Agenda2011_0920rev
AGENDA
Tuesday | September 20, 2011 | 6:00 pm
Commission Chambers | 800 Seminole Road | Atlantic Beach, Florida
904.247.5800 | www.coab.us
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. VERIFICATION OF QUORUM
B. RECEIPT OF SPEAKERS’ COMMENT CARDS
II. AGENDA ORGANIZATION
A. ADOPTION OF MEETING MINUTES – AUGUST 16, 2011
B. VERIFICATION OF NOTICES
C. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS / INTERESTS
D. DEFERRAL OF ITEMS
III. EXCEPTIONS – NONE
IV. VARIANCES
A. DEFERRED ITEMS TO BE HEARD – NONE
B. NEW ITEMS TO BE HEARD
1. ZVAR 11-00100054
ADDRESS: 66 W 7th Street
OWNER: Kenneth D Wise
AGENT: Kenneth D Wise
REQUEST: Rear Yard Dimensional Variance
2. ZVAR 11-00100055
ADDRESS: 1604 Coquina Place
OWNER: Paul Hinder
AGENT: Fabio Fasanelli
REQUEST: Side Yard Dimensional Variance
3. ZVAR 11-00100056
ADDRESS: 341 12th Street
OWNER: Charles Freshwater
AGENT: Michael Phillips
REQUEST: Rear Yard Dimensional Variance
V. WAIVERS – NONE
VI. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS – NONE
VII. ZONING AMENDMENTS – NONE
VIII. MINOR MODIFICATIONS & APPEALS – NONE
IX. ORDINANCES – NONE
X. OLD BUSINESS – NONE
XI. NEW BUSINESS – NONE
XII. INFORMATION
A. FLORIDA PLANNING OFFICIALS HANDBOOK
XIII. ADJOURNMENT
C
i
t
y
o
f
A
t
l
a
n
t
i
c
B
e
a
c
h
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
B
O
A
R
D
Ch
r
i
s
L
a
m
b
e
r
t
s
o
n
,
C
h
a
i
r
|
B
l
a
i
n
e
A
d
a
m
s
|
K
e
l
l
y
E
l
m
o
r
e
|
K
i
r
k
H
a
n
s
e
n
|
H
a
r
l
e
y
P
a
r
k
e
s
|
B
r
e
a
P
a
u
l
|
P
a
t
S
t
r
a
t
t
o
n
Ma
t
t
h
e
w
S
c
h
e
l
l
h
o
r
n
,
M
i
l
i
t
a
r
y
R
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
v
e
NOTICE: All information related to the item included in this agenda is available for review at the City of
Atlantic Beach Planning and Zoning Department. Interested parties may attend the meeting indicated in
this notice and speak regarding agenda items. Additionally, comments may be mailed to the address
above. If any person chooses to appeal any decision made by the Community Development Board with
respect to any matter considered at this meeting, that person 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 any 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 at (904) 247-5800, 800 Seminole Road, Atlantic Beach, Florida 32233, not
later than five (5) days prior to the date of this meeting.
