04.16.2019 CDB Agenda Packet
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
Tuesday / April 16, 2019 / 6:00 PM
Commission Chambers / 800 Seminole Road
1. Call to Order and Roll Call.
2. Approval of Minutes.
A. Minutes of the March 20, 2019 regular meeting of the Community Development Board.
3. Old Business.
4. New Business.
A. ZVAR19-0007 PUBLIC HEARING (Holstar, LLC)
Request for a variance as permitted by Section 24-64, for relief from stormwater retention
and from floodplain compensation as required by Section 24-66 at 650 Begonia Street (Lots
1-6 Block 138 Section “H”).
B. ZVAR19-0003 PUBLIC HEARING (Devajyoti Ghose)
Request for two variances as permitted by Section 24-64, to increase the maximum
impervious surface allowed within the Residential, Single Family (RS-2) zoning district and
for relief from required stormwater retention at 317 East Coast Drive (Lot 25 Atlantic Beach
Terrace).
C. ZVAR19-0006 PUBLIC HEARING (John and Sandra Farhat)
Request for a variance as permitted by Section 24-64, to increase the maximum impervious
surface allowed on a residential lot from 50% as required by Section 24-17 to 58% to allow
for the installation of a swimming pool at 1689 North Linkside Court (Lot 122 Selva Linkside
Unit 2).
D. ZVAR19-0005 PUBLIC HEARING (Ellen Golombek)
Request for a variance as permitted by Section 24-64, to decrease the required side yard
setback from a combined 15 feet with a minimum of 5 feet on either side to a combined
11.5 feet with a minimum of 0 feet on one side at 375 3rd Street (Lot 26 Block 5 Atlantic
Beach).
E. ZVAR19-0008 PUBLIC HEARING (Kyle Stucki)
Request for a variance as permitted by Section 24-64, to reduce the vehicle use area
perimeter landscape buffer for side property lines from 5 feet as required by Section 24-
177(d)(2) to 3 feet and to reduce the minimum required parking from 16 spaces as required
by Section 24-161(h)(8) to 9 spaces to allow the reconfiguration of existing nonconforming
parking at Saltair Section 3 Lots 834-834 and 850 (aka 425 Atlantic Boulevard).
F. UBEX19-0002 PUBLIC HEARING (Thomas Horn)
Request for a use-by-exception as permitted by Section 24-111(c)(3), to allow on-premises
consumption of beer and wine in accordance with Chapter 3 of the code within the
Commercial General (CG) zoning district at 25 West 6th Street.
5. Reports.
6. Public Comment.
7. Adjournment.
All information related to the item(s) included in this agenda is available for review online at www.coab.us and at the City of Atlantic
Beach Community Development Department, located at 800 Seminole Road, Atlantic Beach, Florida 32233. Interested parties may attend
the meeting and make comments regarding agenda items, or comments may be mailed to the address above. Any
person wishing to speak to the Community Development Board on any matter at this meeting should submit a Comment Card located at the
entrance to Commission Chambers prior to the start of the meeting. Please note that all meetings are live streamed and videotaped. The video is
available at www.coab.us.
If any person decides to appeal any decision made by the Community Development Board with respect t o any matter considered at any
meeting may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, including the testimony and evidence upon which any appeal
is to be based.
I n accordanc e wit h the American s with Disabilitie s Act and Section 286.26 of the Florida Statutes , persons with disabilities needin g
special accommodation s to participat e i n this meeting should contact the City not less than three (3) days prior to the date of this meeting
at the address or phone number above.
Page 1 of 3
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
March 20, 2019
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chair Hansen. Ms. Paul, Mr. Major, Mr.
Tingen, Mr. Elmore and Ms. Simmons were all present. Ms. Lanier was absent. Also
present were Director Shane Corbin, Principal Planner Derek Reeves, Board Secretary
Valerie Jones and the City Attorney, Brenna Durden representing the firm Lewis,
Longman and Walker.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Minutes of the February 19, 2019 Regular Meeting of the Community
Development Board.
Mr. Elmore motioned to approve the minutes. Ms. Paul seconded the motion. The
motion carried unanimously.
3. OLD BUSINESS
There was no old business. Chair Hansen spoke about several things that were of
concern to him. There was a brief discussion on what the Community Development
Board does and the purpose of a variance. The Board and Staff agreed to put something
on the website that describes what the variance process is about.
4. NEW BUSINESS
A. COMP19-0002 Ordinance No. 31-19-13 PUBLIC HEARING
An Ordinance of the City of Atlantic Beach, County of Duval, State of Florida,
amending the future land use map of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan to change
the designation of those lands described in attached Exhibit A from Residential
Low (RL) to Commercial (CM); providing for conflict; providing for severability;
and providing an effective date.
