"With public sentiment, nothing can fail;  without it nothing can succeed." -- Abraham Lincoln

Crane Island page:

•   17 Mar 08        Go here to vote:  Should Crane Island keep its conservation designation?

Index:  

• 09 Mar 08  A Big win  Click here
• 31 July 07 Update  Click here
• 06 Jun 07  County traffic mess and Crane Island destruction  Opinion Page
• 28 Mar 07 Update                                                                                                   
• 21 Nov 06  City rescinds MOU approval
• 19 Nov 06  Round one...Click here
• 08 Nov 06  How county commissioners broke the law  Click here
• 30 Oct 06  County Commission gives Crane Island development OK Click here
• 04 Oct 06  County PZB votes to allow 169 units on Crane Island  Click here
• 19 May 06 The Wisdom of a Child......Click here
• 25 Apr 06  City and County sued over MOU  Click here
• 13 Mar 06 BOCC meeting  Click here
• 08 Feb 06  Memorandum Of Understanding to reflect the developers' new approach. Click here
• 26 Sept 05 LEGAL DEFENSE FUNDRAISER  Click here
• 15 Sept 05 Maintain Conservation Zoning Click here
• 22 Aug 05 Friends of Crane Island  Coalition formed to oppose development Click here
• 12 July 05 CFOF challenges development rights transfer and other points in City/County    Memorandum  of Understanding  Click here
• 25 Jan 05 AIP takes Royal Amelia Properties Click here 
• 10 Sept 04 Crane Island Access Road  Click here

Save Crane Island

Nassau County and City of Fernandina Beach commissioners are being asked to allow development on Crane

Island - including 169 homes and a 90-slip marina carved out of the island’s center !  Crane Island unique location

provides irreplaceable natural functions, wildlife habitat and is vulnerable to storm surges even in a Class 1 hurricane. 

           PLEASE HELP US SAVE CRANE ISLAND !

 The community has already been very generous with donations small and large to the Crane Island Legal Defense

Fund.  But we need your continued help to raise funds for what could be a protracted legal battle and pursue

acquisition of this unique conservation treasure in the River for future generations.   An anonymous donor has

agreed to match dollar-for-dollar any contributions made to the Crane Island Legal Defense Fund from this point

 forward. 

Please join us and send your check to:  Nassau Sierra Club (earmarked for “Crane Island Legal Defense Fund”

on the Memo line).  Mail to:  Nassau Sierra Club, P.O. Box 38, Fernandina Beach FL 32035. Thank you.

Thank you, Friends of Crane Island:  Amelia Island Association, Concerned Friends of Fernandina,

East Nassau Homeowners’ Council, Nassau Pilots Association, and Nassau Sierra Club.

 

• 09 Mar 08  A Big win

                                                                                                    _____________**____________

• 31 July 07 Update

 

                                                         ______________**______________

• 06 Jun 07  County traffic mess and Crane Island destruction  Opinion Page

 

• 28 Mar 07 Update

As expected, the county (with assistance from the AIC's attorney) has made a motion to dismiss our action.  We don't have the motion to dismiss yet as our attorney is involved in a trial.  But a hearing -- lawyer's arguments only -- is set for June 29th. 

                                                             _______**________

• 19 Nov 06  Round one...

                                                                                     __________**__________

 

