FBCC, CRAAB meet to clarify expectations and direction

Submitted by Suanne Z. Thamm

Reporter – News Analyst

Unusually large audience attends joint FBCC-CRAAB meeting on February 12, 2014
Unusually large audience attends joint FBCC-CRAAB meeting on February 12, 2014

On February 12, 2014 Fernandina Beach City Hall was the venue for a two-hour joint special meeting of the Fernandina Beach City Commission (FBCC) and the Community Redevelopment Area Advisory Board (CRAAB).  Agenda topics included the FBCC’s expectations for the CRA, potential CRA expansion up to the 2% limit imposed by the City Charter, the role of the CRAAB and the value of a CRA Developer Advocate, and considering the outcome of the joint CRAAB/Waterfronts Advisory Group (WAG) meeting held on January 23, 2014 with respect to proceeding with an Amelia River waterfront park.

CRAAB member Lou Goldman asked commissioners, “What are you all looking for us to do?”  Commissioner Pat Gass, the FBCC liaison to the CRAAB, replied, “We are looking to you to put the pieces in order.  When the money starts to flow into the CRA fund, we must have projects that we are able to run with.”  Mayor Ed Boner added that he wanted to see a waterfront park, recommendations to stimulate growth in the CRA and better ways to encourage development.

Goldman reminded commissioners that money would probably not start flowing into the CRA fund, or TIF, for three years.  He suggested that the city needed to take action on a waterfront park to show potential developers that “something is going on” in the area.  He expressed his support for the park plan put forward by local architect Randy Rice, saying that executing that plan “won’t cost the city” because it will be financed by private contributions.

Meeting participants expressed frustration over both First Coast Railroad’s failure to date to address city concerns on improving railroad crossings in the CRA as well as the unresolved sidewalk issue alongside the Duryee Building from Centre Street to the Salty Pelican Restaurant.  A complaint has been filed against the city and the railroad with the Department of Justice; the land ownership dispute between the Duryee Building owner and the city is in the courts.

Mayor Boner said that he was interested in setting priorities and determining the scale of projects in the CRA and looked for advice in identifying what can be done now.  CRAAB Chair Mike Zaffaroni said, “The CRAAB believes that the CRA is an effective way to make progress downtown, but we can’t do it without you [the Commission].  Lots of studies have been done, including visioning, for the CRA.  Let’s move forward with plans.”

Expanding the CRA to the 2% maximum 

DSCN1735According to the City Charter, an area designated as a CRA may only be created if its assessed value for ad valorem tax purposes does not exceed 2% of the total assessed value of all real property in the city at the time of the CRA’s creation. Since the referendum to remove the 2% limit was overwhelmingly defeated in November, Vice Mayor Sarah Pelican asked how the city would go about increasing the size of the existing CRA to the legal limit. Zaffaroni suggested expanding outward from Centre Street.  City Manager Joe Gerrity reminded commissioners how difficult it was to establish the original boundaries, which were eventually trimmed back due to public opposition.  Senior Planner Kelly Gibson also said that in order to expand, in effect the city would need to go back to the beginning, prepare a new finding of necessity, abolish the existing CRA and replace it with the expanded one.  No referendum would be required to expand to the 2% limit; consent of included property owners would be desirable, but not required.  Audience member and local businessman Lowell Hall advised commissioners that initial opposition to the CRA creation was based on the funding mechanism that required increased property tax revenues for CRA properties to be reinvested in that area and not spread around the entire city.  Also, some property owners did not want their properties identified as “blighted,” a term required for CRA creation.  There was no consensus on undertaking a reset of the CRA boundaries at this time.

Creating CRA Developer Advocate position

CRAAB member Lou Goldman emphasized that the city needs a point person to aggressively pursue potential developers for CRA projects.  Zaffaroni said that such a position would not necessarily need to be a paid position, but could be done by a knowledgeable volunteer.  Mayor Boner said that he saw the CRAAB performing that role; Vice Mayor Pelican said that she thought the city was paying the Nassau County Economic Development Board to attract developers.  Commissioner Pat Gass and CRAAB member Andy Curtin agreed.  Zaffaroni explained that the purpose of such a position would be focused on the CRA needs only.  The advocate would market the CRA, recruit developers, and walk them through the local permitting process.