Staff Report
Director Corbin presented information on items A and B as they are dependent on each
other. He explained that there is a request for a zoning change that involves two
parcels and three parcels that would be a part of a Future Land Use Map (FLUM)
amendment from Residential Low (RL) to Commercial (CM). The change would be
necessary in the FLUM for the parcels to qualify for the zoning change that they are
requesting. The properties included are the Voo Swar which was built in 1971 as well
as the home to the east and a vacant lot on Lewis Street.
Director Corbin went through the zoning history to show how it changed along the
way. He explained that it went from Business (BB), an old commercial designation, in
1979 to a mix of Commercial General (CG) and Residential General (RG) after 1982. He
Page 2 of 3
explained to the Board how the FLUM has all 3 parcels as RL and the Zoning Map has
1 of the 3 zoned CG. So the request is to rezone the two properties to CG.
He said that there are a couple of steps to the process: 1) extend the Commercial
Future Land Use category to all 3 parcels, 2) extend the Commercial General (CG)
zoning to 2 parcels.
Mr. Major asked Director Corbin if the Voo Swar meets the requirements to exist in a
commercial zone as a business. Director Corbin said he believes so. Mr. Major asked if
it violates any stipulation in the Comp Plan and Director Corbin said it doesn't as long
as they change the Future Land Use designation. It is currently operating as a legal non-
conforming use due to the zoning changes. Mr. Major asked whether Staff had any
history on why the zoning changes so many times. Director Corbin said he didn't have
any minutes or explanations.
The Board discussed how the changes might affect surrounding properties.
Applicant Comment
Lewis Davis introduced himself as the son of Earnest Davis who is the owner of the Voo
Swar (51 Robert Street). He explained that they did not realize that there was a zoning
issue until they had an investor who did some research and discovered it. Mr. Davis
said that is why they are making the request to change the parcel back to Commercial.
Public Comment
Chair Hansen opened the floor to public comment.
Cora Baldwin of 50 Lewis Street introduced herself as the homeowner next to the
vacant lot. She said that although the Voo Swar has been there for a long time, she is
concerned about how the zoning change would affect her home and the surrounding
neighborhood.
Jacinda Head of 1879 George Street introduced herself as a homeowner in the
neighborhood. She said she has concerns about increased traffic and how this change
could affect the community.
Board Discussion
Ms. Simmons said she had concerns about the vacant lot becoming Commercial and
what kind of changes that could bring in the future. Ms. Simmons said her concern is
whether you could put a business there as it is right now. Planner Reeves said there
could not be a commercial property where the house is right now. Ms. Simmons said
she was inclined to go with a zoning change for the Voo Swar property but leave the
vacant lot as it is and discuss making the lot with the home consistent with RL.
Mr. Elmore said he was inclined to let all 3 properties become CM because the Voo
Swar has been there for a long time, it's a family oriented business, has been a stable
business and it uses the vacant lot as part of the business.
Page 3 of 3
Director Corbin said that downzoning the property with the house wasn't part of the
application. Therefore it would not be appropriate to downzone without proper notice.
Ms. Paul agreed with Mr. Elmore's statement as did Mr. Major
Motion
Mr. Elmore motioned to approve COMP19-0002 amending the FLUM and designate all
three parcels as Commercial (CM). Ms. Paul seconded the motion. The motion passed
5-1. Ms. Simmons was the dissenting vote.
B. REZN19-0001 Ordinance No. 90-19-239 PUBLIC HEARING
An Ordinance of the City of Atlantic Beach, County of Duval, State of Florida, rezoning
those lands described in attached Exhibit A from Residential General (RG) to
Commercial General (CG); providing finds of fact; requiring recordation; and
providing an effective date.
Staff Report
Director Corbin said this is a request to rezone 2 of the 3 parcels (51 Robert and 0 Lewis
Street). He told the Board that if this is approved, it would also go to the City
Commission.
Motion
Mr. Elmore motioned to approve REZN19-0001 and rezone both parcels to Commercial
General (CG). Ms. Paul seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-1. Ms. Simmons
was the dissenting vote.
5. REPORTS
There were no reports.
6. PUBLIC COMMENT
There was no public comment.
7. ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Hansen adjourned the meeting at 6:53 p.m.
_______________________________________
Kirk Hansen, Chair
_______________________________________
Attest
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM 4.A
CASE NO. ZVAR19-0007
Request for two variances as permitted by Section 24-64, for relief to the
stormwater retention and floodplain compensation requirements within the
Residential, Single Family (RS-2) zoning district for 6 lots currently being
developed.
LOCATION 650 Begonia Street.
