On paper the plan to add 19 new parking spaces to the city owned parking lot next to City Hall seemed as simple as kicking in a 6-inch putt in golf.
But during 30-minutes of review of the plan by the City's Technical Review Committee Thursday, Interim City Manager Charlie George became so exasperated he threatened to "kill the project all together."
George and City Planner Sal Cumella went toe-to-toe debating over the requirements of the city's Land Development Code and approvals of the Historic District Council in trying to add more downtown parking spaces.
"Let's just agree to disagree," George told Cumella at one point.
All city construction projects are reviewed by the Technical Review Committee - composed of city staff representing planning, building, stormwater and fire departments and the city arborist. The TRC reviews construction applications and provides compliance reports for site plans, rezoning, amendments to the Land Development Code, preliminary subdivision plats, final subdivision plats, and amendments to previously issued local development orders.
According to the submitted plans, 10 new parking spaces would be added to what is now unpaved land next to the railroad tracks. Another nine angular paved parking spaces would be installed by the pocket park on the lot.
"We have the LDC standards and these are the LDC standards," Cumella told George in reviewing aspects of the plan. Cumella said the city was required to follow all of the requirements just as private parties are held to the same standards.
The litany of LDC specifications and Historic District Council reviews led George to say "All these are project killers that the City Commission has already approved and the CRA created. We don't have budgets to do that kind of work."
"That's a different discussion," Cumella retorted.
George said "We're trying to solve one of the most important projects in the city and directed by the commission to do this."
Cumella said any variances from the LDC standards could be reviewed by the Historic District Council.
"I think we'll just pull this and we just won't build it," George said. "For me, these projects are not typically done in the city, so the LDC (requirements) like in unimproved right of ways is slowing this whole thing down."
The City Commission has devoted two workshop meetings trying to identify more downtown parking spaces to ease congestion. Commissioner Chip Ross has walked the entire downtown and identifed areas where 47 more spaces could be added.
George and Cumella began sparring over whether the parking plan was required to be approved by the Historic District Council.
"Here's where I'm going to get a little defiant," George said. He argued that adding parking spaces to an existing parking lot were 'improvements' and not new construction and as such did not need HDC approvals.
"The maintenance department, utilities department and the parks department do things downtown in the historic district every single day, are you telling me everything they do they have to go through the HDC?" George asked Cumella.
Cumella said the city in the past had done many projects without HDC review and "contrary to HDC guidelines."
"People come to us and say why isn't the city doing what we're required to do," Cumella said.
The discussion got more heated when city staff told George that a sidewalk needed to be put in where four parking spaces now exist along 2nd Street.
"You're going to kill four parking places, so what's the point of this project," George asked. "It's a sidewalk (going to) nowhere."
Cumella argued that the city parking lot was built out of compliance with the LDC, "so any time we can have compliance we should."
Part of the plan was to have 18 more parrallel parking spaces on north 7th Street. That has been shelved. Ten more spaces are planned on vacant city land at 2nd Street and Beech.
The next step in the process would be for the city to appear before the Historic District Council to seek variances for the parking project.
"I'll have to talk to my bosses (city commissioners) and tell them what has happened and see which way they want to go," George said.`
Why not reconfigure this lot for the vehicle/trailer parking needed for the boat ramp?
Commissioners always want to change something ! Here is a question. Why not designate a parking lot for OVER EXTENDED PICKUP TRUCKS that park on our main street all the time. Which is causing a REAL PROBLEM !!!!! THEY STICK OUT IN THE STREETS ????? OR are you waiting for a billionaire to drive his or her expensive car gets hit ?
Oh there is absolutely a way to get it done, Mike. It's a revolutionary concept called "following the rules." Believe it or not, even the mighty interim city manager and city commission are not above those pesky regulations. Shocking, I know! Just because they happen to disagree with certain rules doesn't mean they get a free pass. Can you imagine if that were the case? Fernandina Beach would turn into a wild, lawless land where everyone gets things their way! So, let's all bow down to the almighty process that tax-paying citizens endure and ensure that nobody, not even our esteemed city officials, gets special treatment. You support equality, right? Cheers to equal treatment for all!
Just an observation based on my 7 years of experience with similar situations. A one on one weekly conversation between a City Manager who is well informed and educated in matters of City operations and requirements, and individual seated Commissioners before these types of issues reach a conscious or vote is very effective in avoiding this type of conflict. These confusions between staff who following basic requirements given to them, and their manager as well as lack of understanding of by the Commission their own code requirements does not instill confidence in city operations to the public.
Commission does nor care if it breaks city rules. The do it all the time. Then change the laws afterward.