• 08 Nov 06   How county commissioners broke the law

By approving the large-scale development of the Willis land on Crane Island, Nassau County commissioners - the four who voted to approve - made two illegal actions.  Commissioners Marianne Marshall, Jim B. Higginbotham, Tom Branan and Floyd Vanzant knowingly violated two sections of the county's comprehensive plan in approving the rezoning of the Willis land from conservation to residential.  The Willis land is the lower two-thirds of the island, the northern portion having been acquired by the Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) for a dredging spoil site. The first illegal action was breaking an agreement the county had with the state that Crane Island - and other land in the coastal high hazard area - would be developed at no more than one house for five acres, a total of 49 houses for the property claimed by the Willis family rather than the 169 homes approved. In 1991 the state rejected the county's draft comprehensive plan on the grounds that it was "not adequate to protect wetlands."  The state legislature had established wetland protection policies that were adopted also by the Northeast Florida Regional Plan.  The state suggested the 1:5 ratio would be acceptable. After two years of negotiation, Nassau County entered into a stipulated agreement with the state in which the 1:5 ratio for Crane Island and other Coastal High Hazard Area lands was accepted and the 1:5 ratio for lands designated conservation/wetland was made part of the county's comprehensive plan. This agreement was a binding contract between the county and state. State law says that any change to a comp plan must be approved by the state.  Three times Nassau, at the behest of developers, tried to change the conservation designation of the Willis land, but all three times the state refused.  As everyone knows, a contract can only be legally broken if all the parties to the agreement agree. About a year ago, the Amelia Island Co., representing the Willis family, proposed that section 1.09.03 of the comp plan permitted the county to change the designation of the land from conservation to residential.  County Attorney Mike Mullin, unsure, asked for a meeting with the state's Department of Community Affairs, which oversees such matters.  At that meeting the DCA attorney, senior planner for our district and planning division director unanimously said that 1.09.03 could not be used to change the comp plan's 1:5 requirement. They said it would be an attempt to make an "end run" around state law that requires state review of comp plan amendments. Disregarding this legal advice, attorney Mullin (who has resigned effective the end of this year to consider offers from the business world) gave commissioners his opinion that 1.09.03 could be used to change the zoning on the Willis land.  By accepting this opinion (commissioners could have rejected it in favor of the DCA opinion), the four assenting commissioners violated state law by approving the zoning change without submitting a comp plan amendment to the state. The second law violation came in the interpretation of how 1.09.03 was applied to the Willis land.  This was the responsibility of the county's Growth Management Department, which instead of doing its own due diligence accepted the interpretation provided by the Amelia Island Co. that 1.09.03 made the Willis land residential.  It made a "leap of faith" that the developer - Amelia's 800-pound gorilla - was correct.  It wasn't. Policy 1.09.03 has two parts: "... areas that are not jurisdictional wetlands (uplands not under state jurisdiction) will be allowed to be developed at the least intense adjacent land use densities and intensities."  The adjacent land to the Willis land is the FIND site on the northern third of Crane Island. Because the FIND site remains designated conservation that is the only legal designation that applies to the adjacent Willis land. The second part reads: "Where the adjacent land use remains wetlands the county will allow the use to be the least intense use bordering on the surrounding wetland."  The Crane Island wetlands owned by the Willis family are surrounded by areas designated conservation on the county's Future Land Use Map.  As a result, the only designation that can be applied to the Willis wetlands is conservation. Instead, the Amelia Island Co. reached across a half-mile of conservation areas to Brady Point to claim that development's residential zoning should apply to the Willis land.  By accepting the developer's interpretation and ignoring the future land use map, the four county commissioners violated the county comprehensive plan. When elected officials violate the law the only recourse the public has is to seek justice in the court.  If the public does not, it will be giving government a blank check to violate the law in other cases.  The Friends of Crane Island - a coalition led by the local Sierra Club and including the Amelia Island Association, East Nassau Homeowners' Council, Concerned Friends of Fernandina and a group of local pilots - is taking such action.  The coalition has filed one suit against county/city action concerning the Willis land; it was heard in District Court on Oct. 27.  A second suit opposing the county commission's decision on the legal grounds explained above will be filed soon.  Legal action is expensive. If you would like to join the public's fight against the illegal actions of the county commission, please contact me at rweintraub@bellsouth.net or 491-6817. As presented in the News-Leader By Robert M. Weintraub/East Nassau Homeowners' Council

 

                                                        ___________**____________

30 Oct 06 County Commission gives Crane Island development OK   The room was packed with Nassau County residents for and against Crane Island Development at Monday night's County Commission meeting, when commissioners heard five hours of testimony before basically giving a nod to the project. MARY HURST/Staff-   02 Nov 06  By MARY HURST, Nassau Neighbors staff writer   YULEE - The signs read "No Rezoning of Crane Island," "No to Bogus Land Swap," "Control Development. Control Our Future." A standing-room only crowd overflowed from Nassau County Commission chambers last Monday as commissioners conducted public hearings on the rezoning of Crane Island and related development issues. After five hours of hearings on four items, commissioners agreed that Crane Island can be developed after they take a closer look at the details. Opponents say they are preparing to take the matter to court and will seek an injunction if the commission approves the development plan Monday. Commissioners voted Monday to change allowed land-use densities on 311 acres at Long Point, an Amelia Island Co. development across from the Amelia Island Plantation. Both are managed by the Amelia Island Co., which is one of the developers seeking to build an upscale community on Crane Island. Commissioners also reduced by 130 the number of homes originally allowed to be built at Long Point. To make up for building on Crane Island in the Coastal High Hazard Area, the Amelia Island Co. is using a new state law which allows it to reduce the number of development units at Long Point to compensate for the ones they want to build on Crane Island. Commissioners also voted to rezone 207 acres of Crane Island from open rural and single family residential to a Planned Unit Development, allowing more units to be built per acre. However, commissioners delayed approval of the actual plans for the proposed development on Crane Island, which is west of the Fernandina Beach Municipal Airport and is one of the last undeveloped tracts of land on Amelia Island. Residences and a marina Plans call for 169 residences - single-family homes and townhouses - and a 90-slip private marina as well as community docks and a public access park. The development would be accessed by extending Bailey Road. Commissioners were slated to have a special meeting to discuss the PUD on Friday and then vote on the proposal Monday. "There are some public safety issues I'm concerned about," Commissioner Ansley Acree said. "It's the number of piers in the marina, the size of lots, open spaces and the height of trees. I'd like to have a workshop." Commissioner Jim B. Higginbotham agreed.  "I want to get this over with but that's a great move," he said. Commission Chairman Tom Branan said he didn't mind spending more time on the PUD: "It's the meat and potatoes of the development."  Earlier in the meeting, Branan said he had been dealing with Crane Island development off and on since 1987.  "We don't want this thing to happen again," he said.  "It's kind of evolved.  If I had it to do over again, I'd say leave it conservation and that's it." Avoiding a review Crane Island has been designated conservation wetlands since the Future Land Use Map and the county's comprehensive land use plan was adopted in the early 1990s. Under that designation, only 41 units could be built. By rezoning the land to a Planned Unit Development, opponents argue developers are trying to avoid review by the Department of Community Affairs, which must approve changes to comp plans and Future Land Use Maps. Friends of Crane Island said they will seek an injunction to keep developers from proceeding until the case can be settled in court. They cannot file the papers until the commission officially approves the PUD. That suit would join another legal challenge by Friends of Crane Island. Opponents went before Circuit Court Judge Brian Davis Friday for a hearing on a lawsuit filed against Fernandina Beach and Nassau County by five plaintiffs, all members of Friends of Crane Island. A violation of laws? Their suit claims the city and the county violated a number of state and local laws in a Memorandum of Understanding they adopted last year. The Memorandum outlined the various approvals the proposed Crane Island development would need and which entity would be responsible for considering each approval request. The lawsuit claimed Fernandina Beach and Nassau County in the agreement allowed developers to apply to the county to rezone Crane Island without first applying to the Department of Community Affairs. The Fernandina Beach City Commission on Oct. 11 voted not to withdraw from the Memorandum of Understanding, which some commissioners were concerned could leave them open to lawsuits. New Nassau County Growth Management Director Walter Fufidio told commissioners Monday the county needs to keep control of future land use. mary.hurst@jacksonville.com