APPLICANT Stephen Starke, Holstar, LLC
DATE April 9, 2019
STAFF Shane Corbin AICP; Director of Planning and Community Development
STAFF COMMENTS
The applicant is Stephen Starke, one of the title managers for the six lots under development at the corner
of West 6th Street and Begonia Street. The property was originally platted in 1944 and single family homes
are planned for each lot. Section 24-66 requires onsite stormwater retention for all development including
single family homes. In addition, 24-66 requires floodplain compensation anytime for an area within a
floodplain is filled for development. Both standards would apply to each lot in questions.
The applicant is requesting relief to the
stormwater retention and floodplain
compensation requirements of Section 24-66
citing two reasons: 1) Surrounding conditions or
circumstances impacting the property disparately
from nearby properties and 2) Onerous effect of
regulations enacted after planting or after
development of the property or after construction
of improvement upon the property.
The applicant believes the tidal canals which
surround the property on three sides make the
stormwater retention requirements and the
floodplain storage compensation requirements of
24-66 unnecessary because the canals discharge
stormwater directly into the Intracoastal
Waterway (ICW).
In addition, providing compensating floodplain
storage volume for areas that are filled below the
Base Flood Elevation (100-year flood stage) is desirable in riverine Special Flood Hazard Areas
(SFHA). This is due to the fact that fill in riverine flood hazard areas take up floodplain storage capacity
and can eventually result in higher flood waters. In this case, the property is located in a SFHA that would
be flooded due to inundation from the ICW and not from riverine upstream drainage. Minor quantities of
fill associated with residential development in the floodplain adjacent to the ICW will not affect the 100-
year flood stage.
Page 2 of 3
ANALYSIS
Section 24-64(b) (1) provides that “applications for a variance shall be considered on a case-by-case basis,
and shall be approved only upon findings of fact that the application is consistent with the definition of a
variance and consistent with the provisions of this section.” According to Section 24-17, Definitions, “[a]
variance shall mean relief granted from certain terms of this chapter. The relief granted shall be only to
the extent as expressly allowed by this chapter and may be either an allowable exemption from certain
provision(s) or a relaxation of the strict, literal interpretation of certain provision(s). Any relief granted
shall be in accordance with the provisions as set forth in Section 24-64 of this chapter, and such relief may
be subject to conditions as set forth by the City of Atlantic Beach.”
Section 24-64(d) provides six distinct grounds for the approval of a variance:
(1) Exceptional topographic conditions of or near the property.
(2) Surrounding conditions or circumstances impacting the property disparately from nearby
properties.
The applicant stated that the property has tidal canals on two sides which alleviate the need for
stormwater attenuation.
(3) Exceptional circumstances preventing the reasonable use of the property as 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.
The property was planted in 1944.
(5) Irregular shape of the property warranting special consideration.
(6) Substandard size of a lot of record warranting a variance in order to provide for the reasonable
use of the property.
Page 3 of 3
REQUIRED ACTION
The Community Development Board may consider a motion to approve ZVAR19-0007, request for a
variance as permitted by Section 24-64, for relief to the stormwater retention and floodplain compensation
requirements within the Residential, Single Family (RS-2) zoning district for 6 lots currently being
developed, upon finding this request is consistent with the definition of a variance, and in accordance with
the provisions of Section 24-64, specifically the grounds for approval delineated in Section 24-64(d) and
as described below.
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 as 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 consideration.
(6) Substandard size of a lot of record warranting a variance in order to provide for the
reasonable use of the property.
Or,
The Community Development Board may consider a motion to deny ZVAR19-0007, request for a
variance as permitted by Section 24-64 for relief to the stormwater retention and floodplain compensation
requirements within the Residential, Single Family (RS-2) zoning district for 6 lots currently being
developed, upon finding this request is not consistent with the definition of a variance, or it is consistent
with one or more of the grounds for denial of a variance, as delineated in Section 24-64(c), described
below.
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 (1) 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 situation created by the property owner.
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM 4.B
CASE NO. ZVAR19-0003
Request for two variances as permitted by Section 24-64, to increase the
maximum impervious surface allowed within the Residential, Single Family
(RS-2) zoning district and for relief from required stormwater retention at 317
East Coast Drive (Lot 25 Atlantic Beach Terrace).
LOCATION 317 East Coast Drive
APPLICANT Devajyoti Ghose
DATE April 5, 2019
STAFF Derek W. Reeves, AICP; Principal Planner
STAFF COMMENTS
The applicant is Devajyoti Ghose, the
owner of 317 East Coast Drive. The
property is zoned residential, single-family
(RS-2) and includes a single family home
completed in 2016. The applicant installed
crushed coquina with flagstone pavers
creating a patio area within the stormwater
retention area in the backyard of the
property without a permit in 2018. The City
cannot administratively approve a permit
for the pavers due to the increase in
impervious area and the location within the
stormwater retention area. The property has
been to the Code Enforcement Board and
that case pending the results of this variance
request.
