>
Amelia Wharf design rejected again over height, massive riverfront scale
FERNANDINA BEACH - A divided City Historic District Council declined Thursday to grant conceptual approval for Amelia Wharf, a massive commercial development proposed along the city’s downtown riverfront.
The plans call for a three-level, 28,316-square-foot complex on North Front Street across from the Salty Pelican containing restaurants, retail shops, a welcome center, boardwalk, parking and space for a possible future marina. The building would have two occupied levels above an elevated ground-level area.
But council members remained sharply divided over whether the building’s mass, height and architectural features were appropriate for the riverfront.
The revised plans removed a boardwalk encroachment from the northern view corridor and provided additional information about rooftop mechanical equipment and a proposed observation tower. Staff said the northern view corridor was open in the updated design and the required 15-foot view corridors on each side of the property were provided.
“It’s such an ambitious project, and taken in a vacuum, it’s, you know, it’s obviously — it’s monumental,” Kosack said. “I think when I look at this as what I said the first time, this is the first major redevelopment of our waterfront, of a structure. And it doesn’t harken to the other waterfront structures that are there.”
“So, if we’re putting a — I don’t know, what are we at, 100 feet? 75 feet? 150 feet times 40-some-odd feet, we are completely obliterating what we see of the water,” she said.
“The very first thing that we can have to look at is scale, height, and width,” she said. “This doesn’t meet scale, height, or width.”
“I am very, very concerned with the overall massing and scale of this,” Byrnes said. “And I understand that we’re looking at 30 feet over the base flood elevation, but the reality is is that from grade, this thing is — this structure is going to be like 63 feet tall to the tower.”
The tower would provide a controlled-access viewing area and display historical information. Staff recommended that any approval include a condition limiting it to a viewing area with no permanent uses.
“Because this a commercial building and my finished floor elevation is required to be at almost 16 feet,” Flick said. “That’s the first occupiable level.”
Flick said the design team had worked extensively to keep the project within the allowable dimensions.
Vice Chair Dylan Psulkowski argued that the project appeared to satisfy the requirements for conceptual review.
“I’m just having a hard time picking apart anything that this board hasn’t asked them to do other than scaling back the structure,” he said.
“There’s no doubt that it — it’s going to change our waterfront, and it’s a big building,” Platt said. “There’s no denying that.”
“So when you’re thinking about the scale, what’s proposed is within the scale of what’s allowed by the code,” Platt said.
He then offered a second motion requiring that “the scale and massing of the building is considered to be reduced in its final design and the ornamental structure specifically.”
The council did not adopt a separate motion formally denying the application. Because conceptual approval was not granted, Amelia Wharf cannot move to formal Technical Review Committee review under the process outlined in the staff report. The applicant would have to revise the proposal and return to the council to obtain conceptual approval before seeking final design approval and other required permits.
Comments
9 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
Mark Tomes
The Council needs to be unequivocal about what they will approve: pedestrian-friendly, open design, lots of viewspace, non-commercial. This current plan is a monstrosity, befitting only profit over people. It has no historic nor citizen value to it. Scale it down and put it 3 or 4 blocks to the north, if need be, but it belongs nowhere near the end of Centre Street.
Saturday, August 22 Report this
AcurtNA63
Don't need that monstrosity!
Saturday, August 22 Report this
Martbrut
If I was a current or future business owner I would seriously consider whether to build or expand my business in the downtown area. The City Commission is now considering a special taxing district which is likely to raise additional taxes from downtown businesses. They have tentatively indicated that they will look for any avenues they can use to replace the revenue “lost” from paid parking. I keep seeing people posting about view spaces and pedestrian friendly areas. When I ride by the new park on the waterfront both day and night I rarely see more than 8-10 people enjoying that park.
Saturday, August 22 Report this
warrenmatt
The newly proposed waterfront development at the front of Center Street is simply too massive and will totally destroy the character of that area.
While it would be a fantastic windfall for the developers - it will surely devastate the historic value an open waterfront has always provided Fernandina Beach.
Our Historic District Committee has been so true to maintaining the values that committee was originally formed to preserve in our community.
I trust they will have the fortitude to continue that quest.
A point I find very questionable is the matter of adding a new private marina in that area - which would be in direct competition with the city marina and subsequent revenues - that would be lost to the town.
Approving that development actually "expands" the downtown business district - in direct competition with the existing businesses that have occupied that area for many decades.
As a lifelong businessman I surely believe in free enterprise but I question changing the playing field.
But unfortunately the almighty dollar has to rule too often.
Saturday, August 22 Report this
BBillings
That hulking beast of a building has no business in downtown Fernandina.
The harbor is popular because of the beautiful views for anyone(s) who want to take a boat ride or just wander around downtown - NOT because of behemoth buildings blocking sightlines.
That building would make much more sense in Jacksonville at the old Landings property.
Saturday, August 22 Report this
DouglasM
That building looks great......if it's on Boston Harbor!
I'm a little worried that 3 members of the HDC think it would look good here. Last month, one member was gushing with excitement at the concept. Whoa!
To the 3 members who gave a thumbs down....thank you!
Monday, August 24 Report this
Brokerphil
Lighten up folks, Iconic structures are always despised when proposed because they are different than the norm. Based on the theory that no buildings should have scale outside of the “normal size “ we would not have the Post Office or the Courthouse. I would be sad to see them bulldozed and replaced with another single family house.
Tuesday, August 25 Report this
Leskov
What attracted me to make Amelia my home was the "charming town set beside a waterfront". The size of the proposed design shown that includes "15 foot viewing areas" (my little back deck is wider than that) as well as a completely ironic "viewing tower" (ironic, as the entire view currently enjoyed would be blocked by the monstrous building) does not fit the character of downtown, in any way. I originally had a mental image of something new built with the same proportions of Brett's. If anything approximating this proposed design is built, the end result will be a tremendous boost to other areas of the island, as the newly "closed in and confined" downtown will lose its desirability and unique character. To Tammi - Please continue being a voice of reason! You have the correct perspective that is so valuable (and apparently in very short supply). Thank you.
Saturday, August 29 Report this
Leskov
To BrokerPhil: Neither the Post Office nor the Courthouse are positioned at the end of Centre Street, blocking the waterfront. Is there a reason why the council is only looking at a structure so large that it obliterates any enjoyment of the waterview (unless one is a customer of that particular building and sitting out on its deck)? I'm also not a meterologist or "wind energy engineer", but wouldn't such a gigantic structore block any breeze coming off the water? (aside from the "15 foot viewing areas" aka "wind tunnels")
Saturday, August 29 Report this