2011-02-15_CDBminutes Minutes of the February 15, 2011 regular meeting of the Community Development Board
j
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
The regular meeting of the Community Development Board was convened at 6:03 pm on Tuesday,
February 15, 2011 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
Blaine Adams, Kelly Elmore, Ellen Glasser, Kirk Hansen, Chris Lambertson, Harley Parkes and Brea
Paul.
1. CALL TO ORDER. Chairman Chris Lambertson called the meeting to order at 6:03 pm.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 16, 2010 MEETING.
MOTION: Ellen Glasser moved to approve the minutes of the November 16, 2010 meeting, as
written. Kirk Hansen offered a second, and the motion carried unanimously, 7 -0.
3. RECOGNITION OF VISITORS. Chairman Lambertson introduced and welcomed new Board
members Kelly Elmore and Brea Paul. He also expressed gratitude for the service of former Board
members Joshua Putterman (4 years) and Lynn Drysdale (8 years). Board member Ellen Glasser then
recognized the hard work and dedication of Community Development Director Sonya Doerr.
4. ELECTION OF OFFICERS.
MOTION: Kirk Hansen moved to elect Chris Lambertson as Chair and Ellen Glasser as Vice -Chair
of the Community Development Board for calendar year 2011. Harley Parkes second the motion and
it passed unanimously, 7 -0.
5. OLD BUSINESS. None.
6. NEW BUSINESS.
a. ZVAR- 2011 -01. Request from Donald and Karen Wolfson for a Variance from Section 24-
106(e)(2) to reduce the required twenty (20) foot rear yard setback to seven (7) to allow for
the construction of a residential structure on a non - conforming lot of record at 1725 Beach
Avenue.
Ms. Hall introduced this item and explained that the subject parcel was a legal nonconforming lot
of record with fifty (50) feet of depth and seventy (70) feet of frontage on the western side of what
Page 1 of 4
Minutes of the February 15, 2011 regular meeting of the Community Development Board
was once called Garage Approach Roadway, now known as the northern extent of Beach Avenue.
Though never officially platted, this area was historically sold off to the oceanfront property
owners for for the construction of garages and /or guest quarters or surface parking.
Chairman Lambertson invited applicant Donald Wolfson to address the Board regarding his
request. Mr. Wolfson provided Board members with a historical timeline of development on and
around the subject property, and explained the significance of the 1986 /7 annexation of the area
previously known as Seminole Beach to the City of Atlantic Beach (COAB) jurisdiction. Prior to
that event, the parcel was located within the City of Jacksonville (COJ), and such substandard
parcels were allowed to be developed according to COJ regulations, particularly, a ten (10) foot
rear yard setback as opposed to the COAB required twenty (20) foot rear yard setback. Mr.
Wolfson noted that numerous owners of similar nonconforming lots have been granted variances
and allowed to construct residential structures over the years. As the owner of the subject parcel
since 1981, he expressed his desire for the same allowances, and noted that without a variance, a
structure built according to current COAB regulations could be no more than ten (10') feet deep.
Mr. Wolfson also provided Board members with photos of a recently constructed garage apartment
on the parcel addressed as 1734 Beach Avenue, and explained that he wished to build a similar
structure.
Ms. Hall noted though the 1734 Beach structure was located seven (7) feet from the rear property
line, no variance had been required because the new structure was built in the footprint of a
previously permitted, legal garage apartment.
Ms. Glasser noted Staff had determined that the height of any structure would be limited to twenty -
four- and - one -half (24 ' /2) feet. She asked what effect a variance might have on the height, to which
Mr. Wolfson replied none, explaining that the height was proportional to the total lot area.
Mr. Lambertson opened the public hearing and invited comments.
Donald Wanstall (1723 Ocean Grove Drive), whose property abuts the southwest corner of the
subject property spoke in opposition to the requested variance and stated that he had also submitted
his opinion via email. He called attention to the standards for approving and denying a variance, in
particular that "nonconforming conditions of adjacent properties shall not be considered" and a
variance "shall not be [granted] for personal comfort, welfare ".
Jo Ann Ruggiero (1725 Ocean Grove Drive), whose property directly abuts the western side of the
subject property, also spoke in opposition to the requested variance and stated she had been told
the lots were substandard and therefore were undevelopable, and thus construction would never
occur on them.
Barbara James (1727 Ocean Grove Drive), whose property directly abuts the western side of the
subject property submitted a letter in opposition to the requested variance to Ms. Ruggiero, who
read the letter to Board members and submitted a copy for the file.
John Laliberte (1729 Ocean Grove Drive), whose property directly abuts the northwest corner of
the subject property submitted a letter in opposition to the requested variance to Board members
via email, and Ms. Hall noted that it too had been added to the file.