The Public Works Department, the reviewing department for impervious surface and stormwater retention
requirements within the City, has determined that the permitted impervious surface percentage for the
property without the flagstone pavers is 49.6%. The lot is 5,000 square feet and there are currently 2,481
square feet of impervious area on the property. The applicant is requesting a 20 foot by 10 foot area of the
flagstone pavers, totaling 200 square feet. The addition of 200 square feet of impervious area would put
the property at 53.7% impervious. This is above both the 50% impervious surface limit in the RS-2 zoning
district when the pavers were installed as well as the recently passed reduction in the impervious surface
limit within the RS-2 zoning district to 45%. This results in the need for the first part of the variance.
The second part of the variance is due to the fact that the pavers are located within the stormwater retention
area that was required when the home was constructed in 2016. The pavers fill in a portion of the retention
area that should be 20 feet by 17 feet and one foot deep, which reduces the holding capacity of the retention
area. Additionally, the impervious surface area of the pavers prevents water from being absorbed into the
Page 2 of 4
ground where the ground serves as both storage area and the area for water to filter out of the ponding
area at the surface. The entirety of the originally constructed stormwater retention area has been altered
and functionality cannot be verified by staff. As a result, the applicant is requesting to reduce the required
stormwater retention to zero. The stormwater retention area required for the new home was 649 cubic feet.
Two variances are required from two sections of the code so that a permit can be issued for the pavers:
the first is an increase in the maximum impervious surface percentage allowed within the RS-2 zoning
district; the second is to eliminate the required stormwater retention for the property as required by Section
24-66 as the paver area is located within the retention area required reducing the volume/storage capacity.
Page 3 of 4
ANALYSIS
Section 24-64(b) (1) provides that “applications for a variance shall be considered on a case-by-case basis,
and shall be approved only upon findings of fact that the application is consistent with the definition of a
variance and consistent with the provisions of this section.” According to Section 24-17, Definitions, “[a]
variance shall mean relief granted from certain terms of this chapter. The relief granted shall be only to
the extent as expressly allowed by this chapter and may be either an allowable exemption from certain
provision(s) or a relaxation of the strict, literal interpretation of certain provision(s). Any relief granted
shall be in accordance with the provisions as set forth in Section 24-64 of this chapter, and such relief may
be subject to conditions as set forth by the City of Atlantic Beach.”
Section 24-64(d) provides six distinct grounds for the approval of a variance:
(1) Exceptional topographic conditions of or near the property.
The applicant stated in their application that the grass in the back yard repeatedly died due to the
topography and lack of sun causing mud to block the drains. The flagstone prevents mud from
blocking the drains and allows the system to work.
(2) Surrounding conditions or circumstances impacting the property disparately from nearby
properties.
(3) Exceptional circumstances preventing the reasonable use of the property as compared to other
properties in the area.
The applicant stated in their application that the inability of grass to grow results in a backyard that
is unsightly and unusable.
(4) Onerous effect of regulations enacted after platting or after development of the property or after
construction of improvements upon the property.
The applicants stated in their application that they were unaware of regulations prohibiting them
placing the flagstone and building a swale to prevent runoff into the street, which is semi-permeable
surface that stabilized the dirt and prevents the drains from being clogged.
(5) Irregular shape of the property warranting special consideration.
(6) Substandard size of a lot of record warranting a variance in order to provide for the reasonable
use of the property.
Page 4 of 4
REQUIRED ACTION
The Community Development Board may consider a motion to approve ZVAR19-0003, request for a
variance as permitted by Section 24-64, to increase the maximum impervious surface allowed within the
Residential, Single Family (RS-2) zoning district and for relief from required stormwater retention at 317
East Coast Drive (Lot 25 Atlantic Beach Terrace), upon finding this request is consistent with the
definition of a variance, and in accordance with the provisions of Section 24-64, specifically the grounds
for approval delineated in Section 24-64(d) and as described below.
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 as 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 consideration.
(6) Substandard size of a lot of record warranting a variance in order to provide for the
reasonable use of the property.
Or,
The Community Development Board may consider a motion to deny ZVAR19-0003, request for a
variance as permitted by Section 24-64, to increase the maximum impervious surface allowed within the
Residential, Single Family (RS-2) zoning district and for relief from required stormwater retention at 317
East Coast Drive (Lot 25 Atlantic Beach Terrace), upon finding this request is not consistent with the
definition of a variance, or it is consistent with one or more of the grounds for denial of a variance, as
delineated in Section 24-64(c), described below.