City Manager Joe Gerrity and CRAAB member Lou Goldman
City Manager Joe Gerrity and CRAAB member Lou Goldman

City Manager Gerrity said that someone in his office or in the Community Development Department should fill such a role.  Zaffaroni reported that the CRAAB had talked about Lou Goldman performing this role.  Vice Mayor Sarah Pelican said, “With all due respect, he is an affected property owner.  I have already heard from certain citizens that he would have a conflict of interest.”  Both Mayor Boner and Commissioner Charlie Corbett had no problems on that score.  Boner said, “[Goldman] would then have a double incentive to succeed.”

All parties expressed interest in pursuing a CRA Developer Advocate position.

Status of Amelia River Waterfront Park

Mayor Boner suggested that the city might need to consider some type of incentive to attract waterfront development.  Zaffaroni said that potential developers needed to see that the city was serious about CRA development, and that an example of city commitment might be moving forward on the waterfront park.  CRAAB member Curtin added that other issues like the railroad crossings and the sidewalk were safety issues, but that the FBCC needed to show a commitment to developing something like the waterfront park in the CRA.

CRAAB Member Marla McDaniel and CRAAB Chair Mike Zaffaroni
CRAAB Member Marla McDaniel and CRAAB Chair Mike Zaffaroni

Both Pelican and Corbett reminded Curtin that city has been committed to building the park since 2012, when the city commission approved the conceptual plan put forward by the Waterfront Advisory Group (WAG).

Considerable discussion ensued over the status of current plan in light of two additional plans that were recently submitted.  The first, put forward by a group called Partnership for Amelia River Park (commonly called “the Rice Plan,” for spokesman Randy Rice, a local architect), substitutes a new design for the central portion of the WAG plan and calls for creation of a new parking lot.  The proposal calls for building this park as a public/private partnership, with private donors paying for park features, in-kind contributions of materials and labor.  The second proposal, put forward by waterfront advocate Lynn Williams, calls for a $16-18M project to build a seawall from Rayonier property to the Port of Fernandina.

Commissioner Gass said that before any plan is implemented, “We’ve got to get the parking done, build a garage, and then work with FIND [Florida Inland Navigation District] to get grants for the seawall.”  Gass advocated pursing multiple avenues simultaneously.

Commissioners noted the January 23, 2014 joint meeting of the CRAAB and the Waterfront Advisory Group to review and react to the Rice Plan.  According to a memo prepared by Senior Planner Kelly Gibson, “The general consensus of both groups is that they would really like to see something happen and progress towards a waterfront park.  They were supportive of the identified funding strategy, but neither group is interested in getting into the park design planning process again.”

Mayor Boner recognized Randy Rice who told commissioners that it was important not to lose the thousands of hours of planning invested in park design.  He suggested that the Rice Plan only addressed the central portion of the WAG plan and proposes building structures to attract donor contributions, as opposed to concentrating on park infrastructure needs which are not of interest to private donors.  Rice claimed he had spent two days walking around neighboring businesses and with only one exception found strong support for his plan.  Rice said, “We need faith in each other, working together, and trust in each other to move forward.”

Commissioner Corbett said, “Since we already have an approved plan, we would need to amend it or replace it to adopt your plan.”  Goldman agreed.  CRAAB member Debra Stephenson suggested that if the Rice Plan or Phase 1 of the WAG plan were built, the remainder of the plan might need to be revisited.  Zaffaroni expressed concerns about having to rip up completed areas to build infrastructure for future WAG plan phases.

Commissioner Corbett reiterated the FBCC’s commitment to build a waterfront park and suggested the CRAAB to come up with a plan that combined elements of both the existing plan and the new proposals.

WAG member Eric Bartelt, CRAAB members Deborah Stephenson and Andy Curtin, City Attorney Tammi Bach
WAG member Eric Bartelt, CRAAB members Debra Stephenson and Andy Curtin, City Attorney Tammi Bach

WAG member Eric Bartelt rose to speak, stating that the WAG was not being represented during the current discussion, and that their plan was not being accurately represented.  He recapped the years of public input and professionally volunteered architectural and design services that had gone into developing the WAG plan.  He said that with all due respect, it was not possible to “mush” the two plans together, and that it boiled down to the commissioners having to decide which path to pursue.