                                                                  ________**________

 

• 24 Oct 06  Please attend BOCC meeting 9am, Oct 27th at County Chambers...Crane Island PUD special meeting and  Oct 30th, 7pm for the BOCC vote on the PUD details.

                                                                          __________**__________

 

• 04 Oct 06 County PZB votes to allow 169 units on Crane Island
  At last night's Planning & Zoning Board (PZB) meeting, as expected, the board was unanimous in giving what the Crane Island developers asked for.
  In response to our comments that the 1.09.03 issue will be heard in court on Oct. 27 and that the Board should wait until the courts have ruled on the legality of the application of 1.09.03, Mike Mullin said the suit does not concern itself with the legality of 1.09.03, but with other issues.  He implied that the suit was improperly brought and he said point blank that we should have sued to stop the county from holding these meetings to consider the development;  as we didn't, he said, the Board -- and the commissioners on Oct 23rd, are free to make their decisions, and based on those decisions, the developer would be free to proceed as planned.
   
   Robert M. Weintraub

 

                                                              __________**__________

 

• 19 May 06 The Wisdom of a Child......

Excerpted from the News-Leader...........Crane Island in the classroom In January the classes of Mary Martha Embry, teacher of Fernandina Beach's gifted elementary students grades 1-5, Southside Elementary, began studying wetlands and their importance now and in the future. They clipped articles from the News-Leader and discussed them, then decided to write letters outlining their feelings about several of the articles. The following letters are written by third-, fourth-, and fifth-grade students. Crane Island should not have homes for humans! Panthers and other animals say that's their home. It would destroy the animal homes and then they would have no place to live. My family has lived in Nassau County for many generations. We are animal lovers. Stop the planning for homes on Crane Island. It's an error! Carra/third grade                                                                                                       ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ You don't understand, these animals need homes. The people who want to build on Crane Island should just be told No! The wetlands are important to the animals. These animals need our help. Say no! There are enough condos and houses already. Save the animals. Say no! Amelia/third grade ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ Fortunately Crane Island is beautiful. Unfortunately it is so beautiful that people want to build houses on the island! Crane Island is home to wetland animals such as the panther. If people build houses on this island there is a 95 percent chance that many of the animals will become extinct. Also, the natural wetland armor against hurricanes will disappear. Julia/third grade ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ This construction boom could cause a major drop in environmental population while making the population of the economy rise. Hynson/third grade~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ This construction catastrophe could knock out the entire Northeast Florida panther race. This will destroy all the trees and homes where animals live. I agree with Marshall McCrary that the county needs to have more control over where they put the roads. I think the construction should stop. Liam/third grade ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ Turtles are magnificent beings. To save them we must conserve them and give them room to lay their eggs like on Crane Island. Please keep room for them and stop building or else it will be all over. If you build more you kill more. Mike/third grade~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ A long time ago panthers used to roam as part of our island. But since the Fernandina Airport and many roads, subdivisions, condos and apartments have been built, the panthers have evacuated across the water to Crane Island. Now, developers want to construct 169 homes on Crane Island. I know it would be paradise, but the ANIMALS need it more than we do! It will destroy our amazing wetlands leaving a wide, and I mean WIDE, doorway to hurricane destruction. Instead, let the owners of Crane Island do their grandchildren a favor - make Crane Island a National Park! McLane/fourth grade gifted ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ If you minimize the wetlands animals will die, so will plants. It will be easier for storms, floods and hurricanes to cause severe damage to all living and non-living things because the natural "sponge" power will be limited. This affects the entire ecosystem. 25 feet of a wetland = 50 percent more DISASTER!!! Jackson/fourth grade gifted~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ If the county decides to reduce the size of our wetlands then they will reduce the amount of plants and animals, which would affect the whole ecosystem. Plus, we would be welcoming floods and many other major storms because we have nowhere for the water from these storms to be stored or contained. They may be destroying Nassau County bit by bit. It is my classmates and my own concern that this should not be allowed. 