2003-12-16 (meeting minutes) vAGENDA
CONI1bITJ~ZTY DEVELOPiYIENT BOARD
CXTY OF ATLA~TTXC BEACH
Tuesday, December 16, 2003 at 7:00 p.m.
City Hall Commission Chambers, 800 Seminole Road
1. Call to order and pledge of allegiance.
2. Approval of lYlinutes of the meeting of November 13, 2003.
3. Recognition of Visitors.
4. OId Business:
a. None.
5. New Business. .
a. ZVAR-2003-18, Jerry R. Bahr. Request for a Variance from Section 24-104 (e) (2) to
reduce the required riventy (20) foot rear yard to sixteen (16) feet and six (6) inches to
allow for the construction of an addition.to.an existing single-family residence within the
RS-l Zoning District, and located at 2348 Oceanwalk Drive, West.
b. ZVAR-2003-19, Leroy K Fouts. Request for a Variance from Section 24-1.04 (e) (3) to
. allow external stairs to encroach a maximum of thirty (30) inches into the required seven
and one-half (7.5) foot side yard for property, within RS-1 Zoning District and located at
2020 Duna Vista Court.
6. Other Business not requiring action.
a. Review and discussion of draft Evaluation and Appraisal Report :(EAR) based
amendments to the adopted Comprehensive Plan.
7.. Adjournment.
All information related to these applications and full legal descriptions for the subject properties
are available for review at the City of Atlantic Beach Planning and Zoning Department located at .
800 Seminole Road, Atlantic Beach, Florida. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by
the Community Development Board with respect. to any matter considered at the meeting, he or
she .will need a .record of the proceedings, and for such purpose, may need to ensure that a
verbatim- record of the proceedings is made,. which record includes the testimony and evidence
upon which the appeal is based. Notice to persons needing special accommodations and to all
hearing impaired persons: In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, persons,
needing special accommodation to participate in this proceeding should contact the City of
Atlantic Beach (904) 247-5800, 800 Seminole Road, Atlantic Beach, Florida 32233 not later
than 5 days prior to the date of this meeting.
MINUTES OF THE
REGULAR MEETING OF
THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
December 16, 2003
A regular meeting of the Community Development Boazd was held on Tuesday, December 16, 2003,
in the City Hall Commission Chambers. Present were Chairman Don Wolfson, Lynn Drysdale,
Robert Frohwein, Sam Jacobson (7:12 p.m.), Mary Walker, and Community Development Director
Sonya Doerr. Craig Burkhart and Steve Jenkins were absent.
1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
The meeting was called to order at 7:12 p.m.
2. Approval of Minutes of the Meeting of November 18, 2003.
A motion was made by Bob Frohwein, seconded by Lynn Drysdale and unanimously
carried to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 18, 2003 as
presented.
3. Recognition of Visitors.
Jack Varney, President of the Oceanwalk Homeowners' Association, introduced himself.
4. Old Business. None.
5. New Business.
a. ZVAR-2003-18, Jerry Bahr. Request for a Variance from Section 24-104 (e)(2) to reduce
the required twenty (20) foot rear yard to sixteen (16) feet and six (6) inches to allow for
the construction of an addition to an existing single-family residence within the RS-1
Zoning District, located at 2348 Oceanwalk Drive West.
Jerry Bahr, owner of the property, introduced himself and explained that sixteen years ago, he had
the house built positioned far back on the lot to save several trees located at the front of the property.
He further explained that he now wished to build aroom-addition on the rear of the home, which
would reduce the rear yard to approximately 16 feet-6 inches, from the required twenty feet, at the
northwest corner of the home. He indicated that his neighbors had signed a letter stating they were
aware of the project and had no objections to the requested variance.
As a point of clarification, Chair Wolfson inquired if Mr. Bahr had taken the request before the
Oceanwalk Homeowner's Association for their input. He indicated that he had their approval for the
pool screen enclosure and the room addition. Chair Wolfson stated that usually the written
recommendation of approval would be part of the application package, and inquired if Mr. Bahr had
the document with him. Mr. Wolfson stated he was interested in the setback.
`~~ ~- ~
~.~ ~ .
