or more members of any board or committee of the City of Atlantic Beach may be in attendance.