Can/will the 8th Street corridor ever be improved?

Submitted by Suanne Z. Thamm
Reporter – News Analyst
July 6, 2016 3:24 p.m.

The main topic of discussion at the July 5, 2016 Regular Meeting of the Fernandina Beach City Commission (FBCC) was a series of code changes for the 8^th Street (A1A) corridor designed to improve the appearance and marketability of property along the entranceway to the city, while also providing an opportunity for more housing.

Although the FBCC approved the recommended ordinances on first reading, there was general acknowledgment that more work needed to be done before the ordinances returned for a second reading.

In her overview, Senior Planner Kelly Gibson told commissioners and the audience that the issue of reducing or redirecting traffic from log trucks and other heavy trucks – a major public concern — had been thoroughly investigated. No solutions presented themselves. Therefore, 8^th Street will remain a transportation corridor for the mills and the port. She also explained that one reason for the proposed changes was to allow for the possibility of more moderate income housing, which if it could be built, would take more traffic off the roads by allowing people to walk or bike to work. She expressed appreciation to Florida Public Utilities and other companies for working with the city to develop plans for possibly putting utility lines underground.

Neighboring residents expressed concerns over what several termed quality of life issues, property values and traffic. Some commissioners expressed frustration with residents who, despite significant outreach efforts by city staff over the past two years, waited until “the 11^th hour” to raise their concerns. Commissioners agreed that there was no rush to pass the measures, asking staff to research some alternatives to items that appeared to cause the most concern to neighbors.

No date was announced for a second reading.

Background

As reported in earlier articles, discussion about possible code and zoning changes for the 8^th Street Corridor has been underway formally for two years via two different committees, many advertised meetings, city-sponsored surveys and mailings. For earlier articles see: https://fernandinaobserver.com/2014/05/01/fernandina-beach-seeks-your-input-on-8th-street/, https://fernandinaobserver.com/2014/08/22/whats-in-store-for-eighth-street-an-opinion/, https://fernandinaobserver.com/2014/10/15/the-eight-street-corridor-a-revisioning-project/, https://fernandinaobserver.com/2015/01/28/8th-street-working-group-meets/ , https://fernandinaobserver.com/2016/02/03/enhancing-our-entry-8th-street/, https://fernandinaobserver.com/2016/02/24/update-on-8th-street-corridor-thinking-planning/, https://fernandinaobserver.com/2016/05/17/enhancing-the-city-entrance-8th-street-public-hearings-beginning-in-may/,https://fernandinaobserver.com/2016/05/26/pab-sends-8th-street-recommendations-to-city-commission/.

Additionally, the city has regularly updated two websites as information or recommendations have come to light: www.fbfl.us/8thstreet and www.fbfl.us/LDCED.

While committees have been working on the 8^th Street problem for two years, local citizens and visitors have long expressed concerns with the visual statement made by this city/state thoroughfare that serves as the gateway to Fernandina Beach. Populated by a wide variety of commercial establishments ranging from auto repair to retail and restaurants, 8^th Street also contains a few pockets of undeveloped or underdeveloped property that perhaps would be improved with changes to existing land development codes.

Current development rules and zoning

8^th Street today is partly in the Historic District. Between Lime Street and Atlantic Avenue, it includes C-2 and C-3 zoning categories, meaning that buildings along 8^th Street can be built to a height of 45 feet. There are no parking requirements, no required setbacks, and minimal landscaping requirements. The only areas where residential is allowed is in those structures that have been “grandfathered” into the commercial zoning.

Residentially zoned lots (R-2) that back up to 8^th Street properties on either side of the thoroughfare (South 7^th and 9^th Streets) are generally 50’x100’or 25’x100’ in size.

Potential developers and redevelopers of 8^th Street properties have claimed that the restrictions imposed on new developers who would take over “grandfathered” commercial properties are so onerous that the smaller properties would basically be undevelopable.

What would change with the pending recommendations?

After two years of study and input, city staff has put forth recommendations that would create a new zoning district called MU-8. This district, outlined in black in the graphics below, would preserve zoning rights of current property owners.

But it would also expand the corridor west and east of the existing 8^th Street to include property currently zoned MU-1 (8^th east to mid-block of 10^th Street) and 3 lots currently zoned R-2 (one at the corner of Fir and S. 7^th Streets, and two straddling the mid block of S. 10^th Street between Ash and Beech Streets).

According to the city’s website:

Design requirements tied to the new 8th Street Small Area Mixed Use (8MU) land use category and MU-8 zoning designation have been drafted to reflect a goal of becoming more Centre Street like by providing an opportunity for residential development mixed with commercial development opportunities. It is intended to provide for a wide-range of housing options with access to amenities located downtown. The zoning changes have been crafted to accommodate existing uses along 8th Street and anticipate future uses for the area. It is unlikely that the City will experience immediate change resulting from the new land use and zoning within the area. Changes will occur over time. 