50 to 25 feet is a recipe for disaster!!! Dakota/fourth grade gifted~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ A public hearing Monday was going to decide about reducing the wetland buffer (land) by 25 feet. Many people are speaking out. Another public hearing will be held to decide the issue on April 10. The public will then be allowed to speak. Affects me: This makes me feel angry because all those wetland animal homes will be destroyed for 25 feet. Plus the animals will be killed. I don't understand why they would do this?! Why can't they build somewhere else? They're destroying the wetlands! This makes me sad, angry and I want to speak out. These people are hurting the web of life. They are destroying the "sponge" that controls flooding from hurricanes and other storms. Tanner/fifth grade gifted~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ This article is about a woman who doesn't know where to put her recyclables. She is worried about the environment and wants to know where the recycling place is. It could affect us because if we don't know where the recycling bins are, then the stuff that we can recycle will just end up in our trash. Then the trash mounds will get bigger. I have seen many trash bins around Amelia Island where we can put our recyclables. The newspaper was very effective to me because some people might not know where the recycling bins are that I've seen. At least the editor put down the location where you can drive to, to put your recyclables. Lana/fifth grade gifted~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ I have heard of good development. The plan for 169 homes on Crane Island is NOT good development. Here is a few reasons why. First, what about the animals like the deer and panthers and bobcats and countless others? Second, what about kids? We need Crane Island! Turn it into a state park or something that will protect the natural environment. Finally, the development seems to be in for a major sue fee. So please, Nassau County, make the right decision. Olivia/third grade~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ Crane Island is home to many animals and plants. If it is built on we may lose the island by flood during a bad storm or in a hurricane because the wetland sponge will be weak. Also, many birds won't have a place to lay eggs. Make it a national park. Don't let the owners choose. Nic/third grade~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ The Florida panther lives on Crane Island and they are endangered. They left Amelia Island because they require an undisturbed, large area of land near wetlands to survive. The wetlands act as sponges that help control damage from possible hurricanes by soaking up floodwater and then filtering the water. People should not be able to build on or near wetlands. If we build on Crane Island we will kill all of the animals, or they will move to other areas and some will die on the way. Destroy the wetlands and make a window for hurricanes. Wyatt/fifth grade gifted~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ Finite place, finite spaces   How can we make a difference? This article is about how people should get together and help the seaside birds. The real problem is that the birds are losing their resting habitats. The birds set their perch on seaside docks. You say, "OK, what's the problem?" The problem is nobody sees the problem! Birds are losing their resting spots because the docks are rotting away. So we need to make a difference. Maybe we need to build more docks. Not just boat docks, resting docks for the birds. We can help. We can make a difference! Haley/fourth grade gifted~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ I think they shouldn't build on Crane Island because it will affect all the animals and may cause endangerment or extinction. A panther is one of the endangered animals in the area. They no longer live on Amelia Island because of the vast construction and have been spotted on Crane Island. If they make buildings the animals might have to be relocated - but what if they cannot find a place to put them other than the zoo? If we build on Crane Island it would mess up the food web. It could also change the wetlands. We need the wetlands because it acts as a sponge for when there are hurricanes and storms. It soaks up the water so it doesn't flood in the area. It also filters water. I hope adults that can vote understand the seriousness of the situation! Jean/fifth grade gifted

 

 

• 25 Apr 06

Friends of Crane Island

News Release

 

NASSAU COUNTY, CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH SUED

OVER CRANE ISLAND MOU

Citizens Group files suit to protect Crane Island from increased density

          FERNANDINA BEACH, FL., April 25 – Legal action was filed yesterday against Nassau County and the City of Fernandina Beach by a group of citizen’s and organizations (known as the Friends of Crane Island) challenging the county and city’s joint agreement with the owners of Crane Island to allow development of Crane island.  The agreement would increase the allowable density on the undeveloped Crane Island located in the Intracoastal Waterway adjacent to Amelia Island. The agreement would allow densities that far exceed the maximum allowable number of units under the current Conservation/Wetlands designation for Crane Island.

           The action seeking judicial review was filed in Florida’s Fourth Judicial Circuit Court. The suit claims the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) would allow development of the island without seeking review and approval of a comprehensive plan amendment from the state Department of Community Affairs and would violate a number of state and local laws. 

           “The MOU agrees that the county will process applications for a rezoning without submitting a plan amendment to the Future Land Use Map designation to the state as required by law … and then annexation into the City as a non-conforming use in the City…,” all in violation of law. “Allowing 169 units exceeds the allowable units under the Conservation/ Wetlands designation of the property on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map (FLUM) by 300-400%.”

           Because the density is inconsistent with the County FLUM … and would not be allowable under the City’s Land Development Code the MOU violates the essential requirements of law contained in state statute, local codes and comprehensive plans of the City of Fernandina Beach and Nassau County.

                The legal action was brought by five individuals and an incorporated homeowner’s association. They are: Eric Titcomb, conservation chair of the Nassau Sierra Club; Robert Weintraub, who is president of the East Nassau Homeowners’ Council; Tom Coté-Merow, president of the Amelia Island Association Inc. (which is also a party to the litigation): Gordon R. Reilly of the Nassau Pilots Association; and, Julie Ferreira of Concerned Friends of Fernandina.  These five organizations formed a coalition called Friends of Crane Island to oppose the overdevelopment of the island, including the increase in density and the marina proposed to be dredged out of the island behind a proposed lock.     

