Board continues Case B after applicant fails to appear; staff clarifies pool and ADU questions

The Daytona Beach Board of Adjustment voted 5-0 to continue Case B to the next regular meeting after the applicant failed to appear.

The chair told the board the applicant was not present. Assistant city attorney David Russell advised the board that, while a deferral is usually requested by the applicant prior to the hearing, the board retains discretion to continue the item to the next meeting or proceed on the materials in the packet.

Board members and staff discussed elements of the submitted site plan. Staff said the pool shown on the plans is located in front of the garage and would not require the reduced setbacks being considered in other items, noting pool setbacks measured to the waterline are different. A board member expressed confusion about a balcony above the garage and whether that space was intended for storage or as living quarters; staff told the board that if the applicant intends that space to be an accessory dwelling unit, the applicant should include that information in the application because different variances could be required.

Afterward a board member moved to continue the item until the owner could attend and answer outstanding questions; the motion was seconded and the board voted to continue the application 5-0.

The continuation means staff will expect the applicant to appear at the next regular meeting and to clarify whether the upper-level balcony is storage or an ADU and to provide any revised plans or materials addressing setback questions before further action.