Draft Minutes of the August 16, 2011 regular meeting of the Community Development Board
Page 1 of 3
1 2
3
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE 4
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD 5
August 16, 2011 6
7
8
The regular meeting of the Community Development Board was convened at 6:04 pm on 9
Tuesday, August 16, 2011 in the City Hall Commission Chambers, located at 800 Seminole 10
Road in Atlantic Beach. In attendance were Building Official Michael Griffin, Principal Planner 11
Erika Hall, Board members Kelly Elmore, Kirk Hansen, Chris Lambertson, Harley Parkes and 12
Patrick Stratton. Members Blaine Adams and Brea Paul were absent. 13
14
1. CALL TO ORDER. Chairman Chris Lambertson called the meeting to order at 6:04 pm. 15
Mr. Stratton arrived at 6:06 pm. 16
17
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE JULY 19 , 2011 MEETING. Chairman Lambertson 18
called for a motion to approve the minutes of the July 19, 2011 meeting. 19
20
MOTION: Mr. Parkes moved to approve the minutes of the July 19, 2011 meeting, as 21
written. Seconded by Mr. Elmore, the motion carried, 5-0. 22
23
3. RECOGNITION OF VISITORS. There were no visitors present. 24
25
4. OLD BUSINESS. There was no old business for consideration. 26
27
5. NEW BUSINESS. 28
ORDINANCE NO. 25-11 -42. AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF 29
COMMISSIONERS OF THE CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA, 30
AMENDING CHAPTER 8 FLOOD HAZARD AREAS OF THE CODE OF 31
ORDINANCES, RELATING TO FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION, IN ORDER 32
TO ADOPT, TO THE EXTENT APPLICABLE, THE REGULATIONS AND 33
POLICIES SET FORTH IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA MODEL FLOOD 34
DAMAGE PREVENTION ORDINANCE; PROVIDING FOR STATUTORY 35
AUTHORIZATION, FINDINGS OF FACT, PURPOSE, AND OBJECTIVES; 36
PROVIDING FOR DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING FOR GENERAL PROVISIONS; 37
PROVIDING FOR ADMINISTRATION; PROVIDING FOR PROVISIONS FOR 38
FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION; PROVIDING FOR VARIANCE 39
PROCEDURES; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CHAPTER 8 FLOOD HAZARD 40
AREAS, AS AMENDED, IN ITS ENTIRETY, PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND 41
Draft Minutes of the August 16, 2011 regular meeting of the Community Development Board
Page 2 of 3
SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION INTO THE CODE OF LAWS 42
AND ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 43
44
Building Official Michael Griffin, who is also the Certified Floodplain Manager for the 45
City of Atlantic Beach, explained that the City is a member of the National Flood 46
Insurance Program (NFIP) and participates in the Community Rating System (CRS) 47
which results in flood insurance discounts upon successful completion of certain 48
activities, such as keeping our ordinances current with State and Federal regulations. 49
Currently, residents of the City enjoy a 15% discount on flood insurance. 50
51
Mr. Griffin continued, explaining that over the last two years, the Federal Emergency 52
Management Agency (FEMA) has been working on new Flood Insurance Rate Maps 53
(FIRMs), and they have requested local regulations be updated prior to the publication of 54
the new maps, scheduled for November 2011. Essentially, the City already observes or 55
complies with all the revised language. However, to remain consistent with the NFIP, 56
and to support the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the adopted 2020 Comprehensive 57
Plan, the land development regulations providing for flood hazard areas, need to be 58
revised. 59
60
Mr. Lambertson asked what portion of the City was located in a flood zone. Mr. Griffin 61
explained that FEMA is trying to educate the public that all property is located within a 62
flood zone. The probability of being flooded during a particular type of event is what 63
determines a property’s flood zone designation. Those properties located in flood zone X 64
are outside the probability of being flooded by a 100-year event, and generally are not 65
required to carry flood insurance, but are recommended to do so because of the margin of 66
error and unpredictability of some situations. That being said, Mr. Griffin explained that 67
approximately one-third of the City is located in a flood zone other than X, and therefore 68
has a higher probability of being flooded and is mandated to carry flood insurance. Mr. 69
Elmore added that these areas are not necessarily where most people would expect them 70
to be, noting that much of the oceanfront is at a higher elevation due to the dune system, 71
while the lower areas are around the creeks and the Intracoastal. 72
73
Mr. Lambertson asked how an average citizen would determine their flood zone. Mr. 74
Griffin said that surveyors generally note flood zones on property surveys, but if someone 75
looks at an old survey, that information might be outdated. He noted that, as FEMA 76
transitions to a completely digital system, up-to-date information will be more readily 77
available, adding that the City of Jacksonville (Duval County) already has put up a 78
website with both the current and preliminary designations. 79
80
Board members reviewed the revised language, and Mr. Elmore asked if the language 81
came straight from FEMA, and Mr. Griffin said that it did. 82
83
MOTION: Kelly Elmore moved that the Board recommend approval to the City 84
Commission of proposed Ordinance No. 25-11-42, revising Chapter 8, Flood Hazard 85
Areas, of the Municipal Code of Ordinances for the City of Atlantic Beach, as 86
written and provided to this Board, finding that the language is consistent with the 87
Draft Minutes of the August 16, 2011 regular meeting of the Community Development Board
Page 3 of 3
purpose and intent of Chapter 24, Zoning, Subdivision and Land Development 88
Regulations, and the authority and responsibilities bestowed upon this Board by 89
Section 24-47, in furtherance of the goals, objectives and policies of the adopted 90
2020 Comprehensive Plan. Harley Parkes seconded, and the motion carried 91
unanimously, 5-0. 92
93
6. OTHER BUSINESS NOT REQUIRING ACTION. None. 94
95
7. ADJOURNMENT. Mr. Lambertson adjourned the meeting at 6:42 pm. 96
97
98
_______________________________________ 99
Chris Lambertson, Chairman 100
101
102
103
_______________________________________ 104
Attest 105
AGENDA ITEM IV.B.1
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT
September 20, 2011 Public Hearing
Zoning Variance, ZVAR-2011-03 (11-00100054)
To: Community Development Board
From: Erika Hall
Principal Planner
Date: September 13, 2011
Subject: ZVAR-2011-03
Applicant: Kenneth D Wise (Owner)