           The lead attorney in the legal team assembled by Friends of Crane Island is Ralf Brookes of Cape Coral, Florida, who has been involved with the Crane Island issue on behalf of the Nassau Sierra Club for more than eight years. His website can be found at: www.RalfBrookesAttorney.com email: Ralf@RalfBrookesAttorney.com

 

                                                                                           _________**__________

 

                                                                                 

• 13 Mar 06 BOCC meeting

                                                                         __________**_________

• 08 Feb 06  At County Commission meeting  

  At today's (2/8) County Commission meeting, it was decided that there would be a public hearing before the County Commissioner's on Feb. 27 at 7 pm to amend the Crane Island Memorandum Of Understanding to reflect the developers' new approach.

  If you remember Eric's comments at the CFOF meeting- the developers now want to skip the MOU process because they believe it is taking too long and they have now stated that their development will be based upon a 1998 County ruling that the uplands of Crane Island were low density residential instead of the wetland/conservation zoning in place today. (At that time, the DCA challenged the County's ruling by saying CI was wetlands/conservation and not Low Density Residential).

   The county attorney Mike Mullin, Commissioners Branan and Acree, Chris Jackson and Marshall McCrary will meet with the Department of Community Affairs in Tallahassee on Feb. 22 to get the DCA's legal opinion regarding the developer's attempt to abandon the MOU and rely upon the County's 1998 ruling to develop CI.  Members of the Crane Island coalition will also be attending this meeting, and Eric Titcomb is attempting to get our lawyer to also participate. The funds we raised in August will be financing the lawyer's involvement.

   The application to make changes in the Long Point Development of Regional Impact (PLM West) in preparation to transfer density rights to Crane Island was withdrawn from this week's County P&Z meeting because it hadn't been properly advertised.  It might be on the agenda for March, but it could also be that the meeting with DCA on the 22nd might have some impact on when and how this will comes before the County.

   As sad news of the day:

  At the County Commission meeting this morning, S. Norman Bray, Nassau County Commissioner for FIND said that the Army Corps of Engineers has indicated that they believe there is more silt to be removed from the international waterway than previously determined.

   As a result, FIND has initiated a $92,000 study to determine three things:

       +  The quantity of the silt to be removed.

      +  The quality of the silt (e.g. can it be used for beach replenishment)

      +  Potential alternate spoil sites.

  Mr Bray said he welcomed the interest in having DEP take over the site, but that may be necessary if it is determined that the Crane Island spoil site is too small or otherwise not necessary to use in the future.

  In response to a question, Mr. Bray said that if the Crane Island site was no longer needed, FIND would dispose of the property through these means, in this order:

   First, through a swap with whoever owns the alternate site selected.  This would allow the Plantation/AIC to acquire the 35 acres on the north end of the island.  AIC would obtain rights to the alternate site -- or make an offer to the owner they couldn't refuse for the Crane Island site. 

   Second, if a swap could not be arranged, AND ONLY IF A SWAP COULD NOT BE ARRANGED, the land would be offered to other state agencies.  If DEP or any other agency wanted to take over the site, they would have to wait in line to see what developers will do.

   Third, the land would be offered for sale to the county. Fourth, the land would be offered for sale to the city; and Fifth, the land would be put up for bid.

   It should be obvious that as soon as a decision is made to abandon the Crane Island FIND site and an alternate is selected, the Plantation/AIC will move on purchasing the alternate site and arranging a swap in order to expand their developable acres. 

   

• 26 Sept 05   Join us at the Florida House Oct 2nd.... 

  LEGAL DEFENSE FUNDRAISER

  AT FLORIDA HOUSE SUNDAY OCT 2, 5-7 PM

    

            The coalition of local public interest groups working to protect the wetlands/conservation designation of Crane Island will hold a fund raising event on October 2 at the Florida House in Fernandina Beach from 5 to 7 pm.

            The coalition -- Nassau Sierra Club, Amelia Island Association, East Nassau Homeowners' Council, Concerned Friends of Fernandina, Nassau Pilots Association -- has established the Crane Island Legal Defense Fund through the Nassau Sierra Club in the event legal action is necessary.

            Developers are pressing to change the Nassau Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation for Crane Island from wetlands/conservation to residential so they can build 169 houses on the island surrounding a 90-slip boat marina to be carved out of the island’s heart.  The issue is scheduled to come before the county Planning & Zoning Board on Tuesday, Oct. 4, and before the Board of County Commissioners on Monday, Oct. 24. 

            The coalition maintains that permitting a large-scale residential development on Crane Island will violate more than ten federal, state and county laws.  The coalition is prepared to initiate legal action against the county should it approve the FLUM change.  It has been raising money for a legal defense fund to prepare for court action should it become necessary.

            A fun afternoon is being planned with music, buffet dinner, a silent auction and 50/50 club.  Tax-deductible donations for the event will be $25 per person.  Donation for children under 12 will be $7.   Checks should be made to the Nassau Sierra Club with a notation it is for the Crane Island Legal Defense Fund.  Donations can also be sent to Nassau Sierra Club P.O. Box 38, Fernandina Beach, FL 32035.

            The event will be held in the Florida House courtyard.  In the event of rain it will be moved inside.

