Developers want nine townhomes on property that had three houses (since demolished) on South 4th Street
Property owner Worthy Investments wants to turn back the clock on land records dating to the 1850s in Fernandina Beach so it can take three neighborhood lots on South 4th Street and build nine townhomes on the property.
Worthy Investments has applied for a variance from city codes that prohibits subdividing of lots where a house or structure was built on two adjoining parcels as identified in the city's original plating of land in 1857.
The three homes, built in the 1950s, have already been demolished by the builder Compass Group.
A hearing to consider the variance by the city"s Board of Adjustment is scheduled Wednesday at 5 p.m. at City Hall.
"If granted the variance, the effect would be the separation of the three (3) current parcels into nine (9) platted lots of record capable of supporting one single-family unit each," stated the city's Planning Department report regarding the variance application."
In its application letter to the city, Worthy Investments said "it is our intent to create up to one unit per 25-foot wide platted lot allowed for a mix of townhome development, using the 25-foot plated lots for free simple ownership of a single family residence."
The lots were formerly owned by the Tringali family and sold to developers. Last year, the city commission ignoring provisions of the Land Development Code voted to allow Tringali lots on South 3rd and 4th Streets to be subdivided for townhouses. That decision was overturned by a Nassau County Judge following a lawsuit by adjacent homeowners to the property. That ruling is now being appealed.
Worthy Investments is employing another strategy by seeking a variance from the Land Development Code restrictions from the Board of Adjustment in order to build the townhouses.
"Underlying lots of record mean re-establishing Yulee’s vision of a metropolis with plats of 25-foot wide lots downtown. These lots are directly across from the homes often held for generations in the Historic District on 4th Street. What will set future precedence in the City? Will the future of Fernandina follow the recent changes of South 7th Street and install Yulee’s (1857) vision (of 25-foot lots) ; or will 1.03.05 which was added to the Land Development Code to protect the ambience of the City from being over built be upheld?," said Julie Ferreira, one of the leaders of Stop the Domino Effect. "All residents have standing (in the variance hearing) because this affects the downtown area, and perhaps could even have wider ripples throughout the City since Yulee’s 25-foot lots often stretch as far as 14th Street."
Worthy Investments faces a difficult task in convincing the Board of Adjustment to grant the variance. In the city staff analysis of the merits of the application, there are six criteria that are required to be met. City staff in its report cited only three criteria of merit.
City staff said:
Granting the variance will not be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Land Development Code and Comprehensive Plan. Both the LDC and Comp Plan emphasize the preservation of “...open space, visual corridors, and neighborhood character...”, however, restoration of the 25’ wide lots is inconsistent with the d evelopment pattern of the neighborhood.
Granting the variance is not compatible with the surrounding properties, will cause injury to the area involved, or otherwise be detrimental to the public health, safety, welfare, or environment. 25’ wide lots would s everely limit the type of dwelling able to be built resulting in a much more uniform block face than what is consistent for the subject neighborhood and the Comprehensive Plan and LDC. Additionally, a narrower dwelling typically necessitates a taller structure which will drastically reduce the established visual corridors.
Literal interpretation of the Land Development Code would not deprive the applicant of rights enjoyed by others in the same zoning district. A literal reading of the LDC would not prevent the applicant from developing each of the 3 parcels in a way that is consistent with the R-2 zoning district and the surrounding built environment.
"The requested variance is inconsistent with 3 of the 6 criteria for granting a variance," the analysis stated.
According to the city staff report, granting the variance will require a super majority (4 of the 5 members) voting to approve the application.
On question six of the application, Public Interest: Granting the variance is compatible with surrounding properties, will not cause injury to the area involved, or otherwise be detrimental to the public health, safety, welfare or environment, the Compass Group said "Granting this variance for use of the underlying 25' wide lots would be compatible with the surrounding properties as it will follow similar development in the area being granted use of the same.
"Additionally, the development under the LDC site development requirements will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, welfare, or environment; it will result in infill development supporting the site development rules of improving
infrastructure (sidewalks, community street parking, stormwater system of self- storage, underground power,
etc.), and furthering the continued economic growth, expanding the tax base of the community."
granted the variance, the effect would be the separation of the three (3) current parcels
into nine (9) platted lots of record capable of supporting one single-family unit each.
Follow the code! Otherwise, why even bother to have one?