01-24-84 v MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
• CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
JANUARY 24, 1984
7 : 00 P .M.
CITY HALL
PRESENT: L. B . MacDonell , Chairman
C.T. Tinsley , Secretary
Mrs . Dorothy Kerber
George Bull , Jr .
Frank Tassone
AND: A. William Moss , City Manager
• Rene ' Angers , Recording Secretary
AND: J .M. Jones
Mrs . C . B. Thompson
The meeting was called to order at 7 : 02 p .m. by Chairman MacDonell .
There was a roll call that noted all members were present .
Chairman MacDonell asked if there were any questions or comments
about the minutes of the last meeting. There being none ,
Mr. Tassone motioned to approve the minutes of the meeting of
November 22 , 1983 as presented. The motion was seconded by Mr . Bull
and carried unanimously.
n i is * * * i * i
OLD BUSINESS
Chairman MacDonell called for any old business to be considered.
Mr. Bull asked the City Manager the status of the deck on Sixth
Street .
Mr. Moss advised that a letter had been written to the owner asking
him to obey the laws of the City , that unless he complied, the
City would be forced to take unprecedented action to seek compliance .
Mrs . Kerber asked Mr. Moss how the deck reached its point of
construction.
Mr. Moss replied that a search revealed that no permits had been
issued.
The Board recalled that the construction of the deck occured during
prior Administration "one board at a time. "
Mr. Tinsley asked what had been decided with reference to the vote
of the Board to reverse any order.
Page 2
• Board of Adjustment
January 24, 1984
The City Charter says : (Section 140 - Page 43) "The concurring
vote of four members of the Board shall be necessary to reverse
any order, requirement , decision or determination of any such
administrative official , or to decide in favor of the applicant
on any matter upon which it is required to pass under an7 such
ordinance , or to effect any variation in such ordinance . '
The Land Development Code says : (Page 3-6) "In exercising the
powers granted by this ordinance , the Board of Adjustment , by
the concurring vote of the majority of members , may reverse or
affirm, wholly or partly or modify the order , requirement ,
decision or determination appealed from, and may make such order,
requirement , decision or determination as should be made , and to
that end shall have all the power of the official from whom the
appeal is taken. "
Mr. Moss advised the Board that the Charter prevails .
Mr. Bull asked whether necessary steps could be taken to amend
that portion of the code .
Mr. Moss advised that the Code of Ordinances is in the process
of being codified and that the necessary change could be made
during the process .
Mr. Bull motioned that the section of the ordinance referring to
"majority" be amended to read as per the Charter .
The motion was seconded by Mr . Tassone and carried unanimously .
There being no further old business before the Board, Chairman
MacDonell called the Board' s attention to the new business .
;; * ;; :; ;; :; :; ;; ;;
NEW BUSINESS
Mr. and Mrs . Edward Then - Request to make additions and alterations
to their property at 193 Beach Avenue .
Mrs . Then introduced herself and stated that she felt she had the
legal right to improve her property and that she felt she should be
allowed to do so .
Mr. J .M. Jones , 161 Beach Avenue , owner of the property directly
to the south of the Then property , advised that the same request
had come up two years ago , and a petition objecting to the additions
with approximately 60 signatures had been submitted. Mr . Jones
'age 3
• Board of Adjustment
January 24, 1984
felt that the property had been "butchered" enough, that the
property was in violation, and any further additions would also
be in violation. He urged the Board to deny the request .
Mrs . C. B . Thompson, 211 Beach Avenue , owner of the property
directly to the north of the Then property , spoke in opposition
to the application, citing increased density and the problems
with parking of automobiles .
There was a general discussion on the consideration of the same
requests at past Advisory Planning Board and City Commission
meetings .
Mr. Bull stated that he had been inside the units and that he
understood what Mrs . Then was trying to do on the penthouse unit ;
that they were just trying to expand it because it is very small .
He added that the balcony is for the purpose of another means of
egress , and to aesthetically blend the structure together , also
adding that they were not encroaching on any setbacks any more
than they already were .
Chairman MacDonell asked Mr . Bull if the addition of two rooms
would expand the units to the extent that larger families would be
interested in renting them.
Mr . Bull replied that he didn' t see how that type of activity could
be culled. He added that from an architect ' s point of view he
thought the property was interesting, that the Thens maintain
their property well , that they offer a very good tax base to the
community, and that they hadn' t done anything to upset the
community atmosphere .
Chairman MacDonell commended the Thens for accomplishing what they
have , and stated that it was in good taste . He added that he
agreed with Mr. Bull ; that what they want to do will not be an
eyesore and would improve the property .
Mr. Moss stated that he had the pleasure of working with three
different City Commissions and each of them had the chance , as
elected public officials , to grant a request to the Thens , and each
of them in some way or other had chosen not to do so . He did not
see how the request varied in any way from anything that had
already been considered by the City Commission. He added that it had
already gone through numerous public hearings and had been objected
to by a petition of 66 signatures of residents in the neighborhood.
He stated that he had searched the Code and that in looking through
the powers and authority of the Board of Adjustment had not found
'age 4
►oard of Adjustment
• January 24, 1984
one example of how the property would meet any criteria for granting
a variance . He added that it is a non-conforming use ; that there
are eleven units on 18, 000 square feet . The area can handle a
zoning of 13 . 28 units per acre - based on 18 , 000 square feet ,
the property should have approximately 52 units . He added that
the Code says if a building is a non-conforming use , it cannot
be expanded or altered. Mr . Moss cited page 3-3 which lists the
powers and duties of the Board of Adjustment .
Mr , Bull stated that the Board of Adjustment was not subject to
the City Colluuission' s decision , and that he did not care what
any other City Commission had granted or not granted. He added
that the Board of Adjustment is independent and makes its own
decisions , and he had no qualms with the section of the code that
Mr. Moss cited.
A general discussion ensued on the property being a non-conforming
use and whether the additions would be detrimental to the neighbor-
hood.
Mr. Bull motioned that the request be granted. Mr . Tinsley asked
whether he intended to include each individual request which had
been submitted, Mr . Bull replied that all the requests that had
been submitted were included in the motion .
Mrs . Kerber seconded the motion , adding that since it was within
the present lines of the building it wouldn' t damage anything
surrounding it , and that it would enhance the appearance of the
property.
The motion carried unanimously .
There being no further business to come before the Board, Chairman
MacDonell adjourned the meeting at 7 : 50 p .m.
Cef., +.:°;?-00,/%42,..e;
C . T. Tinsley , Secre ary