No variance shall be granted if the Community Development Board, in its disc retion, determines
that the granting of the requested variance shall have a materially adverse impact upon one (1) 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 situation created by the property owner.
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM 4.C
CASE NO. ZVAR19-0006
Request for a variance as permitted by Section 24-64, to increase the maximum
impervious surface allowed on a residential lot from 50% as required by
Section 24-17 to 58% to allow for the installation of a swimming pool at 1689
North Linkside Court (Lot 122 Selva Linkside Unit 2).
LOCATION 1689 N Linkside Court
APPLICANT John and Sandra Farhat
DATE April 9, 2019
STAFF Brian Broedell, Planner
STAFF COMMENTS
The applicants are John and Sandra Farhat, the owners of 1689 N Linkside Court. This property is located
within the Selva Linkside Planned Unit Development with a future land use designation of Residential,
Low Density (RL). The applicants bought the property in
September, 2018, and recently submitted a permit for a new
pool on February 21, 2019 (before the new impervious surface
ordinance). The permit was denied due to the property
exceeding the maximum impervious surface allowed on
residential lots.
The property is currently covered in over 70% impervious
surface, making it a nonconforming lot in that respect. Much
of the impervious surface was added to the property between
2006 and 2011, prior to the current owners purchasing the
property. Also, there are no permit records for this additional
impervious surface.
The applicants have expressed their willingness to reduce the
impervious surface coverage of their lot from over 70% to
58% coverage in order to install a swimming pool in the
backyard. However, the permit for the pool cannot be
approved by city staff if the resulting impervious surface
coverage exceeds the maximum allowed. As such, the
applicants are requesting a variance to increase the maximum
impervious surface allowed from 50% to 58% impervious.
Proposed Pool
Page 2 of 3
ANALYSIS
Section 24-64(b) (1) provides that “applications for a variance shall be considered on a case-by-case basis,
and shall be approved only upon findings of fact that the application is consistent with the definition of a
variance and consistent with the provisions of this section.” According to Section 24-17, Definitions, “[a]
variance shall mean relief granted from certain terms of this chapter. The relief granted shall be only to
the extent as expressly allowed by this chapter and may be either an allowable exemption from certain
provision(s) or a relaxation of the strict, literal interpretation of certain provision(s). Any relief granted
shall be in accordance with the provisions as set forth in Section 24-64 of this chapter, and such relief may
be subject to conditions as set forth by the City of Atlantic Beach.”
Section 24-64(d) provides six distinct grounds for the approval of a variance:
(1) Exceptional topographic conditions of or near the property.
(2) Surrounding conditions or circumstances impacting the property disparately from nearby
properties.
The applicant stated that when the home was purchased a couple of months ago, the owner’s had no
idea that they could not install a small pool. The previous owners had installed pavers causing the
lot to be at about 72% impervious surface. The applicant’s researched the area and saw that other
homes with similar lot sizes and lot coverage had pools, so they thought they could install a pool as
well.
(3) Exceptional circumstances preventing the reasonable use of the property as compared to other
properties in the area.
The applicants expressed that with the lot coverage being so high, installing a pool will actually
lower the lot coverage. Further, the applicant’s expressed a willingness to further help drainage
issues by installing permeable pavers and remove the existing pavers.
(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 consideration.
(6) Substandard size of a lot of record warranting a variance in order to provide for the reasonable
use of the property.
Page 3 of 3
REQUIRED ACTION
The Community Development Board may consider a motion to approve ZVAR19-0006, request for a
variance as permitted by Section 24-64, to increase the maximum impervious surface allowed on a
residential lot from 50% as required by Section 24-17 to 58% to allow for the installation of a swimming
pool at 1689 North Linkside Court (Lot 122 Selva Linkside Unit 2), upon finding this request is consistent
with the definition of a variance, and in accordance with the provisions of Section 24-64, specifically the
grounds for approval delineated in Section 24-64(d) and as described below.
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 as 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 consideration.
(6) Substandard size of a lot of record warranting a variance in order to provide for the
reasonable use of the property.
Or,
The Community Development Board may consider a motion to deny ZVAR19-0006, request for a
variance as permitted by Section 24-64, to increase the maximum impervious surface allowed on a
residential lot from 50% as required by Section 24-17 to 58% to allow for the installation of a swimming
pool at 1689 North Linkside Court (Lot 122 Selva Linkside Unit 2), upon finding this request is not
consistent with the definition of a variance, or it is consistent with one or more of the grounds for denial
of a variance, as delineated in Section 24-64(c), described below.
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 (1) 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 situation created by the property owner.
