Item 9AAGENDA ITEM # 9A
MAY 27, 2008
May 19, 2008
MEMORANDUM
TO: The Honorable Mayor
and Members of the Commission
FROM: Jim Ha
..~it?~~
SUBJECT: City Mana is Report
Beach Dune Walkovers; The City Commission adopted an ordinance in 1996 that created
Section 6-24(b) of the City Code that states "all residential dune crossover structures shall be
constructed in accordance with the beach dune walkover design as displayed in the plan attached
to Ordinance 25-9b-29.... Walkovers will have strict adherence to this design and shall not vary
more than ten (10) percent in height to allow for changes in topography of the dune system." A
copy of the plan is attached for your reference.
This drawing conflicts with State regulations in a couple of areas and an amendment to the City
Code should be considered. The first area is where the city plan shows a 25 inch minimum
sepazation between the dune line and the bottom of the beach walkover. Considering that
walkovers require at least a two by eight support with planking on top, the height of the dune
walkover according to the City plan has to exceed 30 inches. State building requirements say
that a handrail should be placed on any walkable structure that is more than 30 inches above
ground level. A second problem comes up with the steps to the beach. In many (most?)
instances, it is impossible to create a stairway that goes over the dune line without being 30
inches above the sand. Again, state code requires handrails in this case.
Because State code takes precedence over local ordinances, and because handicap accessibility is
difficult to obtain by closely following the dune line, virtually all of the beach walkovers that
have been constructed in Atlantic Beach since the adoption of this ordinance have had handrails
although it was the intent of the City Commission to limit them. It is requested that the City
Commission provide guidance as to how the City ordinance should be amended so as not to
conflict with State regulations.
Interpretation of City Code Section 3-11 Consumption, Possession of Open Container on
Public Property; Section 3-11 of the City Code states that "It shall be unlawful for any person
to consume alcoholic beverages upon the public properties within the city.... Such public
property shall include but not be limited to, roads, streets, highways, pazks and the ocean beach."
The code goes on to say in the next section that "The City Manager may, for special events, grant
permits for the consumption of beer and wine and the possession of open containers of beer and
AGENDA ITEM # 9A
MAY 27, 2008
wine upon public properties within the city, provided... no alcohol shall be consumed out of
doors in public or park areas, except for up to four (4) festivals in any one (1) calendaz yeaz."
This is to ask the City Commission for an interpretation of what all is included in "special
events". Cleazly, the "Dancin in the Streets festival" is a special event for which the approval of
alcohol consumption in public streets is permitted. However, the city also receives several
requests per year for approval of neighborhood block parties where one or two blocks are closed
to traffic and alcohol is consumed. Usually these aze on lesser-traveled neighborhood streets and
are intended only for the residents of that block or that neighborhood. Does the City
Commission consider these block parties to be included in the total of four events maximum per
year, are they excluded from that numeric limit yet acceptable when reasonable conditions for
traffic safety are applied, or should they be prohibited?
AGENDA ITEM # 9A
MAY 27, 2008
Z
0
n i
a~ ~n
~x r~r~s
xnz sra~a~
u
T Y P !CAL P L A N
scN~~: 1/4~ ~ ~_o-
~~
T
rPICAL. SECTt4N
S C A 1. E t/ 4` ~ .. a.
BE~4C}! 5T10R1A PROfII.E
;AIAXIMEJAf EXFE~C'1ED RECESSION}
NdtE: PIJICE STEPS ON 9I:ACN SIOl:
TO LEVEL OF WIJpNINI BFJICH RECESSION
OtJigNGi A SERE STORY.
http://libraryl .municode.com/default/DocView/10377/img/6-24 5/14/2008
IRON 11ECETATION