             For more information call- Robert Weintraub at 904-491-6817.

  
   
• 15 Sept 05  Maintain Conservation Zoning:

                                              ____________**________

• 22 Aug 05 Crane Island Coalition formed to oppose development

FIVE GROUPS JOIN FORCES TO OPPOSE CRANE ISLAND DEVELOPMENT;

LEGAL RESPONSE PLANNED IF COUNTY CHANGES COMP PLAN

 

          Five Nassau County organizations have joined forces to prepare a legal response should the Nassau Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) change the county’s Comprehensive Plan to permit large-scale residential development of Crane Island. 

          Two homeowners groups – the Amelia Island Association and East Nassau Homeowners’ Council -- plus Concerned Friends of Fernandina and the Nassau Pilots Association, have agreed to form a coalition that would join with the Nassau County Sierra Club in its on-going legal defense of Crane Island’s conservation designation.

          The Sierra Club has been fighting the development of Crane Island, which is designated Conservation-Wetlands, for more than 20 years, according to local club issues chairman, Eric Titcomb, who said “we welcome the support of these organizations that represent so many thousands of taxpayers in this part of the county.”  A Sierra Club attorney, Ralph Brooks of Cape Coral, Florida, has prepared a legal brief that identifies more than a dozen U.S., Florida, Nassau County and City of Fernandina Beach laws that would be violated if the Crane Island development is permitted to proceed, Titcomb explained.

          The group is holding discussions with several attorneys with the intention of retaining one to prepare legal action should that become necessary, according to Robert Weintraub, president of the East Nassau Homeowners’ Council, an umbrella organization for homeowners groups between the Amelia River and Yulee.  “There are so many laws being violated it is obvious we have a very strong case and we are confident of winning if this issue gets to a courtroom,” Weintraub said.  A fund-raising campaign has been launched to build a legal war chest to finance the expected legal fight, Weintraub said.  Donations will be collected by the Nassau County Sierra Club which is setting up a Crane Island Legal Defense Fund.

          “We have to work quickly,” said Julie Ferreira of Concerned Friends for Fernandina, an organization of homeowners primarily in the City of Fernandina Beach.  “We plan to organize a show of force at the Sept. 6 meeting of the Nassau Planning & Zoning Board and the Sept. 26 County Commission meeting.  If the county approves the comprehensive plan change they will know they are going against the will of many thousands of voters,” she said.

          “We are preparing a mission statement that all five groups will support,” said Tom Coté-Morow, co-president of the Amelia Island Association which represents some 32 homeowners associations and 25 percent of Island residents.  The AIA’s already published position paper against the proposed Crane Island development will provide the basis for the mission statement, Coté-Merow explained.

          Gordon Reilly of the Nassau Pilots Association , said commercial interests in the area should also be concerned about the Crane Island development and join the fight because the viability of the airport will be compromised.  “The airport is an important economic resource for the island’s commercial and tourist industries,” he said.  Reilly warned that there have been some 14 air crashes on or near the airport in the last 20 years so the homes proposed for Crane Island will be in constant danger.  The Navy and Army Reserve use the airport for training purposes as part of the agreement that converted the airport from a military base to a private operation, he pointed out saying “It is incredulous that people will pay $1.2 million for a home and put up with a constant stream of Gulfstream's, Navy helicopters and Army night support aircraft flying a few hundred feet overhead.  Regardless of what’s on paper, if Crane Island is developed the airport’s future is dim.

          The coalition is also reaching out to residents of western Nassau to join the fight on the grounds that they can be affected financially and politically.

          “Nassau residents have already seen large increases in homeowners insurance bills due to last year’s hurricane damage, even though most of the damage was elsewhere,” Coté-Merow said.  “Crane Island is the lowest land in eastern Nassau and, according to the experts, will be flooded by even a passing hurricane causing millions of dollars in insurance claims that will be passed on to all Nassau residents.  In effect, people in Callahan, Bryceville and Hilliard will be paying for other people’s right to live on Crane Island.”

          “If the County Commissioners (BOCC) approves a special exception change to the county’s comprehensive plan it sets a precedent for similar changes everywhere in the county,” Ferreira pointed out.  “With so much new development planned for the Callahan and Bryceville areas, people there should be very concerned with their commissioners playing fast and loose with the comp plan,” she said. 

          Several fund-raising programs are being planned for the Crane Island Legal Defense Fund, according to Weintraub, including a possible wine-tasting event.  In the meantime, those wishing to make donations to the fund should send checks made out to the Nassau County Sierra Club at  P.O. Box 38, Fernandina Beach, he said.  These donations will be tax-deductible if designated for  Crane Island Legal Defense Fund, according to Titcomb.

 

Crane Island Coalition

                                                                         _______________**______________

 

• 12 July 05  CFOF challenges development rights transfer and other points in City/County Memorandum of Understanding

As a representative of Concerned Friends of Fernandina, I spoke before the Nassau County Commissioner's meeting on Monday evening, July 11th regarding the development of Crane Island. Currently, Crane Island is designated as "conservation" on the county's land use map which permits a maximum density of 1 home per 5 acres.  As everyone knows, the owners of Crane Island have been attempting for more than 15 year to develop the land at a much higher density.  The owners have sought extraordinary means to attempt to accomplish their objective, including threatening the City to stop allowing our children the use of the soccer fields by the airport.   Their latest effort involves an agreement with the Amelia Island Plantation to transfer density rights from the Plantation to Crane Island.  Based on documentation we have been given, CFOF challenges the legality of these development rights that the Amelia Island Plantation wants to transfer. 