66 W 7th Street.
Atlantic Beach, Florida 32233
Requested Action: Request for a Variance from Sec. 24-107(e) (2) to reduce the required twenty
(20) foot rear yard setback to fifteen (15) feet to allow for the construction of 12’ x 12’ addition to
one dwelling unit of an existing two-family residential structure located in the Residential General
(RG) Zoning District at 66 W 7th Street.
STAFF COMMENTS
Staff was contacted on several occasions during the past few months by building contractor Larry
Rice on behalf of the owner regarding possible alterations to the Wise property. In mid July, Mr.
Rice proposed a 12’ x 12’ addition to the existing structure, and staff conducted a thorough review of
the property and reported the following findings on July 21st via email to Mr. Rice, who in turn
relayed the same to Mr. Wise:
• The structure at 66 W 7th Street is one dwelling unit of an attached two-family structure.
According to Section 24-88(a), paragraph 2, “Dwelling units attached by an type of solid,
continuous or connected roof…shall be considered as a two-family dwelling or a
townhouse.” This is evident according to the original construction plans.
• According to Section 24-88(c), “Adjoining two-family or townhouse dwelling units shall be
constructed at substantially the same time or in a continuous sequence unless an existing
structure is being renovated within the same footprint”. Staff interpreted this to mean that a
structural addition cannot be made to a single unit of a two-unit dwelling. Staff found no
provision for variance or waiver of this standard. However, upon Mr. Wise’s appeal of this
SEPT 20, 2011 - AGENDA ITEM IV.B.1
ZVAR-2011-03 (11-00100054)
Page 2 of 4
administrative determination and recommendation of the City Manager, the City
Commission rejected staff’s interpretation of this provision only, and recommended that Mr.
Wise apply for this variance.
• According to Section 24-107(e)(2), the minimum required rear yard setback for this property
is twenty (20) feet. Upon examination of an the submitted survey, which is to scale 1”= 20’,
staff determined that there is 24.5’ from the rear property line to the existing rear wall of the
structure, leaving only 4.5’ of buildable area. Therefore, a 12’ x 12’ addition would encroach
upon the required rear yard by seven and one-half (7 ½) feet, rather than the five (5) feet Mr.
Wise has requested. Further, staff previously advised both Mr. Rice and Mr. Wise that there
are no extenuating circumstances that meet the grounds for approval of such a variance, as
listed in Section 24-64(d):
o (1) Exceptional topographic conditions of or near the property – The Wise property
is relatively flat with less than 2-ft variation from W 7th Street, to the lot directly
behind, according to the most recent (2010) 1-ft contour interval topographic layer in
the AB GIS.
o (2) Surrounding conditions or circumstances impacting the property disparately from
nearby properties – There are no such conditions or circumstances of the physical
environment. The Wise property is the mirror image of the unit at 68 W 7th Street,
and units 66-68 were developed identically to units 70-72 and 76-78, located to the
west.
o (3) Exceptional circumstances preventing the reasonable use of the property as
compared to other properties in the area – There are no such exceptional
circumstances preventing reasonable use of the property. As mentioned above, this
unit, along with the five directly to the west and two others at the end of the block but
fronting Orchid Street, are developed as substantial two-family structures, with each
having a single-car garage, three bedrooms, two bathrooms, and 1,506 total square
feet of area (1,152 living area; 301 garage; 36 storage; 17 porch).
