After nearly four hours of Fernandina Beach City Commission meetings on annexations, rezoning of property and rewriting the city's Land Development Code (LDC), commissioners approved changes that could increase density with another 153 housing units.
And, the city's Building Department has yet to determine the impact of how many more houses can be built if the LDC revisions on subdividing lots are eventually approved.
All of the commission votes were passed 4-1 with Commissioner Chip Ross casting votes in opposition.
A recap of the city commission approvals include:
Annexation and rezoning of 3.47 acres located on South 14th and South 15th Streets. Although rezoned general commercial, under provisions of the state's "Live Local Act," the property could be developed to include a 130-unit apartment complex.
Changes to the Land Development Code to exclude accessory structures such as swimming pools, storage sheds, patios, etc., when property owners want to subdivide their lots. Currently when accessory structures are on adjoining lots next to a house, the two lots are defined as one lot and cannot be subdivided.
Annexation and rezoning of 1.33 acres on Amelia Road. Property was rezoned to low density residential.
Annexation and rezoning of 1.41 acres at 2194 Sadler Road. Property was rezoned to mixed use which commonly is used to build townhouses.
Annexation and rezoning of .94 acres at 1912 and 1888 Drury Road.
Preliminary plat approval for 12 townhouses at Sadler Road and Ryan Road.
Land Development Code and Underlying Lots of Record
Changes to the LDC was the lone discussion at the city commission's workshop and four commissioners agreed to have city staff rewrite several sections that determine how property lots can be subdivided into underlying lots of record. The underlying lots are the original property determinations established in the 1850s.
Once completed, the city staff revisions will be reviewed by the Planning Advisory Board most likely in January.
"You're not clarifying (the LDC), you're changing it," Commissioner Ross said. "We're going from a code, which says when you have all these structures on it, that's what give character to the neighborhood. You're saying we're now going to have the house and whatever it's on, and you can have that and now we can strip off all the other lots as long as they're 50 feet wide and we can build it. Let's at least be honest that you're going to change the code. You're not clarifying."
Vice Mayor David Sturges, who has been pushing for LDC revisions for months, disagreed with Ross' judgement.
"There are many community members that are interested (in changing the LDC). That do not want to see their property right trounced on," Sturges said. "Money could be an object for certain people. If you spend $300,000 on a lot and you buy two of them and now it's $600,000 . And you tell them if you put a pool on the lot next door you can never put a house on it ever again. That doesn't make much sense to me. I'm just trying to clarify the code and make sure you can still use your property at some point."
Commissioner Darron Asycue said there have been 16 variance requests at the Board of Adjustment in the past 12 years.
"There is something going on with this piece of code," he said. "We have to do something."
Ross asked how many of the variances had been granted by the BOA. The answer was 12. "So four were denied in 12 years," Ross said.
Asycue has proposed eliminating 25-foot width underlying lots and making the minimum 50-feet wide. He also proposed moving the process from the Board of Adjustment to the County Property Appraiser.
Annexation and Rezoning
The 3.47 acres on North 14th and 15th Streets garnered the most discussion among commissioners.
Commissioner Ross postured that the owner of the property - Darius Properties LTD - paid about $2 million for the land and could build 130 apartment units under the state's "Live Local Act" which mandates 40 percent of the units be designated as affordable housing. Ross said the annual income of affordable housing would be $95,000 in Nassau County.
"If we annex this, 130 apartment units can come in and if we don't, a maximum of 35 units (under county rules)," Ross said. "This will have a huge impact on our city. I'm not in favor of annexing this property until we know the full impact on the city."
Sturges labeled discussions about apartments as "speculation."
"It might or might not be that. Who knows what this applicant is going or not going to do," Sturges said. "It's like the stamp from the previous commission. Nothing can be converted to residential. Don't do that. I think this is a good application moving it from the county in medium density commercial to the city which is medium density commercial."
Teresa Prince, the attorney for the property owner, said no decision had been on the specific use of the land.
"All these hypotheticals are floating around about Live Local and again the applicant hasn't made any statements to that effect. It is hypothetical and it is responsible to look at it. But whether or not we're in or out, we can avail ourselves to Live Local," she said.
The commission voted 4-1 to change the future land use to general commercial.
The .94 acres on Drury Road can accommodate about seven units under the new zoning. The 1.42 acres on Sadler Road is for 12 townhouses. The Amelia Road parcel was zoned to allow for five residential houses.
During the public comment segment, Jack Imber raised concerns over the number of properties being annexed into the city.
"I call it an annexation glut that is happening right now," Imber said. "It's not about merely tax revenue. It's about let's face it development. I went back through the island's history and couldn't find this repetivity and this intensity of annexation and I know it's going to get worse."
"Clarifying" or "changing the Code". Sounds ripe for major administrative law litigation over a word that has the potential to obliterate local procedural law and baseline local rule.
Feel lied to and screwed much by Bean and Sturgus?
Who is poised to make themselves the huge [ongoing] windfall profit from this revision and not simply these few tracts? It grants additional free reign to overpopulating every scrap of City jurisdiction on and off island. This initiative is not "enabling affordable housing" either. To make building profitable, rentals must be exorbitant as the cost of building/maintaining apartment buildings is exorbitant. This basically provides for another lifetime income stream to those select investors buying up every sandlot they can lay their hands on.
Interesting that many from the area say "Don't turn this into NYC" when in fact that is what is going on. Maybe the Commissioners would consider purchasing a second home in the city and it would satisfy the need for "wall-to-wall"