Public concerns

City Hall Chambers were comfortably full for the discussion, but it appeared that most attendees came to listen, not talk. During the public hearing on the proposed changes, city commissioners and staff heard from 10 speakers—three of whom spoke multiple times. Eight of the speakers reside in the Historic District west of 8^th Street, and two of those live on S. 7^th Street. One speaker resides on the north side of the Historic District. No resident east of 8^th Street spoke; only one 8^th Street business owner spoke.

Several themes related to quality of life recurred during public comment: concern that the changes would bring allowable density in line with that downtown and therefore would bring more traffic to neighborhoods; parking spillover into residential streets outside the MU-8 zone; safety; concern for preserving trees; property values; building height.

Historic District Peg Lehosit cited her experience with historic districts in Savannah and Jacksonville-Riverside. She said that every vacant lot in Fernandina’s historic district appears to be disappearing as new homes are built. She feared that the recommendations would have a negative impact on Historic District property values and sense of neighborhood. While acknowledging that public discussions have been ongoing, she suggested that the city needed to make a more positive effort to go into affected neighborhoods and invite individuals to staff those committees whose decisions impact them.

Former Mayor-Commissioner Greg Roland, who lives on S. 7^th Street, said that he believed that most residents were behind 8^th Street improvements, but that they were taken aback when the plans grew to potentially impact residential property on 7^th and 9^th Streets. He suggested that commercial interests had driven the process to date and that the proposed changes had the potential “to kill the 7^th Street and 9^th Street neighborhoods.” He asked commissioners to remove 7^th and 9^th Streets from the proposed overlay, saying that residents of those neighborhoods had never asked to be included.

James Shroads, a 33-year resident of S. 7^th Street, suggested that 8^th Street redevelopment efforts have been thwarted by soil contamination on properties grandfathered into existing zoning and land use. He asked, “What are you actually achieving [with the proposed change?” adding that very few parcels on 8^th Street are not contaminated.

Joan Cory, a Beech Street resident, provided commissioners with photos of the existing streets and those of Venice, CA. She proposed a buffer of ten feet (rear setback) for properties backing up to residential properties.

Fernandina Beach Main Street Executive Director Jeff Kurtz said that the recommended changes supported the vision of many who serve on his Economic Vitality Committee. He talked about the positive benefits of a more attractive corridor, more moderate income housing and the opportunity to combat urban sprawl. He said that the recommendations could result in more customers for retail operations because they encouraged a more walkable community. “We are all served well, if it functions well,” he said.

Date Street resident Julie Ferreira opposed increasing density to allow for residential development in the area. She noted that the appearance of 8^th Street is improving and expressed fear that if adopted, the proposed changes would result in “apocalyptic change.” Ferreira said, “People asked for increased landscaping, and they get increased density. What’s our quality of life worth?” She asked that the item be placed on a citizen referendum.

Chip Ross, who lives on the north side of the Historic District and who serves on the city’s Planning Advisory Board (PAB), reported that he had attended many of the meetings that led to the fashioning of the plan. He said that while he initially supported the proposed changes, he began to rethink his position following citizen input at a PAB meeting. He suggested that commissioners slow down, “press the RESET button”, and return the recommendations to the PAB for additional input. [The PAB had approved the proposals on a 4-3 vote. Several PAB members had attended or been members of a variety of committees that took public input in considering the matter.]

Commissioner discussion

Commissioner Robin Lentz reminded the audience that the current allowable building height in the area is 45 feet. The proposal, as amended by the PAB, would require that the height of buildings abutting residentially zoned property would be limited to 35 feet. She also restated that parking for new construction in the MU-8 zone would need to be contained on site. She reminded people that any development in the area is fraught with challenges, and that the city is trying to offset those challenges with the new zoning designation. “The market will dictate what can be built,” she said.

Commissioner Roy Smith said that he wanted the 35-foot height limit extended to those commercial properties that face residential properties across a street.

Commissioner Tim Poynter said, “8^th Street is currently unbuildable because of existing rules. It makes sense to move forward. Doing what we’ve been doing means nothing changes.” He asked staff to develop some alternatives to current recommendations. At the end of the meeting he expressed frustration that many people refuse to acknowledge that good things can come from change, instead always viewing change as “the sky is falling.” He urged people to participate more in the process, and get accurate information.

Commissioner Len Kreger asked about the possibility of removing 7^th and 9^th Streets from the overlay. He emphasized that 8^th Street is the gateway to Fernandina Beach, but that it is a state highway and as such will remain an intermodal connector. He expressed his desire for more setbacks and protection for the residents. He also expressed an impatience to resolve the 8^th Street issues so that attention can be refocused on Sadler Road and the beaches.

Smith supported Kreger’s suggestion regarding removing 7^th and 9^th street from the overlay. Poynter emphasized that the city could not take away development rights enjoyed by property owners under existing land use and zoning regulations.

When the vote was called on each of the four proposed ordinances required to effect the recommendations, the vote was unanimous to continue moving forward.

Commissioner Smith, however, stated following each of his votes that he would vote against the measures at second reading “unless there were changes.”  He did not specify which changes at the time of his vote.

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.