Submitted by Suanne Z. Thamm
Reporter – News Analyst
June 22, 2016 4:49 p.m.
Once again the Fernandina Beach City Commission (FBCC) turned its attention to the future of a property consisting of two undeveloped parcels at the corner of Lime and 14th Streets, one in the city and the other in the county. After considerable discussion and public input, as well as a lengthy presentation by the property’s agent, the FBCC voted unanimously on first reading at their June 21, 2016 Regular Meeting, to approve Ordinance 2016-12, changing the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code to modify the definition of “Net Density.” The FBCC has endorsed the proposed amendments for transmittal to the State Land Planning Agency for the purpose of a sufficiency review in accordance with statutory requirements.
The proposed change, which was approved by city staff but denied by the city’s Planning Advisory Board (PAB), would allow the applicant to include wetlands and wetland transitional areas in the overall calculation of “net buildable land area.” The applicant argued that the requested changes allow for properties containing these important environmentally sensitive lands to “have more flexibility and creativity to design the site to preserve wetlands.”
Background
Discussion over the suitability of development plans for this property dates back to 2014 when First National Bank South, the property owner, requested and was denied a variance to impact wetlands on this property. The dispute came before a Special Magistrate later that year. When the parties could not reach agreement, the Special Magistrate issued an Order and Recommendation upholding the applicant’s position. That ruling was not binding on the city, which rejected the order.
City staff attempted to fashion a solution, which the FBCC first accepted and then rejected in October 2015. For a more complete discussion of the background, see earlier Fernandina Observer articles, including http://fernandinaobserver.org/2015/02/05/fbcc-rejects-special-magistrates-order-on-wetlands-during-3rd-hearing/.
Applicant’s presentation
At the June 21 meeting, Spurgeon Richardson presented the applicant’s case requesting approval of the change recommended by city staff. He presented a series of slides detailing the steps that his client has gone through to obtain permission to build on the site, including both the Special Magistrate’s ruling and the permit from the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD).
The developer’s goal is to build a complex of housing units to meet the needs of moderate-income earners. There would be approximately 260 units built on the combined properties, with rents starting at $1,000 per month.
Richardson indicated that he could proceed with a plan approved by SJRWMD that has a greater impact on wetlands. But he has submitted an alternative plan that would allow the developer more design options to lessen impact on wetlands with the requested change in the definition of net density. Net density would be approved by multiplying the “maximum allowable units per acre” by the “net buildable land area” expressed in acreage. “Net buildable land area” means those contiguous land areas under common ownership proposed for development.
Nature of wetlands on property
Richardson in presenting his applicant’s case, suggested that the wetlands on the site are low-grade wetlands, created by a mosquito ditch in the 1930’s. Richardson introduced Brian Spahr of LG3 Environmental Solutions, Inc., who briefly reviewed his findings regarding the wetlands on the property. In his 2014 report to Gillette and Associates, he characterized the 13.3 acres of jurisdictional wetlands found on the property as follows:
The property is completely surrounded by busy roadways and existing development which severs any connection the on-site wetlands would have to off-site habitats/natural areas thereby limiting the property’s value to local wildlife. Additionally, the property accepts stormwater from the surrounding area with little or no outlet causing portions of the wetlands to be unnaturally inundated further limiting the value and function the on-site wetlands provide to the surrounding area. … Considering the wetlands location, the isolated nature and unnaturally excessive hydrology it is our professional opinion the value and function the on-site wetlands provide to the surrounding area should be considered minimal at best.
Richardson characterized the wetlands as isolated and low quality, created by a mosquito ditch and runoff from adjacent property, including roads. Since there is no natural outlet for the ditch and runoff water from surrounding built up areas, the water stagnates and serves as a large breeding ground for mosquitos. He said that under his development plan, that ditch would either be cleaned out and left open or piped to be connected to other parts of the ditch which are today piped.
Public Input
Seven speakers addressed the items, echoing many of the remarks made at public hearings last year. Two speakers—former City Commissioner Eric Childers and Clinch Kavanaugh, the applicant’s attorney—stressed the need for affordable housing within the city. Childers noted that the area has become a dump and a public health nuisance, overrun by mosquitos. Kavanaugh expressed praise for city staff and his client who have worked together to develop a design that helps save wetlands while providing for an aesthetically pleasing residential development that can accommodate moderate-income residents and workers.
Margaret Kirkland, representing the Amelia Tree Conservancy, in expressing fears for the future of wetlands, also expressed concerns that existing infrastructure cannot support new residential development on such a scale. Lynn Williams characterized Richardson’s presentation as a “superb sales pitch,” adding that the underlying problem was greed, since the developer was not satisfied with the number of dwelling units that could be built under existing code. Julie Ferreira said that the issue was about the future of the community. Faith Ross expressed concern that annexing wetlands into the city could have an adverse impact on city insurance rates.
Judith Lane, who chairs the PAB, stressed that she was speaking for herself, not the PAB. While acknowledging that providing affordable housing was a noble cause, she said that the county land needs to be annexed into the city immediately. She expressed her hope to see “greening” that is not money. She reminded commissioners that the developer has received approval to proceed from SJRWMD.
FBCC Discussion
Following public comment, Commissioner Len Kreger spoke and reported that his informal query to the North Florida Land Trust had generated no interest in purchasing the land in question. He said that the land has become a homeless camp, in addition to being mosquito infested.
In what appeared to be an attempt to head off the “slippery slope” argument, Commissioner Tim Poynter spoke to the uniqueness of the property lying in both the city and the county. He expressed appreciation to the developer for his willingness to save more of the wetlands than required by SJRWMD. He did not see this as a situation that would be replicated throughout other areas of the city. “It is a good plan, considering the options,” Poynter said. He added that the developer would move forward one way or the other possibly via litigation with the city.
Vice Mayor Robin Lentz commended both the citizens and the developer for getting engaged and listening to each other. “We need affordable housing that takes cars off our roads,” she said, pointing to the many people in the city who might choose to walk to work or ride bicycles if they could afford housing.
Commissioner Roy Smith expressed his support for what he termed a “workable plan.” He said that he has looked at both sides of the argument, but ultimately believes that the city needs more affordable housing. “We don’t want to get into a costly lawsuit over this,” he said. “I prefer to spend city money where we can get something for it.”
Mayor Johnny Miller spoke last, citing his visits to the site that revealed lots of birds and butterflies, contradicting earlier opinions that the area was a low quality wetland. He asked, “If the wetlands are low grade, then why would the developer be trying to preserve them?” He asked to see the city’s professionally conducted environmental assessment of the property before the final vote on the matter.
Commissioner Len Kreger moved approval of the item and was seconded by Commissioner Tim Poynter. The item passed on a 4-1 vote, with Mayor Miller dissenting.
Editor’s Note: Suanne Z. Thamm is a native of Chautauqua County, NY, who moved to Fernandina Beach from Alexandria,VA, in 1994. As a long time city resident and city watcher, she provides interesting insight into the many issues that impact our city. We are grateful for Suanne’s many contributions to the Fernandina Observer.