Commissioners Clash Over Legality of Tringali Permits Amid Court Orders and Code Conflicts

Workers (right) taking down trees Wednesday on Tringali lots (left)

A heated debate erupted during Tuesday’s Fernandina Beach City Commission meeting after residents and commissioners learned that 16 building permits were issued for the controversial Tringali property — despite two court rulings and a land development code section that seemingly prohibits the project without a variance.

With those building permits in hand, developers for the property just 12 hours later were clearing trees on the parcels which have been one of the city’s longest-running land use battles.

Commissioner Joyce Tuten laid out the legal history.

“In 2003, the former commission approved a townhome development on the Tringali property, and three residents sued the city… based on the grounds that the city violated our land development code.” She continued, “Judge Roberson ruled against the city, ruled in favor of the residents, and rejected the city’s arguments… [and] ruled that we must apply the plain language of Section 1.03.05.”

That section of the code states “no permit will be issued for the construction of more than one residential dwelling unit” on combined lots, unless a variance is granted by the Board of Adjustment. The city and developer appealed the ruling, but on Monday “the Fifth District Court of Appeal denied the developer’s appeal and affirmed Judge Roberson’s order.”

Yet just days later, city staff issued 16 permits for a revised version of the project —12 townhomes grouped into four triplexes.

“So, my question again,” Tuten pressed, “how can we issue permits for a new project that is also for 12 townhomes, this time as triplexes, if Judge Roberson is telling us we need to apply 1.03.05?”

The five parcels formerly known as the Tringali property

City Manager Sarah Campbell responded, “It’s a very complicated issue.”

She explained the planning department staff determined the new project didn't require a variance because it used “the existing four combined building lots” and did not involve a replat, which was a factor in the court’s original decision. Campbell said staff interpreted the code’s Section 1.03.04 — permitting one building on a lot — as conflicting with 1.03.05.

Commissioner Tuten pushed back.

“So, I do not understand why we don't default to the consistent reading of it… a triplex is a building but it’s not one residential dwelling unit… when met with conflicting orders you default to the more stringent. That’s common law practice,” she said.

Campbell countered with legal precedent: “There is case law… that when two sections of code are in conflict you need to take the most liberal interpretation and interpret in favor of the property owner… that’s Rinker versus North Miami Gardens.”

Campbell than asked Mayor James Antun "I guess I want to understand where we're at tonight. It seems like we're having a trial.... It's not on the agenda. And so, what is the goal? I think what I have are three options. But I'm nervous legally where we're headed right now."

Frustration spilled over as Tuten revealed that she and the city manager had only learned of the permits after a resident brought it to Tuten's attention. “How did we even get here that the city manager and the deputy city manager didn’t even know this was happening?” Tuten queried.

As construction begins — trees already felled and bull dozing equipment on-site — Tuten warned, “We are in violation of not just one court order… but two… and I think time is of the essence.” She urged Campbell to “figure out as fast as possible how to put a stay on this building permit.”

Campbell agreed that suspending the permits was one of “three paths” available: The city could uphold the permits, rescind them, or seek a preemptive judicial ruling.

She promised, “My intention is to have the call tomorrow with Carr Allison… and make a determination before close of business on Friday.”

The Carr Allison law firm was retained by the City of Fernandina Beach as outside legal counsel to represent the city in the original court case regarding the Tringali development.

Vice Mayor Darron Ayscue placed the blame squarely on the city commission for years of inaction and defended Planning and Conservative Department Director Kelly Gibson, who issued the building permits.

“Ms. Gibson has begged 1.03.05 to be addressed… and we’ve continued to ignore it. This is our fault.”

Ayscue accused one Planning Advisory Board (PAB) member of holding up a revision of the LDC: “Because Mr. Mark Bennett doesn’t understand it and refuses to move forward with it… that’s exactly why we have had to take our time.”

But Commissioner Genece Minshew, a former chair of the PAB, took the air out of Ayscue's claim.

"But we can only fix it when the planning director and the PAB work together to bring it to us. We can't sit up here and rewrite it ourselves," she said. "I also met with planning director Gibson right after I was elected and we talked about this. She showed me all these different proposals, and I said so put them together and bring it to the PAB and get them to us and we have not seen anything. So, I mean I offered to you know deal with it and it's not in front of me. So how is it that we're supposed to fix it when nobody brings it to us?"

Tuten reminded everyone that “Mr. Bennett sat on the PAB when this code was written… and it was put into place 19 years ago because the population of this city was exploding… These four (Tringali) homes got torn down for financial reasons only.”

She concluded with a stark warning: “There are… hundreds of parcels across this city that have the exact same configurations… If we do not follow 1.03.05… and how did, we even get here that the city manager and the deputy city manager didn't even know this was happening? For literally an issue that has been going on for years, one of the biggest issues that's been going on in this city for years. What are we doing here?”

The Commission agreed on a tight timeline for resolution. City Manager Campbell was directed to consult outside counsel Carr Allison and provide a “written or verbal legal opinion on the permit issue by close of business Friday.”

Tuten explicitly requested that “the legal opinion from outside counsel be shared with the entire commission.”

https://youtu.be/OJ2mXCHnH7I