,~~ ~-t ~~-a-
~~~
,~ ~,~,-~ .--rtGt~t,-~'i ~ 'l~i~~
.~
Minutes of the December 16, 2003 meeting of the Community Development Board
Discussion ensued and Mr. Bahr stated that there was an issue with the setback for the pool
enclosure and he had submitted a letter to the Architectural Review Committee (ARC) requesting a
variance. Mr. Bahr related that several months ago he had inquired as to the City's requirement for a
pool enclosure and was told the setback was five (5) feet from the rear lot line. He indicated that he
later learned that Oceanwalk required seven (7) feet-6 inches, and his request for a five (5) foot
setback was denied. He stated the current request was for seven (7) feet-6 inches at one end of the
enclosure, tapering to a 6-foot setback across the rear portion of the lot, which had not been
addressed by the ARC.
A discussion of rear yard setback requirements ensued. Mr. Bahr indicated the variance request had
not been addressed by Homeowners' Association. Mr. Bahr found and read the letter written
October 28`" by the ARC granting approval for construction of the pool and screen enclosure and
room additions.
Community Development Director Doerr pointed out that the City had no authority to enforce
private deed restrictions, .and the Board was to consider setbacks ~ as required by the zoning
ordinance. Chair Wolfson felt the Board had no authority to pre-empt deed restrictions and could
take no action in conflict with the restrictions. Ms. Doerr reiterated her position and pointed out that
the Building Department's application for a permit asked if ARC approval was required as part of
the building permit package.
Chair Wolfson felt that procedurally, a request for a variance should go before the Association first,
and then the Community Development Board.. Ms. Doerr responded that she had no authority to
require the procedure. Chair Wolfson indicated his preference for this procedure and felt the Board
should take a position to defer action on this matter until Mr. Bahr received input from the ARC on
his request.
Chair Wolfson invited comments from the audience. Jack Varney indicated that Mr. Bahr's variance
had not been heard by the Oceanwalk ARC.
Chair Wolfson recapped the request and reiterated his position that it would be better for Mr. Bahr to
come back before the Board after receiving input from the ARC. Mr. Bahr voluntarily agreed to
bring his request back after receiving the ARC determination.
Discussion of the pool enclosure ensued. Ms. Walker requested that Mr. Bahr sketch the pool on the
site plan when he resubmits his request.
b. ZVAR-2003-19, Leroy K. Fouts. Request for a Variance from Section 24-104 (e)(3) to
allow external stairs to encroach a maximum of thirty (30) inches into the required
seven and one-half (7.5) foot side yard for property within RS-1 Zoning District and
located at 2020 Duna Vista Court.
Roy Fouts, owner of the property, introduced himself and stated that he was requesting a variance to
allow an outside stairway to encroach a maximum of thirty (30) inches into the required seven and
one-half foot side yard. Mr. Fouts indicated that that the narrowness of the lot was the primary
reason for the variance request and the variance would allow ancillary access to the room he was
constructing above his garage and provide a means for getting construction materials to the site
2
Minutes of the December 16, 2003 meeting of the Community Development Board
without going through the house. He stated reported that he had contacted his neighbors and no one
objected to the stairway.
Mr. Jacobson inquired as to the size of the lot and was informed that it was 60.24 x 128.53 feet.
Chair Wolfson read Mr. Fouts' Statement of Facts relative to the request and stated that by the
definition of hardship, he felt there was no hardship in this case and would have to recommend
denial of the request.
A motion was made by Chairman Wolfson, seconded by Board Member Frohwein and
unanimously carried to deny Mr. Fouts' request for a variance from Section 24-104 (e)(3) to
allow external stairs to encroach a maximum of thirty (30) inches into the required seven and
one-half (7.5) foot side yard for property within the RS-1 Zoning District located at 2024 Duna
Vista Court.
Discussion ensued concerning the size of the side yard and width of the stairway, including the
handrails. It was pointed out that this was an ancillary stairway and the room would be accessed
from inside the house. It was suggested that Mr. Fouts construct a temporary stairway in the garage
to deliver construction materials to the site and keep dirt from inside the house.
Mr. Fouts thanked the Board for their consideration of the request and commended Community
Development Director Doerr and the Building Department Staff for their help with preparing the
application for the variance request.
6. Other Business Not Requiring Action.
a. Review and discussion of draft Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) based
amendments to the adopted Comprehensive Plan.
