2010-10-19_CDBminutes v Minutes of the October 19, 2010 regular meeting of the Community Development Board
S' 1.yr
S r /�a
u r
____!
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
The regular meeting of the Community Development Board was convened at 6:15 pm on Tuesday,
September 21, 2010 in the City Hall Commission Chambers, located at 800 Seminole Road in Atlantic
Beach. In attendance were Principal Planner Erika Hall and Community Development Board members
Lynn Drysdale, Ellen Glasser, Kirk Hansen, Chris Lambertson, and Harley Parkes. Blaine Adams and
Joshua Putterman were absent.
1. CALL TO ORDER. Commencement of the meeting was delayed due to the absence of the applicant
for the only business item on the agenda. Chairman Chris Lambertson asked if the meeting had been
properly noticed and the applicant notified of the meeting. Ms. Hall responded that the property is
posted with the standard notice signage, and that Community Development Sonya Doerr had told her
she spoke with the applicant's designated local contact, prior to taking scheduled leave. Mr.
Lambertson called the meeting to order at 6:15 pm.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 MEETING
MOTION: Kirk Hansen moved that the Board approve the minutes of the September 21, 2010
meeting, as written. Harley Parkes offered a second, and the motion carried unanimously.
3. RECOGNITION OF VISITORS. There were no visitors.
4. OLD BUSINESS. There was no old business for consideration.
5. NEW BUSINESS.
a. ZVAR- 2010 -03. Request from Angela and William Acri for a Variance to reduce the required
five (5) foot rear and side yard setbacks to zero (0) feet to allow for the construction of a
detached garage up to the rear and side property lines of a developed lot located at 44 Coral
Street, within the Residential General, Multi- Family District.
Mr. Lambertson noted that neither the applicant nor an authorized agent of the applicant was
present. He stated, and other members of the Board agreed, they have never had an applicant not
appear. Mr. Lambertson said that applicants must be properly notified and given the opportunity to
appear. Lynn Drysdale asked if the Board needed to re- notice the application and re- schedule it for
the next regularly scheduled meeting. Kirk Hansen stated that, if the applicant had been properly
noticed but failed to attend, then he had no discomfort proceeding with review. Ellen Glasser and
Page 1 of 3
Minutes of the October 19, 2010 regular meeting of the Community Development Board
Harley Parkes agreed, saying they felt there was sufficient information in the application and staff
report, which, when combined with observations from their individual site visits, would allow
them to take action.
Mr. Lambertson asked Ms. Hall to summarize the request. Ms. Hall explained that the request is
specifically related to the southern portion of a platted 50' x 115' lot of record within Unit 1 of the
Ocean Grove subdivision, said lot containing a two -unit townhouse divided in ownership. The
applicant requests a variance to reduce the required five (5) foot rear and side yard setbacks to zero
(0) feet in order to construct a detached garage in the southwest corner of the lot. As justification,
the applicant states that the owners who currently reside out of the country "have an expensive
vehicle that needs to be secured by a building" and that the way the buildings are oriented, the
existing garage cannot be accessed. Ms. Hall noted that the current owners purchased the
southernmost townhouse in June 2010, and thus should have been aware of the existing conditions
of the property prior to closing.
Further, the applicant stated that the proposed garage would be constructed over an existing slab.
However, staff is suspicious of this slab; Inspection of a 2009 aerial photograph does not indicate
presence of a slab, but instead shows a large tree and vegetation in the proposed location, Nor does
the applicant's survey, dated May 25, 2010, show a slab in the proposed location, but instead,
shows only a section covered by an existing wooden deck. The Public Works Director visited the
site and reported that the slab appears to have been recently poured since the concrete forms were
still in place, and there were no signs of staining or weathering of the concrete. Staff could find no
permits for the pouring of the slab. Additionally, staff estimates that existing development on this
lot, excluding the above - described slab, far exceeds the 50% impervious surface area limit that has
been in effect since January 2002. Another issue of concern would be the inability to provide the
required ten (10) foot separation between primary and accessory structures. Sketches of the
proposed garage show a cricket which ties the roof of the garage in to the roof of the primary
structure.
Mr. Lambertson opened the hearing to the public for this item, and with there being no comment,
closed that portion and brought the item back to the Board for motion and discussion. Mr. Hansen
summarized that construction of the proposed garage would contravene several other provisions of
the land development regulations, besides the rear and side yard setbacks for which the variance
was being sought, and he was unable to find acceptable grounds compatible with the parameters
within which the Board is able to grant approval. Mr. Parkes agreed, and it was consensus that the
applicant's expressed need for this request was in direct conflict with Section 24 -64(c) which states
"Variances shall not be granted solely for personal comfort or convenience, for relief from
financial circumstances, or for relief from situations created by the property owner."
Mr. Lambertson asked, if the request were denied, what would be done about the slab. Ms. Hall
said a copy of the decision, along with background information including 2009 aerial photos and
the May 2010 survey, would be forwarded to the Building Department and Code Enforcement for
further action.
MOTION: Kirk Hansen moved that the Board deny approval of ZVAR- 2010 -03, request for
variance from Section 24- 151(b).1.v. to reduce the required minimum five (5) foot setback
from rear and side property lines, to zero (0) feet, to allow for the construction of a detached
garage, upon finding that none of the existing conditions were consistent with the grounds for
Page 2 of 3
Minutes of the October 19, 2010 regular meeting of the Community Development Board
approval of a variance, as detailed in Section 24 -64(d) of the Land Development Regulations,
but that the primary reason for the request was consistent with the grounds for denial of a
variance, as detailed in Section 24- 64(c). Harley Parkes seconded the motion, and it passed
unanimously, 5 -0.
6. OTHER BUSINESS NOT REQUIRING ACTION.
a. Use -by- Exception Approval Procedures
Ms. Hall reported that Ms. Doerr had conferred the Board's previous request regarding review of
the Use -by- Exception Approval Procedures to the City Commission, and the Commission had
determined that the current procedures were sufficient and would not be changed at this time.
7. ADJOURNMENT. Mr. Lambertson adjourned the meeting at 6:40 pm.
7
ris Lam l ertson, Chatrman
Attest Erika 14at (I Pciici. pt.( iiiie'
Page 3 of 3