FBCC approves controversial ordinances on downtown density, land use/zoning changes for N. 2nd & Broome Street properties

Submitted by Suanne Z. Thamm
Reporter – News Analyst
June 7, 2017 11:36 a.m.

 

 

At their June 6, 2016 Regular Meeting, the Fernandina Beach City Commission enacted six ordinances on Second and Final Reading:

  • 2017-10 amending parts of the Land Development Code dealing with Bosque Bello Cemetery;
  • 2017-12 increasing density in the Central Business District;
  • Four interrelated ordinances (2017-13 to 2017-16) dealing with changing land use and zoning for property on North 2nd and Broome Streets.

There was no public comment or FBCC discussion prior to approving the cemetery ordinance on a 5-0 vote. The amended sections include: definition clarifications; bulk cemetery lot purchase; transfer of ownership; perpetual care services and memorial; vault installations; and interment.

One speaker asked that the density ordinance be tabled until the related parking issues could be addressed. Commissioners did not respond to this request and voted unanimously to approve the item without further discussion. First Reading had attracted considerable public input (see https://fernandinaobserver.com/2017/04/19/fernandina-beach-downtown-density-increase-approved-4-1/).

Despite significant public input at First Reading on the four ordinances dealing with land use change and zoning for North 2nd and Broome Streets (see https://fernandinaobserver.com/2017/05/11/land-use-zoning-changes-proposed-for-n-2nd-broome-streets/), no one from the audience addressed the issues at Second Reading, and the changes were approved without further discussion on a 4-1 vote (Vice Mayor Len Kreger dissenting).

The FBCC also unanimously passed on First Reading Ordinance 2017-18, dealing with City issuance of special beach driving permits for emergency vehicles, handicapped persons, certain fishing licenses, and senior citizens. Changes were proposed to clarify parts of the existing code for enforcement purposes. Deciphering which fishing licenses qualify for the special permit has been very difficult for staff to analyze due to changing state laws regarding fishing licenses. The City Commission had directed the City Attorney to amend Section 90-48 to provide for special permits for driving on the beach south of Sadler Road only for disabled persons with an annual maximum of fifteen permits.

There was no public comment on Ordinance 2017-18, which will return for a Second Reading and public hearing at a future meeting.

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.

7 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Marlene M Chapman
Marlene M Chapman(@crew2120)
6 years ago

Suanne, thank you for all of your amazing coverage of the meetings. Is it possible that no one in the “audience” spoke at second reading as no one listened at first reading and because no one on the commission seems to truly listen to what the citizens want? Does anyone see that there are fewer and fewer people at the meetings? The same people go, sometimes the same people speak and most times, nothing…..they call that beating a dead horse, banging your head against the wall, enough is enough I guess…..so sad.

Betsie Huben
Betsie Huben(@betsie-huben)
6 years ago

Keying in on what Ms. Chapman has to say above – once you have spoken to a topic and it has become a part of the public record, generally we are admonished not to repeat what others have said or what we ourselves have said previously. I thought that “once for the record” is the polite rule to keep meetings to time frames.

Marlene M Chapman
Marlene M Chapman(@crew2120)
6 years ago
Reply to  Betsie Huben

Betsy, I cannot agree with your statement of “once for the record” as if we truly want change, we must speak out loud and as often as possible. I understand about keeping meetings to a “reasonable” time frame, but when there is an issue that must be brought forth, the only way to do so is to speak for your full three minutes and let your voice be heard….maybe. We have seen, on multiple issues, that thoughts and feelings are repeated by the same or different people. The reason for this, I believe, is to be assured that the topic is not forgotten. If we can “discuss” horse droppings for over 45 minutes, I believe that we can discuss more important issues even longer.

Marlene M Chapman
Marlene M Chapman(@crew2120)
6 years ago

Betsie, sorry that I misspelled your name.

Betsie Huben
Betsie Huben(@betsie-huben)
6 years ago

It’s all good Ms. Chapman!

tony crawford
tony crawford (@guest_49026)
6 years ago

Interesting points from both Marlene and Betsie. I think we have seen meetings where the Commission has been swayed by the outpouring of the public on certain topics. The closing of Center Street is one that comes to mind. I think much has to do with the topic being discussed and actually the amount of social media coverage it is getting. Social media is a great tool used to rally the population to do the right thing or the wrong thing, which in many cases , are completely indifference to the actual truth of a topic. With respect to ” once for the record ” to keep meetings to time frames I disagree. We all have a right to get up and voice our own opinion in our own special way. Personally I could care how long a public meeting goes on for. The important thing with any public meeting is to allow as many as possible to get up and get involved. This is not only our right, but it is also what keeps the interest up and tells the general public that the City not only wants, but also encourages their input. If we feel that our Commission is not hearing the voice of the people, election day is the simplest cure.

Marlene M Chapman
Marlene M Chapman(@crew2120)
6 years ago

Tony, I do hear what you’re saying about the outpouring of speakers for the Centre St closing and that makes my point even stronger….if we can accomplish change for one thing, we can do it for others. The length of the meetings means nothing to me either as speaking at these meetings is what it’s all about. As I stated to Betsie, we can talk about a subject, that in my opinion, is minor until we’re blue in the face so should we do the same for an issue that so many are passionate about. Again, we need to have citizens show up to the meetings in force but that won’t happen until they feel that they, and what they have to say, will make a difference. an yes, the election is the simplest cure, but we must show up for that also.