Community Development Director Doerr introduced Lindsay Haga and Ed Lehman from the
Northeast Florida Regional Council (RPC) and stated that the City had a contract with the RPC for
technical assistance in preparing the EAR-based Comprehensive Plan amendments. Ms. Doerr
stated that in May the State had found the EAR report to be sufficient and the City now has up to
eighteen months to make the amendments as required by state law and those appropriate for
updating the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Doerr indicated that the Future Land Use Element was the
"heart" of the Comprehensive Plan.
Board Member Jacobson requested direction from Ms. Haga as to which elements were more open
to debate and where the Board should direct its attention. Ms. Haga agreed with Ms. Doerr as to the
importance of the Future Land Use Element. She suggested that the Board direct its attention to the
Future Land Use Element, which prescribes what land uses were planned for the next five and ten
year planning horizons; the Housing Element, paying attention to redevelopment and affordable
housing, and the Conservation and Coastal Management Element, which includes policies related to
the coastal high hazard area, which includes all of the City. Ms. Haga stated that she and Mr.
Lehman wanted Board input as to their interpretation of the policy changes. She suggested
reviewing the Future Land Use and Conservation and Coastal Management Elements.
3
Minutes of the December 16, 2003 meeting of the Community Development Board
Ms. Doerr pointed out that many of the policies in the Future Land Use Element were already in the
Comprehensive Plan. She further stated the Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1991 and had never
been updated and pointed out that most of the proposed changes would bring the plan into
compliance with current law as set forth in Florida Statutes, Chapter 163.
Mary Walker referenced Policy A.14.5 on Page A-5 of the Future Land Use Element, and inquired
concerning waivers to the maximum height of buildings in the Residential-High-Density category.
Community Development Director Doerr stated that Section 24-156 of the Zoning Ordinance now
allows for the City Commission to grant exceptions to height limitations in the Commercial and
Industrial zoning districts, and the change to include Residential-High-Density was made because
affordable housing could not be accomplished at a height limited to 35-feet. It was pointed out that
the Comprehensive Plan took precedent over the Land Development Regulations, and there was very
little undeveloped high-density residential land in the City. Doerr pointed out that there is currently
no provision for height waivers in the other residential zoning categories or the low and medium
density areas, and none is proposed.
Chair Wolfson emphasized the importance of the Comprehensive Plan relative to density.
Discussion ensued concerning redevelopment in case of a catastrophic event. Ms. Doerr stated
that this would be addressed in the preparation Post-Disaster Redevelopment Plan, which will be
prepared after the Comprehensive Plan is amended. Board Member Jacobson inquired as to
how conflicts between the Future Land Use Map and the Zoning Ordinance were resolved
relative to redevelopment. Ms. Doerr stated that some revisions to the zoning and Land
Development Regulations will be required after the completion of the Plan amendment and that
this was typical.
Ms. Haga indicated that the policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan were intentionally
broad, and that these set the guidelines for future amendments to the land development
regulations. Procedurally, she indicated that after the amendments to the Comprehensive Plan
were approved and adopted, the amendments included therein, would affect the current Land
Development and Zoning regulations. She indicated that, for example, the process to obtain a
height waiver might need to be further spelled-out in the land development regulations. Ms.
Doerr emphasized that the Comprehensive Plan would be the policy document and the ~ land
development and Zoning regulations would implement the policy. She indicated that after the
Comp Plan was adopted, some changes would probably have to be made to the zoning
regulations to eliminate inconsistencies.
Ms. Doerr. reiterated that the entire City was considered to be a coastal high hazard area, and that
there should be no changes to the Plan that would increase density and have an impact on
hurricane evacuation times. She indicated that State would likely have objections to any action
that would increase density in the high hazard areas, and the State and regional Plans strongly
discouraged local governments from increasing density in coastal high hazard areas that would
contribute to increased hurricane evacuation time.
Board Member Walker read Policy A.1.1.3 on Page A-4: By December 31, 2005, the City shall
amend its Land Development Regulations to include provisions intended to retain the unique
community identity, the architectural character, and the smaller residential scale of that area of
the City known as the Core City (Atlantic Beach Subdivision "A. ")
4
Minutes of the December 16, 2003 meeting of the Community Development Board
Ms. Walker commented that recent development in the Core City area was inconsistent with the
policy. She stated that she favored implementation of this policy as soon as possible.