o (4) Onerous effect of regulations enacted after platting or after development of the
property or after construction of improvements on the property – These units were
constructed in 1996, and there have been no changes to the land development
regulations affecting these properties since development.
o (5) Irregular shape of the property warranting special consideration – The lots on
which these two-family structures were constructed were standard rectangular shape,
as demonstrated on the Section H plat, found in Official Records Plat Book 18, Page
34, Block 72.
o (6) Substandard size of lot of record warranting a variance in order to provide for
reasonable use of the property – The four two-family structures located on Block 72
of Section H, were constructed on six individual platted lots, with Lots 1-5 being 50’
wide by 102’ deep or 5,100 square feet in area each; and Lot 6 being 70’ wide by
102’ deep, or 7,140 square feet in area. The units were constructed under a unified
development plan that considered the area of the entire block (345’ wide by 102’
deep, or 35,190 square feet or 0.81 acres) as well as the maximum allowable density
(14 units per acre). Though up to eleven (11) units could have been legally
constructed on the property, only eight (8) were. According to Section 24-107(d)(1),
SEPT 20, 2011 - AGENDA ITEM IV.B.1
ZVAR-2011-03 (11-00100054)
Page 3 of 4
the RG Zoning District requires a minimum of 6,200 square feet for the construction
of a two-family structure upon lands designated as medium density, meaning that
3,100 square feet would be required for each individual dwelling unit. The resultant
dimensions of the Wises’ “duplex” lot are 40’ wide by 102’ deep, or 4,800 square
feet, thus exceeding the minimum required.
• Mr. Wise asserts that his family needs the additional space. However, according to Section
24-64(c), grounds for denial of a variance, “Variances shall not be granted solely for personal
comfort or convenience, for the relief from financial circumstances or for relief from
situations created by the property owner”.
• Mr. Wise also claims that a precedent has been set because a sun porch has been constructed
on the rear of another unit to the west of his. Staff investigated the permit archives and found
that no approvals were granted for that porch, and has turned the matter over to Code
Enforcement. Still, Section 24-64(g) states “Nonconforming characteristics of nearby lands,
structures or buildings shall not be grounds for approval of a variance”.
• According to Section 24-107(f)(1), the maximum impervious surface allowed is 50%.
According to the submitted plan, the proposed addition will increase result in a total
impervious surface area of 54%, thus requiring a waiver from that provision by the City
Engineer.
In summary, staff does not find that he grounds for approval of a variance are sufficiently met. In
taking final action on this request, the Board should carefully consider and provide findings of fact
consistent with the provisions of Section 24-64, Variances, in support of their action.
(c) Grounds for denial of a Variance. No variance shall be granted if the Community
Development Board, in its discretion, determines that the granting of the requested variance
shall have a materially adverse impact upon one or more of the following.
(1) Light and air to adjacent properties.
(2) Congestion of streets.
(3) Public safety, including traffic safety, risk of fire, flood, crime or other threats to
public safety.
(4) Established property values.
(5) The aesthetic environment of the community.
(6) The natural environment of the community, including environmentally sensitive
areas, wildlife habitat, protected trees, or other significant environmental resources.
(7) The general health, welfare or beauty of the community.
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.
(d) Grounds for approval of a Variance. A variance may be granted, at the discretion of the
Community Development Board, for the following reasons.
(1) Exceptional topographic conditions of or near the property.
(2) Surrounding conditions or circumstances impacting the property disparately from
nearby properties.
(3) Exceptional circumstances preventing the reasonable use of the property compared to
SEPT 20, 2011 - AGENDA ITEM IV.B.1
ZVAR-2011-03 (11-00100054)
Page 4 of 4
other properties in the area.
(4) Onerous effect of regulations enacted after platting or after development of the
property or after construction of improvements upon the property.
(5) Irregular shape of the property warranting special conditions.
(6) Substandard size of a lot of record warranting a variance in order to provide for the
reasonable use of the property.
