Atlantic Beach adopts amended stormwater ordinance requiring on‑site retention above 35% lot coverage

The Atlantic Beach City Commission voted 4–1 on Oct. 13 to adopt an amended ordinance changing residential stormwater rules, requiring that development resulting in more than 35% impervious lot coverage provide on‑site stormwater storage for the entire impervious area, while exempting projects that add less than 400 square feet cumulatively.

Mayor Ford, who proposed the amendment, framed it as an incentive to discourage “wall‑to‑wall” development and to protect trees and neighborhood character while preserving the city’s ability to revisit standards after a planned stormwater study. “Development that results in more than 35% impervious lot coverage shall be required to provide on‑site stormwater storage for the entire impervious surface area,” the mayor read as the amendment’s operative language.

Staff warned the change raises legal and process questions because the city’s adopted land‑development regulations must be consistent with the comprehensive plan. Amanda Askew, neighborhoods director, told the commission that the Community Development Board and staff believe removing on‑site retention entirely is inconsistent with the comp plan and recommended initiating complementary comp‑plan amendments or waiting for the stormwater master plan update before making wholesale changes.

Residents filled the commission chambers, with many urging delay until the stormwater study is complete. “There’s a huge difference in there between 35% exemption and going to 36 and providing storage for all 36% of the lot coverage,” said resident Richard Arthur, arguing the proposed threshold and exemption carry material consequences for homeowners. Multiple speakers said removing the requirement now could increase flooding, strain parks and creeks such as Sherman's Creek, and affect insurance premiums.

Technical staff and consultants largely supported the compromise amendment. Rick Carper, public works director, said a recent review of permits found required on‑site storage typically cost under 1% of total project values and that the mayor’s amendment was an “adequate substitute” for full elimination. City engineer Steve Swan cautioned against wholesale removal: “If we make a mistake, we’re undoing 20 years of work that we’re not going to be able to get back,” he said, supporting a targeted 35% threshold pending neighborhood‑specific study.

Commissioner discussion emphasized tradeoffs between fairness to homeowners, environmental protection, and administrative practicality. A procedural motion to end debate on the amendment passed, and commissioners then approved the ordinance as amended by roll call. The final recorded tally was four ayes and one nay; the mayor reported the amendment and ordinance were approved as amended.

The commission directed staff to pursue the already‑budgeted stormwater study and noted the city has sought approximately $300,000 in FEMA grant funding to pay for expanded modeling (LIDAR and neighborhood‑scale analysis). Mayor Ford said the commission will consider funding the study from city funds if FEMA support is not received by the commission’s next meeting.

What happens next: the ordinance was adopted as amended and will be implemented consistent with the city’s procedural rules. Staff will begin the stormwater master‑plan work described to the commission and return with timing, funding contingency details, and any needed comp‑plan amendments.

Votes at a glance (selected): Ordinance 90‑25‑257 (as amended) — Adopted, vote 4–1. Further items the commission approved that evening (resolutions listed at the meeting) are recorded in the meeting minutes and staff files.