ITEM 4.D
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM 4.D
CASE NO. ZVAR19-0005
Request for a variance as permitted by Section 24-64, to decrease the required
side yard setback from a combined 15 feet with a minimum of 5 feet on either
side to a combined 11.5 feet with a minimum of 0 feet on one side at 375 3rd
Street (Lot 26 Block 5 Atlantic Beach).
LOCATION 375 3rd Street
APPLICANT Ellen Golombek
DATE April 9, 2019
STAFF Brian Broedell, Planner
STAFF COMMENTS
The applicant is Ellen Golombek, the owner of 375 3rd Street. This property is the eastern unit of an
attached two-unit townhouse located within the Residential, Single Family (RS-2) zoning district. The
townhouse shares a common wall with the neighboring unit, resulting in the existing house having a 0
foot setback from the property line. The attached townhouse units are staggered, meaning the interior
footprints are not symmetrical. The applicant’s unit extends closer to the street than the neighboring unit
and vice versa, resulting in a section of the common wall
extending about 8 feet into the backyard of the applicant’s unit.
The applicant is proposing to expand the existing covered porch
and master bedroom in the back of the house. The proposed
porch would be expanded into the backyard (northerly) by
about 13 feet and would have a 0 foot setback. The master
bedroom would be expanded into the existing covered porch by
about 8.8 feet and would result in small part of the expanded
bedroom being 4.5 feet from the western property line. The
expansion would result in roughly an additional 4.4 square feet
of the master bedroom being within the required 5 foot setback.
The required side yard setback within the RS-2 zoning district
is a combined 15 feet with a minimum of 5 feet on either side.
Both the expansion of the master bedroom as well as the porch
would violate this setback requirement by adding covered area
within the required 5 foot setback. The covered porch would
result in about 66 square feet of covered porch area being within
the 5 foot setback and the master bedroom would result in about
4.4 square feet of enclosed living area within the 5 foot setback.
Neighboring
Unit
0’ setback
Page 2 of 3
ANALYSIS
Section 24-64(b) (1) provides that “applications for a variance shall be considered on a case-by-case basis,
and shall be approved only upon findings of fact that the application is consistent with the definition of a
variance and consistent with the provisions of this section.” According to Section 24-17, Definitions, “[a]
variance shall mean relief granted from certain terms of this chapter. The relief granted shall be only to
the extent as expressly allowed by this chapter and may be eith er an allowable exemption from certain
provision(s) or a relaxation of the strict, literal interpretation of certain provision(s). Any relief granted
shall be in accordance with the provisions as set forth in Section 24-64 of this chapter, and such relief may
be subject to conditions as set forth by the City of Atlantic Beach.”
Section 24-64(d) provides six distinct grounds for the approval of a variance:
(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 as compared to other
properties in the area.
The applicant stated that current setback regulations do not adequately address townhomes. The
applicant also explained that they share a common wall with the neighbor and simply want to enclose
their patio and that the setback regulations do not allow for reasonable use of their property since
the setback regulations address single family homes, not townhomes.
(4) Onerous effect of regulations enacted after platting or after development of the property or after
construction of improvements upon the property.
The applicant stated that they would like to extend and enclose the current patio by less than 3 feet
and that most of the patio is currently existing slab and they would only be enclosing it.
(5) Irregular shape of the property warranting special consideration.
(6) Substandard size of a lot of record warranting a variance in order to provide for the reasonable
use of the property.
Page 3 of 3
REQUIRED ACTION
The Community Development Board may consider a motion to approve ZVAR19-0005, request for a
variance as permitted by Section 24-64, to decrease the required side yard setback from a combined 15
feet with a minimum of 5 feet on either side to a combined 11.5 feet with a minimum of 0 feet on one side
at 375 3rd Street (Lot 26 Block 5 Atlantic Beach), upon finding this request is consistent with the definition
of a variance, and in accordance with the provisions of Section 24-64, specifically the grounds for approval
delineated in Section 24-64(d) and as described below.
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 as 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 consideration.
(6) Substandard size of a lot of record warranting a variance in order to provide for the
reasonable use of the property.
Or,
The Community Development Board may consider a motion to deny ZVAR19-0005, request for a
variance as permitted by Section 24-64, to decrease the required side yard setback from a combined 15
feet with a minimum of 5 feet on either side to a combined 11.5 feet with a minimum of 0 feet on one side
at 375 3rd Street (Lot 26 Block 5 Atlantic Beach), upon finding this request is not consistent with the
definition of a variance, or it is consistent with one or more of the grounds for denial of a variance, as
delineated in Section 24-64(c), described below.
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 (1) 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 situation created by the property owner.