Community Development Director Doerr stated that this policy was proposed for discussion in
response to many comments and concerns from citizens and elected officials and stated that
implementation of this policy would generate considerable discussion and that it could be
controversial. If adopted, the Land Development Regulations would have to be revised to reflect
and implement the policy. It was the consensus of the Board that implementation of this policy
was crucial to save the Core City area.
Discussion ensued concerning how best to review the proposed amendments. Ms. Haga stated
that RPC and City staff had proposed the changes, and that some were more "technical" and
required by State law, and suggested that it was not the Boazd's duty to ponder each policy in
that regard. She suggested that, to prepare for the upcoming Workshop with the City
Commission, the Boazd Members read the entire document, focus on the changes and policies
they had questions on. It was suggested that the following questions be considered while reading
the document: (1) is this required by state law, (2) is the City now consistent with these policies,
(3) what will this policy mean as far as amending and implementing the zoning and land
development regulations, and (4) is the individual provision a required policy, or a "visionary"
statement guiding the future of the City -- and should it be kept or eliminated?
Density and the process of setting future policy and a vision for the City were briefly discussed.
Ms. Doerr commented that there would be no major changes proposed to the density categories
that aze now in place, but that there probably are a few areas in the City that are currently
designated as Residential, Medium density on the Future Land Use Map, which should be re-
designated to Residential, Low density, .....such as the area east of Seminole Road. Ms. Doerr
commented that it was her opinion that the low density category was probably more appropriate
for those areas closest to the beach that are most vulnerable to damage from storms and
hurricanes. It was pointed out that since the City was basically built-out, the issues that come up
during the process of amending the Comp Plan are very different from those places that have
large amounts of undeveloped land.
Chair Wolfson inquired as to a timeframe for adoption of the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Doerr
responded that she hoped it would be adopted by the end of Mazch 2004.
Discussion continued concerning the amendment process and duties and responsibilities of the
Community Development Boazd. Community Development Director Doerr pointed out that the
CD Board does have a bit different role in this process. The CD Board is designated as the Local
Planning Agency for the City and is required by State law to review and make recommendations
to the City Commission related to certain planning activities including amendments to the
Comprehensive Plan. Chair Wolfson suggested that the Board make a visionary statement to the
Commission concerning setting guidelines for the future; that maintaining the residential
character of the City and implementation of zoning regulations to keep the residential character
were discussed as being very important. '
Mr. Frohwein inquired concerning the land use categories listed in this section and asked if they
were the same and how they related to the zoning categories as included in Chapter 24 of the
City Code. Ms. Doerr responded that in Atlantic Beach, the zoning districts and the land use
categories were much the same, but that the original land use categories as set forth in the 1990
5
c
r•
Minutes of the December 16, 2003 meeting of the Community Development Board
Plan and on the Future Land Use Map were not defined in the text of Plan. Objective A.1.10 of
the proposed Plan amendment defines the land use categories.
Ms. Walker requested information concerning the Regional Planning Council and what their role
is. Ms. Haga provided information concerning its authority and the makeup of the Council. Ms.
Walker inquired if a list exists of areas in the Comprehensive Plan amendments that the Board
should mostly focus on. Ms. Haga stated she would work with Ms. Doerr to provide a list.
Ms. Doerr stated that a Workshop with the City Commission had been tentatively planned for
5:00 p.m. on Monday, January 12, 2004.
Chair Wolfson pointed out that due to term limits, he would no longer be serving on the Board.
He requested that the members read Sec. 14-20 of the City Code, listing the powers and duties of
the Community Development Board. Mr. Wolfson read Item #6 on the list, and stated that
during his tenure, the Board had never submitted a list to the Commission of recommended
capital improvements desirable to be constructed. He requested that the Board give
consideration to submitting a list of preferred projects, as outlined in Item #6.
Board Member Jacobson thanked Mr. Wolfson for his many years of service on the Board and
stated his departure would create a great void. The other members concurred. Mr. Wolfson
stated that he enjoyed working on the Board, and he highly respected the Board Members, whom
he felt always worked well together.
7. Adjournment . There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:07 p.m.
Signed
Attest
6