For a number of years now Long Point has been completely developed, with all excess property now privately owned. To our knowledge the only property that the Plantation still owns at Long Point is the 123 acres that are occupied by the golf course and club house, and the 68 acres of marsh land that lies along the Amelia River.  Of course the Amelia Island Plantation is saying that they own the development rights for 800 units based upon the above acreage. Our contention is that if there is no developable land, there are no development rights that can be transferred.  The Plantation made a deliberate decision to build the Long Point golf course instead of houses. 

In 1985 when the Long Point DRI went through the approval process, there was an issue over the reason the developers wanted credit for 800 developable units on acreage that was not able to be developed. Of course in 1985 density wasn't an issue like it is today and the County gave the developers what they asked for. Years later we see that it appears the developers were stockpiling their development/density rights for future use.  Rather than seeing the County set precedent, CFOF would like to see a legal ruling on this situation.  Can developers legally transfer development rights based upon golf course and marshland acreage, or is it a case that if you can't use them - you lose them?  The analogy I would give you is this:  as a City resident, I am permitted to build a house up to 35' high.  If I only build a single story house with a height of 18', do I have the right to give someone living elsewhere on the Island the 17' of height I didn't use so they could build their house up to 52' high?  Of course not; but that is exactly what the Plantation and the Crane Island owners are attempting to do.  

Certainly Long Point is not Crane Island, so CFOF also contends that transferring the buildable rights on Long Point's Coastal High Hazard area is quite different form the Coastal High Hazard area of Crane Island. Crane Island is a completely different geographical situation- its access is quite different and its impact on road capacity is very different. We would like for these differences to be analyzed by someone other than the developer. 

CFOF also believes that there is a significant problem with the planning, or lack thereof, for evacuation.  No one seems to be taking the evacuation problem seriously. It surprises us that watching the television coverage regarding the damage that Hurricane Dennis has wrecked upon Pensacola, as well as our personal experiences in previous years when evacuation was suggested/mandated, doesn't make local officials realize that hurricane evacuation is a significant problem for Nassau County. 

We certainly need our local officials to deal with these problems realistically so the citizenry of this County will not be endangered in the future.  A County Commissioner raised the evacuation issue in regards to a request to change commercial property for a Chester Road/A1A development to residential- why don't they apply the same reasoning to Crane Island? 

Getting potential Crane Island residents on and off Amelia Parkway in an emergency evacuation situation is going to be quite different than evacuating residents from the south end of the island. The potential bottleneck on Amelia Parkway will be very dangerous.  Jack Healan said at the June 6th JPLA meeting that a traffic study had been done. Was this traffic study done for the conditions at Long Point or the conditions that the Crane Island development will be affecting? 

CFOF also questions the land area stated by the owners of Crane Island. In their permit application in 1988, the owners were requesting permission to build 99 homes and a 90-slip marina on their 76 acres of land.  Later that year, they modified their permit to claim the land encompassed 110 acres - the original 76 acres and 34 acres of wetlands/marsh. Now they claim they have 207 acres to compute their density level.  Can you now use wetlands in determining buildable acres?  

CFOF encourages both County and City officials to research all of the assertions that the developer's request for a Memorandum Of Understanding is being made upon. The developer wants to increase the buildable density rights from 41 houses to 169 houses. We feel that incomplete information is making the developer's request for a density of 169 houses with a Marina for 90 boat slips look one way; when in fact the reality will be very different.

 

Julie Ferreira

                                              ____________**___________ 

 