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM 4.E
CASE NO. ZVAR19-0008
Request for two variances as permitted by Section 24-64, to reduce the vehicle
use area perimeter landscape buffer for side property lines from 5 feet as
required by Section 24-177(d)(2) to 3 feet and to reduce the minimum required
parking from 16 spaces as required by Section 24-161(h)(8) to 9 spaces to allow
the reconfiguration of existing nonconforming parking at Saltair Section 3 Lots
834-834 and 850 (aka 425 Atlantic Boulevard).
LOCATION 425 Atlantic Boulevard
APPLICANT Kyle Stucki
DATE April 5, 2019
STAFF Derek W. Reeves, AICP; Principal Planner
STAFF COMMENTS
The applicant is Kyle Stucki, representing the ownership group Beach Hospitality, Inc. The property is an
existing motel called the Saltair Motel at 425 Atlantic Boulevard. The property was recently purchased by
the applicant and they are in the process of renovating the property. In addition to updating the buildings,
the plan is to redesign the parking and access to the property by adding a driveway from Sturdivant Avenue
and creating a courtyard between the buildings. Existing Site Proposed Site Plan
Page 2 of 4
The Duval County Property Appraiser’s Office lists the construction dates for the motel room buildings
as 1946 and the two-story house as 1975. The building setbacks along the side property lines and front
property line along Atlantic Boulevard are all nonconforming.
To accomplish the proposed redesign, two variances will be needed. One to reduce landscaping around
the new parking and a second to reduce the required parking.
The first variance is to reduce the required
vehicle use area perimeter landscape area along
the side property lines from five feet to no less
than three feet. Due to the angles of the property
and the angles of the existing buildings, the new
parking area would be angled too. This results
in triangular areas where the parking would
encroach into the landscape area. The image to
the right shows black triangles where the
parking would encroach. The dark green areas
are where landscaping would be increased
beyond the minimum required.
To the east of the encroachment area is the back
of the Hotel Palms and to the west of the
encroachment area are McDonald’s dumpsters.
The second variance is to reduce the required parking from 16 to 9 spaces. The 9 spaces would include 7
standard spaces, 1 garage space and 1 ADA space. All of these would meet code for space dimensions
and drive aisle widths. As part of the remodel, the owners are converting the house into two units, but
keeping the garage and converting one existing room into office/lobby space for a total of 15 units. Code
requires 1 space per unit plus one for staff, resulting in 16 required spaces. The site plan provided shows
the Atlantic Boulevard access with one parking space remaining. This would be used as a check-in space
until the Atlantic Boulevard access can be closed. The parallel space in the plan would then be established
as a check-in space once the Atlantic Boulevard access is closed. Neither space is counted in the 9 in the
request.
The existing hotel has 14 units plus the two-story house where the code would require 1 space per unit
plus 1 for staff and 2 for the house resulting in 17 required spaces. There are currently 13 marked spaces.
One space is in a garage and another is a parallel space. The remaining 11 are 90 degree or near 90 degree
spaces stripped at 15 feet long, which is 3 feet short of the minimum 18 feet required by code. They vary
in width from 7 to 9 feet making several less than the minimum of 9 feet required by code. If the spaces
were 18 feet deep as required, the drive aisle ranges from 10 feet to over the 22 feet required by code.
There are also no existing ADA spaces. At best you could say there are 7 existing spaces, including the
garage and parallel spaces, which meet code.
The applicants are actively seeking code compliant shared parking agreements which could negate or
reduce the need for the second variance to reduce parking.
The two variances needed are:
- A reduction of the side yard perimeter landscape area to no less than three feet, and
- A reduction in the required parking from 16 spaces to 9 spaces.
Page 3 of 4
ANALYSIS
Section 24-64(b) (1) provides that “applications for a variance shall be considered on a case-by-case basis,
and shall be approved only upon findings of fact that the application is consistent with the definition of a
variance and consistent with the provisions of this section.” According to Section 24-17, Definitions, “[a]
variance shall mean relief granted from certain terms of this chapter. The relief granted shall be only to
the extent as expressly allowed by this chapter and may be either an allowable exemption from certain
provision(s) or a relaxation of the strict, literal interpretation of certain provision(s). Any relief granted
shall be in accordance with the provisions as set forth in Section 24-64 of this chapter, and such relief may
be subject to conditions as set forth by the City of Atlantic Beach.”
Section 24-64(d) provides six distinct grounds for the approval of a variance:
(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 as 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.
The applicant stated that the property was constructed in the 1940’s through the 1960’s before
current codes.
(5) Irregular shape of the property warranting special consideration.
The applicant stated that the request is to reduce the landscape area from five feet to three feet in
triangular areas.
(6) Substandard size of a lot of record warranting a variance in order to provide for the reasonable
use of the property.
The applicant stated that two of the proposed parking spaces are encroaching into the greenspace.
