Board of Adjustment Overturns Tringali Property Building Permits

In a decisive 5-0 vote Wednesday night, the Fernandina Beach Board of Adjustment (BOA) overturned the city’s issuance of building permits for a controversial multi-family development on the former Tringali property, ruling the permits violated city code and a standing court order.

At the heart of the decision was Section 1.03.05 of the city’s Land Development Code (LDC), which prohibits the issuance of permits for more than one residential dwelling unit per site unless first approved by the BOA. No such approval was sought before the city issued permits in July for four triplex buildings — totaling 12 units — on parcels at 124 S. 3rd Street and S. 4th Street, owned by Worthy Investment.

“This is a straightforward violation,” said Board Member Fred Johnson. “We’re being asked to rule on permits that were issued improperly. There was no BOA variance granted, and under the code, that’s required. It’s that simple.”

The Tringali property has been the subject of sustained public scrutiny and litigation. A December 2023 court order from Judge James Roberson reinforced the applicability of LDC 1.0305 to the property and stated that BOA approval was required for any such multi-dwelling development — a ruling that remains binding after an appeal was denied earlier this year.

Despite that, the city issued permits between July 7 and July 14, 2025, through its InterGov system without conducting a BOA hearing or notifying nearby property owners. Appellant Taina Christner filed her appeal on July 16, just days after the permits were approved.

In Wednesday’s hearing, City Manager Sarah Campbell defended the permit issuance, arguing the city’s building official, James Parr, followed standard procedures and relied on sign-offs from the Technical Review Committee (TRC). Campbell acknowledged the staff “did not realize” an active court order still applied to the property when the permits were issued.

“The building official does not have the expertise or authority to enforce zoning compliance. That falls to the TRC,” Campbell testified. But she also admitted the development order “did not comply with the LDC,” and that she “became aware of that only after the appeal was filed.”

Campbell did not mention that in her staff report to the BOA she believed the permits were in violation of the city Land Development Code provision.

Taina Christner

Christner, speaking during the hearing, argued the city had ignored both public process and legal precedent.

“Even the city manager wasn’t notified that a development order had been issued — and this is a property under a court order,” she said. “There was no BOA hearing, no notice to neighbors, and permits were issued in direct violation of city code.”

Her attorney, Chris Brooks, emphasized that Florida Building Code 105.3.1 requires all applicable local ordinances be complied with before permits can be issued.

“This wasn’t a simple oversight,” Brooks said. “It was a systemic failure to follow your own laws.”

Board members echoed concerns about the procedural breakdown.

Member Margaret Davis asked pointedly why, if the development order violated the LDC, the city manager had not used her authority to revoke the permits: “You have the power to act under 11.08.02(C). Why didn’t you?”

Campbell responded, “The appeal had already been filed by the time I became aware of that clause. I decided to let the process play out.”

Much of the three-hour hearing focused on the difference between the TRC’s local development order — which is not appealable to the BOA — and the building official’s decision to issue permits, which is.

City Attorney Teresa Prince acknowledged Christner’s appeal was timely regarding the building permits, but reiterated the board had no jurisdiction to consider the TRC’s development order.

Nevertheless, the board found that the permits themselves violated the LDC, rendering them invalid regardless of the TRC process.

As Chair Steve Papke summarized before the vote: “Our job is not to untangle the TRC process. Our job is to determine if the building permits were lawfully issued. And based on the evidence and the plain reading of the code, they were not.”

The board unanimously adopted the motion:

“That the board finds, based on the plain reading of the code and evidence, that the building official’s issuance of permits was erroneous and the permits are invalid.”

The invalidated permits include four master permits and 12 individual unit permits.

The city now faces the possibility of legal challenges from Worthy Investment, the property owner, whose attorney Sidney Ansbacher argued during the hearing that the appeal process was flawed and potentially outside the BOA’s jurisdiction. The city may also be exposed to liability for issuing permits that violated a known court order and city code.

The ruling also reignites long-standing tensions over how Fernandina Beach handles zoning, public notification, and legal compliance in its development processes — issues that the Fernandina Observer has covered extensively over the past two years.

 "It goes back to how this thing went through and (how) the development order got through with nobody questioning on a property that we had lawsuits sitting on," said

Member Len Kreger. "So, it's just, it's sad and discouraging that we can't fix something that's broke."

In a September 2024 article, the Observer reported that residents were “blindsided” by plans to build 12 units on the Tringali property without any notice or public hearing. A March 2024 follow-up noted that city staff were warned about the LDC restrictions but “chose to rely on TRC approvals without involving the BOA.”