Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Atlantic Beach denies variances for two narrow oceanfront lots after residents raise fire‑safety and neighborhood‑character concerns
Summary
After a lengthy quasi‑judicial hearing and public testimony, the commission denied appeals seeking reduced side‑yard setbacks for 1025 and 1039 Beach Ave (two narrow oceanfront lots). Commissioners and residents cited fire‑spread risk and neighborhood character; applicants argued the lots are historically platted and undevelopable without relief.
The Atlantic Beach City Commission voted Aug. 11 to deny variance appeals for two narrow oceanfront lots at 1025 and 1039 Beach Avenue after an extended hearing that included staff presentations, applicant testimony, multiple public speakers and commission deliberation.
Amanda Askew, neighborhoods department director, summarized staff background: both lots were platted in 1913, were significantly damaged by a June 2022 fire and demolished, and owners were advised of a limited period to reconstruct. The Community Development Board denied the variance requests at a May hearing (6–0), finding they did not meet the grounds for relief under LDR §24‑65.
Applicants Nathan Bussey (contractor) and Nathan Gray (broker) said the properties are substandard, that the original footprint and historic platting make the current LDRs onerous, and that the requested relief would allow reasonably sized oceanfront homes. Gray acknowledged the application initially misstated one lot’s buildable width as 30 feet rather than 33 feet but said the discrepancy would not change the core request: "We're simply here asking to enforce their property rights," he said.
Property owner Jerry Harvard (owner of 1039) told the commission he could not afford to rebuild in the same footprint and said forcing a 15‑ to 18‑foot wide structure would create an out‑of‑character, vertical structure he compared to a "toothpick." He said he had tried to sell the lots combined for years with little market interest.
Several neighbors opposed the variances on safety and character grounds. Norma Rizzi, who said she and others remain scarred by the 2022 fire, urged the commission to consider how narrow gaps increase the risk of structure‑to‑structure fire spread, hamper firefighting access and reduce equipment effectiveness. "Buildings that are too close together significantly increase the risk of fire spread," Rizzi said. Scott Carnes, who owns units in a nearby row of townhouses, urged development of the lot but said a single‑home solution or other designs would better preserve neighborhood character.
Commissioners discussed alternatives — conditioning an approval on 5‑foot setbacks on both sides and 5‑foot interior separation (a 5/5/5/5 approach), replatting, townhome construction, and whether the seven statutory grounds for variance were met. The applicants said they could design to a 5/5/5/5 layout and that construction remedies (concrete block in the Coastal Construction Control Line area) could mitigate fire concerns.
After deliberation the commission held roll‑call votes on the appeals; the record shows the motions to deny the appeals carried with a 3–2 vote. The city clerk recorded the roll calls before the mayor declared the motion passed and the variances denied. The commission gave no variance relief for either 1025 or 1039 Beach Avenue.
What this means: The property owners may consider replatting, proposing different conditions, or other design solutions; if denied, repetition of the same application would be limited by local rules for a period (staff noted the rules for substantially similar subsequent applications).