(e) Approval of a Variance. To approve an application for a variance, the Community
Development Board shall find that the request is in accordance with the preceding terms and
provisions of this Section and that the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the
purpose and intent of this Chapter. In granting a variance, the Community Development
Board may prescribe conditions in conformance with and to maintain consistency with the
City Code. Violations of such conditions, when made a part of the terms under which the
variance is granted, shall be deemed a violation of this Chapter, and shall be subject to
established Code Enforcement procedures.
(f) Approval of a Lesser Variance. The Community Development Board shall have the
authority to approve a lesser variance than requested if the lesser variance shall be more
appropriately in accord with the terms and provisions of this Section and with the purpose
and intent of this Chapter.
AGENDA ITEM IV.B.2
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT
September 20, 2011 Public Hearing
Zoning Variance, ZVAR-2011-04 (11-00100055)
To: Community Development Board
From: Erika Hall
Principal Planner
Date: September 13, 2011
Subject: ZVAR-2011-04
Applicant: Fabio Fasanelli (Contractor) on behalf of Paul Hinder (Owner)
1604 Coquina Place
Atlantic Beach, Florida 32233
Requested Action: Request for a Variance from Section 24-108(e)(3) i, to reduce the required
combined fifteen (15) foot side yard setback for a single-family home to a combined nine and one-
half (9 ½) feet – 5.8’ on north and 3.7’ on south - to allow for the construction of 19’ x 30’ two-story
addition to an existing two-story single-family structure located in the Residential General Multi-
Family (RG-M) Zoning District at 1604 Coquina Place. Also requested is relief from Section 24-
151(b)(1) xii, which requires screened enclosures and pool cages be located a minimum of five (5)
feet from rear or side lot lines, and Section 24-164(b)(3) which requires swimming pools be located a
minimum of five (5) feet from rear or side lot lines.
STAFF COMMENTS
Mr. Fasanelli inquired as to whether previous variances existed for the subject property, and with
staff finding no evidence of such, he requested that staff review the existing survey and proposed
plan to determine if a side yard variance was feasible. Upon review, staff found that the subject
property, platted as Lot 4, Block 4 of Ocean Grove Unit No 1 (Plat Book 15, Page 82) is of an
irregular shape, tapering from a measured 55.45’ in width at the front property line adjacent to
Coquina Place right-of-way, to only 35.00’ in width at the rear property line, common to Lot 10,
Block 4. According to Section 24-64(d)(5), “Irregular shape of the property warranting special
conditions” is sufficient grounds for the Community Development Board to approve such a request.
SEPT 20, 2011 - AGENDA ITEM IV.B.2
ZVAR-2011-04 (11-00100055)
Page 2 of 3
The proposed addition will impact the northern side yard, extend four (4) feet beyond the existing
exterior wall, but not beyond the existing a/c pad, while the southwest corner of the existing structure
already encroaches upon the southern side yard, reducing it to 3.8’ at one point according to survey.
Mr. Fasanelli also originally requested relief from Section 24-151(b)(1) xii, which requires screened
enclosures and pool cages be located a minimum of five (5) feet from rear or side lot lines, and
Section 24-164(b)(3) which requires swimming pools be located a minimum of five (5) feet from
rear or side lot lines. However, he has since reconfigured the pool and enclosure such that both
should be adequately accommodated within minimum provisions.
In taking final action on this request, the Board should carefully consider and provide findings of fact
consistent with the provisions of Section 24-64, Variances, in support of their action.
(c) Grounds for denial of a Variance. No variance shall be granted if the Community
Development Board, in its discretion, determines that the granting of the requested variance
shall have a materially adverse impact upon one or more of the following.
(1) Light and air to adjacent properties.
(2) Congestion of streets.
(3) Public safety, including traffic safety, risk of fire, flood, crime or other threats to
public safety.
(4) Established property values.
(5) The aesthetic environment of the community.
(6) The natural environment of the community, including environmentally sensitive
areas, wildlife habitat, protected trees, or other significant environmental resources.
(7) The general health, welfare or beauty of the community.
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.
(d) Grounds for approval of a Variance. A variance may be granted, at the discretion of the
Community Development Board, for the following reasons.
(1) Exceptional topographic conditions of or near the property.