Page 4 of 4
REQUIRED ACTION
The Community Development Board may consider a motion to approve ZVAR19-0008, request for a
variance as permitted by Section 24-64, to reduce the vehicle use area perimeter landscape buffer for side
property lines from 5 feet as required by Section 24-177(d)(2) to 3 feet and to reduce the minimum
required parking from 16 spaces as required by Section 24-161(h)(7) to 9 spaces to allow the
reconfiguration of existing nonconforming parking at Saltair Section 3 Lots 834-834 and 850 (aka 425
Atlantic Boulevard), upon finding this request is consistent with the definition of a variance, and in
accordance with the provisions of Section 24-64, specifically the grounds for approval delineated in
Section 24-64(d) and as described below.
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 as 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 consideration.
(6) Substandard size of a lot of record warranting a variance in order to provide for the
reasonable use of the property.
Or,
The Community Development Board may consider a motion to deny ZVAR19-0008, request for a
variance as permitted by Section 24-64, to reduce the vehicle use area perimeter landscape buffer for side
property lines from 5 feet as required by Section 24-177(d)(2) to 3 feet and to reduce the minimum
required parking from 16 spaces as required by Section 24-161(h)(7) to 9 spaces to allow the
reconfiguration of existing nonconforming parking at Saltair Section 3 Lots 834-834 and 850 (aka 425
Atlantic Boulevard), upon finding this request is not consistent with the definition of a variance, or it is
consistent with one or more of the grounds for denial of a variance, as delineated in Section 24 -64(c),
described below.
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 (1) 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 situation created by the property owner.
ITEM
4.F
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM 4.F
CASE NO. UBEX19-0002
Request for a use-by-exception as permitted by Section 24-111(c)(3) to allow
on premises consumption of alcoholic beverages in accordance with Chapter 3
of the code within the Commercial General (CG) zoning district at 25 West 6th
Street.
LOCATION 25 West 6th Street
APPLICANT Pubs n’ Pits (Thomas Horn)
DATE April 9, 2019
STAFF Shane Corbin, AICP; Director of Planning and Community Development
STAFF COMMENTS
The applicant is Pubs n’ Pits who is in the process of opening a retail business at 25 West 6 th Street that
will supply a wide range of home grilling products and beverage draught systems to their customers. The
company is seeking a 2COP license in order to offer in-store tastings of beer and wine products to their
customers during normal business hours. Section 24-111(c)(3) requires a use-by-exception for on premise
consumption of alcoholic beverages.
2COP means “Beer and Wine
Consumption on Premises”. This
license is for a facility that wishes to
sell both beer and wine for on
premises consumption. Many small
restaurants and sandwich shops hold
2COP licenses. Package sales of
beer and wine are allowed in sealed
containers under this license type as
well, provided that package sales are
also allowed by local municipal
ordinance. From the stated licenses
perspective, there are no restrictions
on the number of 2COP liquor
licenses that can be issued by the
Division in any county.
Policy A.1.10.5 of the City’s
Comprehensive Plan states that the
City should encourage commercial development along Mayport Road that provides neighborhood services
and generate daily activity and interaction between residents of the surrounding neighborhoods like
restaurants and similar uses.
Page 2 of 2
SUGGESTED ACTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL
The Community Development Board may consider a motion to recommend approval to the City
Commission of a requested Use-by-Exception (File No. UBEX19-0002) to allow on-premises
consumption of alcoholic beverages in accordance with Chapter 3 of the code within the
Commercial General (CG) Zoning District and located at 25 West 6th Street provided:
1. Approval of this Use-by-Exception is consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
2. Approval of this Use-by-Exception is in compliance with the requirements of Section 24-63, Zoning,
Subdivision and Land Development Regulations.
3. The requested use is consistent with Section 24-111(c) in that the proposed use is found to be
consistent with the uses permitted in the CG zoning district with respect to intensity of use, traffic
impacts and compatibility with existing industrial uses, commercial uses and any nearby residential
uses.
SUGGESTED ACTION TO RECOMMEND DENIAL
The Community Development Board may consider a motion to recommend denial to the City
Commission of a requested Use-by-(File No. UBEX19-0002) to allow on-premises consumption of
alcoholic beverages in accordance with Chapter 3 of the code within the Commercial General (CG)
Zoning District and located at 25 West 6th Street provided:
1. Approval of this Use-by-Exception is not consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
2. Approval of this Use-by-Exception is not in compliance with the requirements of Section 24-63,
Zoning, Subdivision and Land Development Regulations.
3. The requested use is not consistent with Section 24-111(c) in that the proposed use is found to be
inconsistent with the uses permitted in the CG zoning districts with respect to intensity of use, traffic
impacts and compatibility with existing industrial uses, commercial uses and any nearby residential
uses.