88 Ocean Boulevard 15-ZVAR-1035 Staff Report CDB 07.13.2015 CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM 3.A
CASE NO 15‐ZVAR‐1035
Request for a variance as permitted by Section 24‐64 for relief from the Section 24‐
88(b) requirement for adjoining townhouse dwelling units to be constructed of
substantially the same architectural style, colors and materials at Atlantic Beach
Subdivision “A” south half of Lot 6 Block 34 (aka 88 Ocean Blvd).
LOCATION 88 OCEAN BLVD
APPLICANT DR. DAVID DOWARD
DATE JULY 13, 2015
STAFF DEREK REEVES, PLANNER
STAFF COMMENTS
The applicant, Dr. David Doward, is the owner of 88 Ocean Boulevard. The property is a three story
townhouse where each half of the building and land is owned by separate people. The building was
constructed in 2006 with a flat roof and stucco siding on both units that were mirror images of each other
and connected by a concrete block wall down the middle of the building. Dr. Doward would like to replace
the siding with horizontal lap siding while making some minor architectural changes on his portion of the
building.
A variance is needed because Section 24‐88(b) states that, “adjoining two‐family or townhouse dwelling
units shall be constructed of substantially the same architectural style, colors and materials.” The proposed
changes will result in different exterior materials and architectural style from the original construction and
what exists on the adjoining unit, which is in its original condition.
The reason for the requested variance requires a little history. Dr. Doward bought his unit in 2013 knowing
that there were documented stucco failures. Dr. Doward hired a contractor to make repairs when it was
discovered that the water intrusion issues were worse than they thought. The contractor began to replace
the stucco with new stucco as permitted. Prior to completion, the building was still facing water issues and
Dr. Doward hired a new contractor and an engineer. The engineer recommended building a drainage
system behind the siding. An architect designed a system that would allow water to pass behind the
exterior finish but elected to go with horizontal lap siding after the original failure of the stucco and the
subsequent failure of the second attempt of using stucco. Due to issues with permitting and the change of
contractor, the horizontal lap siding was not approved by the city and a stop work order was placed on the
property after work had started. This led to the variance application.
The city’s Building Official, Dan Arlington, has stated that stucco is an approved building material and does
not believe that the design of the structure prohibits its use. He added that a properly designed drainage
system behind the siding could work for any accepted siding material. It is expected that the adjoining unit
has similar issues that will have to be addressed at some point, but it is unknown when or how they will
make the necessary repairs.
Page 2 of 4
Update
In response to comments from the public and the board at the June 2nd, 2015 meeting, the applicants have
altered their design and provided additional information. The design will now keep the original
construction garage door and paint the new columns on the balconies to match the siding. When compared
to the neighboring unit, the only differences other than the siding material will be the narrower columns
and lack of an arch above the second floor balcony. They have also provided copies of the report on the
condition of the house and the building plans.
While the differences in architectural style have been minimized in the new design, the main issue of the
different siding material still requires the variance to be approved.
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.
In their application, the applicant has identified the condition of the structure and the need to make
repairs resulting from construction defects that other properties in the area do not have to resolve.
(3) Exceptional circumstances preventing the reasonable use of the property as compared to other
properties in the area.
In their application, the applicant stated that the continual issues resulting from stucco siding has
prevented the completion of their home and subsequently the ability for them to move in and live in the
home they bought two years ago.
(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 4 of 4
REQUIRED ACTION
The Community Development Board may consider a motion to recommend approval of 15‐ZVAR‐1035, request
for relief from the Section 24‐88(b) requirement for adjoin townhouse dwelling units to be constructed of
substantially the same architectural style, colors and materials at Atlantic Beach Subdivision “A” south half of
Lot 6 Block 34 (aka 88 Ocean Blvd), 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 above.
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 recommend denial of 15‐ZVAR‐1035, request for
relief from the Section 24‐88(b) requirement for adjoin townhouse dwelling units to be constructed of
substantially the same architectural style, colors and materials at Atlantic Beach Subdivision “A” south half of
Lot 6 Block 34 (aka 88 Ocean Blvd), upon finding that the request is either inconsistent with the definition of a
variance, or it is not in accordance with the grounds of approval delineated in Section 24‐64(d), 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.