(2) Surrounding conditions or circumstances impacting the property disparately from
nearby properties.
(3) Exceptional circumstances preventing the reasonable use of the property compared to
other properties in the area.
(4) Onerous effect of regulations enacted after platting or after development of the
property or after construction of improvements upon the property.
(5) Irregular shape of the property warranting special conditions.
(6) Substandard size of a lot of record warranting a variance in order to provide for the
reasonable use of the property.
SEPT 20, 2011 - AGENDA ITEM IV.B.2
ZVAR-2011-04 (11-00100055)
Page 3 of 3
(e) Approval of a Variance. To approve an application for a variance, the Community
Development Board shall find that the request is in accordance with the preceding terms and
provisions of this Section and that the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the
purpose and intent of this Chapter. In granting a variance, the Community Development
Board may prescribe conditions in conformance with and to maintain consistency with the
City Code. Violations of such conditions, when made a part of the terms under which the
variance is granted, shall be deemed a violation of this Chapter, and shall be subject to
established Code Enforcement procedures.
(f) Approval of a Lesser Variance. The Community Development Board shall have the
authority to approve a lesser variance than requested if the lesser variance shall be more
appropriately in accord with the terms and provisions of this Section and with the purpose
and intent of this Chapter.
AGENDA ITEM IV.B.3
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT
September 20, 2011 Public Hearing
Zoning Variance, ZVAR-2011-05 (11-00100056)
To: Community Development Board
From: Erika Hall
Principal Planner
Date: September 19, 2011
Subject: ZVAR-2011-05
Applicant: Michael Phillips (Contractor) on behalf of Charles Freshwater (Owner)
341 12th Street
Atlantic Beach, Florida 32233
Requested Action: Request for a Variance from Section 24-104(e)(2), to reduce the required rear
yard setback from twenty (20) feet to six (6) feet to allow for the construction of a single-family
home on a property located in the Residential Single-Family, Large Lot (RS-L) Zoning District at
341 12th Street.
STAFF COMMENTS
The subject property is Selva Verde Lot 2 (Plat Book 60, Page 150), which is one of three lots
created by the replatting of all of Lot 33 and part of Lot 34, Block 1, Selva Marina Unit 1 (Plat Book
23, Page 4). As originally platted in 1951, Lot 34 measured approximately 90’ wide by
approximately 170’ deep, and had an area of about 15,300 square feet. Lot 33, a rounded corner lot,
measured approximately 128’ wide by approximately 180’ deep, and had an area of about 23,000
square feet. As was the case with most units of Selva Marina, there was a 30’ – 35’ wide platted
building restriction line along all streets. This platted building restriction line far exceeds the typical
required front yard zoning setback of 20’, but so did the average Selva lot size far exceed the then-
typical lot sizes of 5,000 – 7,500 square feet.
The Selva Verde plat in 2006 resulted in lots ranging in size from approximately 10,000 square feet
to approximately 11,400 square feet, and the original platted building restriction lines of 35’ from
12th Street right-of-way and 30’ from Selva Marina Circle right-of-way were maintained.
Enforcement of these platted building restriction lines, along with the required side and rear yard
SEPT 20, 2011 - AGENDA ITEM IV.B.3
ZVAR-2011-05 (11-00100056)
Page 2 of 3
setbacks prescribed for RS-L lots results in an excessive limitation on the buildable area of Lot 2, as
compared to the other two lots of the Selva Verde plat, as described below and on the attached map.
TABLE 1. SELVA VERDE LOT ANALYSIS: BUILDABLE AREA
SELVA VERDE LOT 1 (FORD) 2 (FRESHWATER) 3 (LAMBERTSON)
TOTAL AREA (SF)* 9,982.92 10,961.11 11,392.59
BUILDABLE AREA (SF)* 4,712.71 3,943.99 5.985.03
BUILDABLE AREA (%) 47.21 35.98 52.53
* Areas obtained from GIS measurement of lots and buildable area.