• 25 Jan 05

• 10 Sept 04

CRANE ISLAND ACCESS ROAD FAA Request for Comment Concerned Friends of Fernandina (CFOF) recently became aware of the notice for written comment by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regarding the release of land at the City’s airport for the purpose of building a public-access road that will service Crane Island. The comment period ends on September 17, 2004, so there is little time left. The full notice can be viewed at the Federal Register web site (http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html). Click on ‘Advanced Search’ feature and then select ‘Notices’; Specific Date On: 08/18/2004 and in the Search Box type ‘Fernandina Beach’ and this should take you to the notice. Given the level of controversy over Crane Island, CFOF would have liked the City to have been more proactive in providing its citizens updated status reports including this opportunity of citizen’s input. Please bear in mind that this issue is separate from the density development issue of which the FAA has no interest. As with most legal issues that drag on for years and years, this is a complicated issue. In an effort to better understand the background and facts of this case, CFOF requested permission to examine to all the City’s records pertaining to this matter. This request was handled expeditiously and we were provided with full access to all internal and external communications, drawings, maps and other documentation. Our layperson’s assessment of the situation is as follows: In 1999, the owners of Crane Island requested the City to provide access to their property since they claimed that they held recorded title to a 15’ wide right-of-way that crossed the airport property. The City denied this request. In January 2000, the owners of Crane Island initiated a lawsuit against the City of Fernandina Beach demanding that the City provide them access to their property as required by Florida law. As with any legal action, the City faced a choice: either pursue a judgment and run the risk of losing; or, seek some type of settlement that would be satisfactory to all parties. Since the lawsuit is still pending in a suspended state, the internal documents assessing the City’s legal position and confidence level in a victory are still sealed. If the City won, the owner’s claims would have been rejected and the City would not be required to provide property-enabling access to Crane Island. The worst-case scenario would be that a loss in court could force the City to shut down one or more of the runways because they would be judged to have encroached on private property. In December 2001, the City entered into a Consent Order to suspended the lawsuit while the parties sought a settlement. The Consent Order placed duties on each of the parties as follows: City of Fernandina Beach Submit application to FAA and FDOT for approval to the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) authorizing the construction of a 60’ wide public right-of-way easement to access Crane Island City would respond to requests for information from these agencies on a timely basis City would not be required to appeal an adverse ruling; but they would be required to assign their appeal rights to the Crane Island owners Approval must include assurances from the FAA and FDOT that the roadway will not result in an adverse impact on the funding of any past, current or future airport projects based on the current ALP Crane Island Owners Bear all costs for the engineering and construction costs of the proposed roadway including fencing Provide all additional wetlands mitigation, where required, at no cost to the City Record restrictive covenants - approved by the City, FAA and FDOT - prior to the development and sale of any lots to grant an "avigation easement" providing that ‘as long as the airport operates within legal standards for noise, property owners on Crane Island shall have no cause of action against the airport or City Additional insulation or other features will be used in the houses to be constructed to provide a level of noise insulation over what is normally required Crane Island will be developed for residential purposes only, although a private-use marina and community center are permitted. (Note: Initial proposals by the owner included a 20,000 sq. ft. retail center.) Owners will obtain all the necessary permits and provide proof to the City from all applicable agencies including: St. Johns River Water Management District; FL Dept. of Environmental Protection; US Army Corps of Engineers; Nassau County and the City. Upon approval, ownership of the disputed 15’ road will revert to the City. In the interim, the City and Youth Soccer Association would be allowed to use the area On February 10, 2004, the City Commission met in Executive Session and re-adopted and extended the Consent Order with an expiration of June 3, 2004. We have not been able to find documentation that indicates that the Commissioners has renewed the Consent Order and have requested the City Clerk and City Manager as to whether this action has taken place. Based on discussions with some of the parties involved, it appears there was an assumption that these federal and state agencies would never approve such an application. However, after numerous efforts over several years, the developer (Civitas) representing the Crane Island owners has successfully presented plans for a public access road that have been approved by the FAA, the Florida DOT and Florida’s Department of Environmental Protection. In early August, the City requested the FAA to release the land necessary to build the road from being used for aeronautical purposes. An independent appraiser has placed the value of the affected land at $747,000, which will be paid by the Crane Island owners to the City. According to the City Manager, these funds will go to the Airport Enterprise Fund and be used as the City’s share of contributions required for future airport grants. As noted earlier, the owners will bear the construction costs of this road. We could find no estimates of this cost; but they are believed to be substantial. CFOF has heard two ‘arguments’ for the City’s past and current role in this effort that we can find no basis in fact: Misconception #1: The City couldn’t oppose this effort. By agreeing to the Consent Order, the City certainly had to tone down their aggressive opposition that had existed to that point. However, while the consent order requires the City to submit applications for the FAA and FDOT approvals, we read nothing in the Consent Order that would have prohibited the City from stating its opposition to this action. An FAA official involved in this matter told CFOF that if the City had objected, the FAA would have supported the City. All should be aware that the FAA and FDOT did raise a number of objections to some of the earlier plans and the owners/developers either modified their plans to comply or challenged the agency’s objection and were sustained. With their approval, the FAA has indicated that the proposed roadway will not impact the safety for airplane operations (citing the presence of Amelia Parkway and Buccaneer Trail in closer proximity to runways than the proposed road). Misconception #2: The current City Commission had their hands tied by the decision of their predecessors to enter into this Consent Order. As shown earlier, the City Commission had on February 10, 2004 or currently has the ability to re-start the lawsuit by not agreeing to an Extension of the Consent Order. Since we have not been able to see an evaluation by the City’s legal representatives, it is impossible for us to know their assessment of the City’s merits in defending this action. While the settlement might be the most prudent action to take, for current officials to claim an inability to follow other courses of action due to decisions made by their predecessors is disingenuous. Additionally, the most recent correspondence we reviewed from the FDOT did NOT provide the assurances required in the Consent Order that future airport grants would not be impacted. In fact our reading was just the opposite, with the FDOT warning the City that if the roadway and resulting development impacted the current or future operations of the airport, it would impact funding and may require the City to refund monies that had been previously awarded if the projects funded by those grants were impaired in some way. CFOF encourages everyone having an interest in this matter to write the FAA by the September 18th deadline. Letters should be addressed to: Richard M. Owen, Program Manager, Orlando Airports District Office, 5950 Hazeltine National Drive, Suite 400, Orlando, FL 32822-5024. As you formulate your letter, please consider the following issues: Impact on future grants; conversion of airport property for non-airport usage; airport safety.  Dave Lott , CFOF                                                                                                 _________________**__________________