Page 2 of 4
Minutes of the February 15, 2011 regular meeting of the Community Development Board
Mr. Wolfson informed Mr. Lambertson that he had two letters in support of his application, the
first being from Ms. Helen Lane (1721 Beach Avenue) and the second being from Robert &
Forrest Parrish (1731 Beach Avenue). Mr. Wolfson read each letter and copies were provided for
the file.
Mr. Lambertson asked if there were others wishing to speak for or against the application, and with
no further comment, he closed the public hearing and opened the floor to Board members. Ms.
Glasser asked, with respect to property taxes, if the substandard lot subject to this request was
billed separately, or together with the Wolfsons' oceanfront lot. Mr. Wolfson replied that the two
are currently tied together and billed as a single tax parcel, but upon the advice of the COJ
Property Appraiser's Office, he is in the process of separating them. Ms. Hall confirmed that the
Wolfson property is the only one which has the western nonconforming lot tied to the eastern
oceanfront lot, and that there is a law stating lots separated by a right -of -way are to be taxed
separately.
Mr. Elmore said that the annexation essentially resulted in a "taking" because the
"nonconforming" status was applied after the property owner had closed on that property. At the
time of purchase, the property owner had certain rights and expectations as to what could be done
with the property and due to the annexation and imposition of COAB regulations, those rights
were lost. Mr. Lambertson pointed out that zoning codes and land development regulations
evolve, noting that when the current code became effective in 2002, it was acceptable to divide a
one hundred (100) foot lot into two fifty (50) foot lots, but that was not the case now. Mr. Parkes
noted from some perspectives, all zoning could be viewed as takings. Ms. Glasser acknowledged
the property owner's right to "reasonable use" of the property, and noted that without a variance,
an accessory structure, occupying up to six hundred (600) square feet of lot area and built to a
maximum height of fifteen (15) feet could be constructed. Mr. Hansen voiced empathy for both
sides and questioned whether "reasonable use" without a variance was amenable to all parties.
Ms. Glasser asked if the applicant was seeking a variance to construct something for personal use,
or if was for future disposal, to which Mr. Wolfson replied he could not rule out future disposal,
but the immediate plan was development. He told the Board that the required separation into a
separate tax parcel would result in significantly higher taxes, and also added that he had been
required to tie the lot into the City's water & sewer lines at a considerable cost. Mr. Wolfson
emphasized the impact annexation had on such nonconforming lots, and Ms. Glasser asked if there
were specific examples the Board could review. Mr. Wolfson referred to other such
nonconforming lots to the north of his.
Mr. Elmore asked if Mr. Wolfson had considered moving the structure forward, asking for a
reduction of the front yard setback, and stated that he would entertain reducing the front yard to get
more separation in the back. Mr. Lambertson reminded the Board that they could approve a lesser
variance, but a shift or change in location of the requested variance would require due notice,
preventing the Board from acting on such a revision at tonight's meeting. Mr. Parkes added that he
would be in favor of such a revised application, noting that a garage typically requires a minimum
depth of twenty -three (23) feet. However, Mr. Adams expressed concerns for safety with a
diminished front yard, and Mr. Lambertson agreed. Mr. Elmore pointed out that there is typically
four (4) to seven (7) feet of unpaved right of way between pavement and private lots in this
vicinity, and Mr. Parkes noted that the subject lot is seventy (70) feet wide, providing sufficient
space for surface parking next to a structure, rather than directly in front of it.
Page 3 of 4
Minutes of the February 15, 2011 regular meeting of the Community Development Board
Mr. Lambertson called for a motion. Blaine Adams moved that the Board approve the applicants'
requested variance from Section 24- 106(e)(2), reducing the required twenty (20) foot rear yard
setback to seven (7) feet, finding that the subject property met the grounds for approval of a
variance according to Section 24- 64(d)(4) and (6). Kelly Elmore seconded the motion, and Mr.
Lambertson called for discussion. Ms. Glasser said she felt the Board required additional
information regarding the variances granted to, and the development of similar nonconforming lots
also subject to the annexation, and other Board members agreed. Mr. Elmore withdrew his second
and Mr. Adams amended his motion as follows.
MOTION: Blaine Adams moved that the Board defer consideration of ZVAR- 2011 -01 until the
March 15, 2011, so that Staff could research and provide additional historical information and/or
the applicants could amend their application in the spirit of compromise with adjacent property
owners. Harley Parkes seconded the motion and it passed unanimously, 7 -0.
Chairman Lambertson asked Staff to request City Attorney Alan Jensen's attendance at the March
15, 2011 meeting.
7. OTHER BUSINESS NOT REQUIRING ACTION.
8. ADJOU MENT. Mr. Lambertson adjourned the meeting at 7:55 pm.
Chris Lambertson, Chairman
Attest
Page 4 of 4