Thus the applicant is seeking a variance to reduce the required rear yard setback from twenty (20)
feet to six (6) feet to allow for the construction of a single-family home with a modest footprint. The
proposed first floor consists of 1,759 square feet of habitable space as well as 633 square feet of
garage space and 876 square feet of open porches, and it should be noted that the proposed structure
is positioned on the lot such that no habitable space will encroach on the required yard. The total
impervious surface area, according to the proposed plan for the Freshwater residence and including
driveway, sidewalk and a/c pads, is 4,636 square feet, or 43% coverage of total lot area
TABLE 2. SELVA VERDE LOT ANALYSIS: IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA
SELVA VERDE LOT 1 (FORD) 2 (FRESHWATER) 3 (LAMBERTSON)
MAIN HOUSE,
PORCHES*
3,828
incl above
1,759
876
4,096
incl above
GARAGE* incl above 633 incl above
POOL HOUSE* --- --- 428
PATIO / DECK* --- incl below 734
DRIVEWAY,
WALKWAYS*
1,204 1,318 ** 418
EQUIPMENT
PADS*
27 50 50
TOTAL IMPERVIOUS
SURFACE AREA* 5,059 4,636 5,726
TOTAL AREA (SF)*** 9,982.92 10,961.11 11,392.59
ISA (%) 50.68% 42.29% 50.26%
* ISAs taken from plans submitted to/approved by City of Atlantic Beach.
* * 50% credit given for those ISAs marked.
***Total Lot Areas obtained from GIS measurements of lots.
SEPT 20, 2011 - AGENDA ITEM IV.B.3
ZVAR-2011-05 (11-00100056)
Page 3 of 3
In taking final action on this request, the Board should carefully consider and provide findings of fact
consistent with the provisions of Section 24-64, Variances, in support of their action.
(c) Grounds for denial of a Variance. No variance shall be granted if the Community
Development Board, in its discretion, determines that the granting of the requested variance
shall have a materially adverse impact upon one or more of the following.
(1) Light and air to adjacent properties.
(2) Congestion of streets.
(3) Public safety, including traffic safety, risk of fire, flood, crime or other threats to
public safety.
(4) Established property values.
(5) The aesthetic environment of the community.
(6) The natural environment of the community, including environmentally sensitive
areas, wildlife habitat, protected trees, or other significant environmental resources.
(7) The general health, welfare or beauty of the community.
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.
(d) Grounds for approval of a Variance. A variance may be granted, at the discretion of the
Community Development Board, for the following reasons.
(1) Exceptional topographic conditions of or near the property.
(2) Surrounding conditions or circumstances impacting the property disparately from
nearby properties.
(3) Exceptional circumstances preventing the reasonable use of the property compared to
other properties in the area.
(4) Onerous effect of regulations enacted after platting or after development of the
property or after construction of improvements upon the property.
(5) Irregular shape of the property warranting special conditions.
(6) Substandard size of a lot of record warranting a variance in order to provide for the
reasonable use of the property.
(e) Approval of a Variance. To approve an application for a variance, the Community
Development Board shall find that the request is in accordance with the preceding terms and
provisions of this Section and that the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the
purpose and intent of this Chapter. In granting a variance, the Community Development
Board may prescribe conditions in conformance with and to maintain consistency with the
City Code. Violations of such conditions, when made a part of the terms under which the
variance is granted, shall be deemed a violation of this Chapter, and shall be subject to
established Code Enforcement procedures.
(f) Approval of a Lesser Variance. The Community Development Board shall have the
authority to approve a lesser variance than requested if the lesser variance shall be more
appropriately in accord with the terms and provisions of this Section and with the purpose
and intent of this Chapter.
LOT 3
LOT 2
LOT 1
12th St
S e l v a M a r i n a C r
0 50 10025Feet
ZVAR-11-00100056 LOT ANALYSISSelva Verde
[PLAT BOOK 60, PAGE 150]Total Lot AreaBuildable AreaSV Platted YardRS-L Required RearYardRS-L Required Side Yard
Lot 1 (Ford)Lot 2 (Freshwater)Lot 3 (Lambertson)
TLA: 9,982.92 SQ FT
BA: 4,712.71 SQ FT
BA: 47.21% TLA
TLA: 10,961.11 SQ FT
BA: 3,943.99 SQ FT
BA: 35.98% TLA
TLA: 11,392.59 SQ FT
BA: 5,985.03 SQ FT
BA: 52.53% TLA