Mayor Boner said he supported raising private funds for the project, citing the public/private partnership behind the library project.  Bartelt responded, “We don’t yet know if you can raise private funds with the WAG plan.  Do you want to build a new park using old infrastructure?”

Goldman commented, “Nothing has happened in 20 years.  If we can get something done, it’s better than nothing.”  Boner said that as the city changes commissions, it seems to change direction on the park.

Rice and Bartelt argued their positions over park infrastructure needs, whether the city or an outside group would own the plan, and specific plan details.  City resident Ann Thomas, a former city attorney from Massachusetts, said that based upon her experience public parks are funded with public money and grants.  “The idea of raising private money [for this park] does not seem real to me,” she said.  She also expressed her opinion that there would be grave repercussions for the city if the WAG plan that had been developed with such extensive citizen involvement were to be scrapped in favor of a new plan developed by a small group.

Curtin asked if the commission wanted the CRAAB to make a recommendation in support of one plan.  Commissioner Johnny Miller said that the choice would need to be made by the FBCC.  He suggested that a special meeting be scheduled to allow both the WAG and Rice to present their proposals for a commission decision.  Pelican added that half the people would be against each option.

(l-r)  Commissioner Johnny Miller, Commissioner Charlie Corbett, Vice Mayor Sarah Pelican
(l-r) Commissioner Johnny Miller, Commissioner Charlie Corbett, Vice Mayor Sarah Pelican

Miller concluded the discussion saying, “The best way to say thank you to all the people involved in the waterfront park planning is to get this thing rolling.”

City Manager Gerrity will schedule a special meeting for the FBCC to listen to details of both the WAG Plan and the Rice Plan and decide how to proceed.  In the meantime, city staff will pursue expanding the CRA to the maximum 2%.  Staff will also explore city membership in the Urban Land Institute to tap into their resources as the city moves forward to develop the CRA.  Commissioner Miller also suggested that the city look toward creating one “flagship” development project within the CRA to show both the citizens and developers what could be done in that area of the city.  The CRAAB will also advise the FBCC on pros and cons of the various plans and work with staff on the concept of a Developer Advocate for the CRA.

For more information on the CRA and the waterfront park plans, consult previous articles in the Fernandina Observer or visit the city’s website.

Suanne ThammEditor’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.

February 13, 2014 12:43 p.m.

3 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Lou Goldman
Lou Goldman(@lgoldmngmail-com)
10 years ago

Suanne, this is a very factual report on the workshop. Thanks.

Dave Lott
Dave Lott(@dave-l)
10 years ago

One must chuckle and shake their head over the comments of VM Pelican and Commissioner Corbett as they now appear to advocate moving forward on the waterfront park after having led the charge to return the Forward Fernandina funds that had earmarked the funds necessary for the final engineering work necessary for the Front Street improvements and necessary infrastructure for the park (but not funds for the park itself). Just as they did for the library expansion, they could have earmarked the funds necessary for the infrastructure improvements if they thought the other projects were not worthy of funding. It has always been the vision of the Waterfront Advisory Committee in developing the plan that was approved by the Commission that private donations would be sought for the major elements of the park such as the pavillion, splash fountain, playground, historical story telling plaques, etc. I have the greatest respect for Randy Rice as he has volunteered countless hours toward the original plan while serving on the committee as well as numerous other projects for the City, but to change the approved plan in such a drastic way is going back to square 1 and negating the effort involving thousands of hours of citizens time in developing a plan that was the consensus of the community. The approved plan was always considered to have been developed in phases and that can certainly still be done under the currently approved plan. But there needs to be a committment from the City for the infrastructure funding as a start.
I would suggest that Lou organize a meeting of all the private property owners north of the marina and see if there is any consensus for what their vision is. The CRA has no future for waterfront development if there isn’t consensus among these owners other than letting taxpayer funds improve their property (i.e. construction of seawall) and then selling out.

Bruno Preuss
Bruno Preuss (@guest_18317)
10 years ago

Looking from afar, it seems to me that by debating, and debating, the value of the “Rice Plan,” the FBCC follows tradition by dancing the Fernandina Dance, “One Step forward, two steps back, turn around, and do it all over again.” Continue until the voters forget what it’s all about, and then place the plan, rather carefully, on the pile with all the other discarded plans.
Way to to go, Fernandina City Commissioners.