>
Proposed Amelia River restaurant heads to HDC amid questions over height, marina plans
FERNANDINA BEACH – The Historic District Council (HDC) on Thursday will consider a conceptual proposal for a new waterfront commercial complex on North Front Street that would bring restaurants, retail shops, marina services and potentially a 30- to 40-slip marina to a vacant parcel along the Amelia River.
The project, known as Amelia River Wharf, is proposed for the North Front Street property immediately north of Brett's Waterway Cafe and within the city's Community Redevelopment Area waterfront district. The application seeks conceptual approval from the Historic District Council before moving into more detailed engineering and site-plan review.
One issue likely to draw scrutiny from the Historic District Council is the building's height. While the CRA Design Guidelines generally limit waterfront buildings to 30 feet above the base flood elevation, city staff concluded that portions of the proposed design — specifically rooftop screening and parapet elements intended to conceal mechanical equipment — appear to exceed the allowable height. Staff stated the design will need to be modified before final approval can be granted.
Developer representative Ron Flick of Compass Group Development, acting on behalf of property owner Osteen Company LLP, proposes approximately 28,000 square feet of covered commercial space elevated above flood levels and designed to accommodate multiple restaurants, specialty retail shops and marina-related businesses.
According to application materials, the development would include a large waterfront restaurant, a second-story restaurant, six retail spaces, outdoor dining areas, public observation decks and a continuation of the riverfront boardwalk along the property. Site plans also show parking along Front Street and future gangway access to a marina extending into the Amelia River.
The proposal would occupy a roughly 0.88-acre waterfront parcel zoned Industrial Waterfront, one of the few remaining undeveloped riverfront properties near downtown. City planning documents indicate the proposed uses — including restaurants, retail shops, marina facilities and marine recreation services — are permitted within the zoning district.
"The proposed Amelia River Wharf project is designed in a coastal, maritime style, drawing inspiration from working fishing wharves, shingle-clad fishing houses, and adjacent riverfront properties," the application states. Proposed architectural features include cedar-style shingles, standing-seam metal roofs, muted colors and vertically oriented windows intended to blend industrial waterfront character with Fernandina Beach's historic downtown architecture.
The proposal also includes a public-access component. Plans show pedestrian pathways on both sides of the building connecting Front Street to the riverfront, allowing continued public access to the waterfront and boardwalk system. City staff concluded the project satisfies the CRA's required waterfront view corridors, including the mandatory 15-foot side-yard corridors intended to preserve views and access to the river.
The issue of waterfront view corridors has become increasingly important as development interest along Front Street grows. Earlier this year, city planning staff issued a memorandum clarifying that waterfront projects must preserve designated side-yard visibility corridors and public access routes connecting downtown streets to the Amelia River. The memo noted that preserving these corridors is intended to maintain the city's visual and physical connection to the waterfront. While staff generally found the proposal consistent with applicable guidelines, planners identified at least one issue requiring further revision.
A rooftop parapet shown on the plans appears to exceed the maximum height allowances established by the CRA Design Guidelines and will need to be modified before final approval can be granted.
The project must undergo a formal Technical Review Committee site-plan review, demonstrate compliance with parking and lot-coverage requirements, address utility and stormwater concerns, and secure all necessary local, state and federal permits. A traffic study could also be required if the development is projected to generate more than 400 average daily vehicle trips.
The Historic District Council will consider whether the overall concept is appropriate for the riverfront location and whether the project should proceed to the next stage of design review. Conceptual approval would not authorize construction but would provide guidance to the applicant before returning with final architectural and site-plan details.
Comments
9 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
Mark Tomes
No matter how much they try to dress up the public access criteria, the conceptual drawing tells it like it is: just a lot of commercial space taking up what should be an open park with play structures, water fountains, picnic tables and benches, strolling lanes, pavilions and gazebos to get out of the hot sun and the stormy rains, etc. And directly across the street is the proposed 45-foot townhome monstrosity. A look at any successful waterfront development across the country shows open spaces, pedestrians everywhere, places to sit and relax and look at the river or lake or ocean or bay, not a bunch of commercial development. Shoppes, Shoppes, Shoppes: just more catering to wealthy tourists and not to the locals.
Tuesday, June 16 Report this
FunnyGirl4615
The HDC needs to stick to the script. The area is already very congested with limited parking and the railroad running right through all of this. A welcome center is a nice idea but will only serve to increase the congestion in that area.
Tuesday, June 16 Report this
Mingnmilo
First thing I noticed is it absolutely kills the view from Salty Pelican for one short row of townhomes. It's one thing to block the view from the backside of industrial buildings and a parking lot, but quite another to deprive businesses a water view they've had for customer enjoyment for years. There is inadequate new parking to support this build. FB already has a welcome center downtown.
Tuesday, June 16 Report this
NTCallis
I would recommend the decision makers take a site visit to St. Petersburg downtown. What they have done there is nothing short of a miracle. It attracts tourists, locals. All low lying public spaces. Lovely art installations to admire. The end of the historic pier has been completely reimagined although we don’t anything with that high a profile the rest of the project is worth studying.
Tuesday, June 16 Report this
DaveLott
Mark, City tried to purchase this property from Simmons several times and even threatened eminent domain until he was able to get a property appraiser to appraise the property at $4 million. Always thought that if there was an appraisal for that then the county appraiser should set that amount for the tax appraisal instead of the $519,000 currently set.
Tuesday, June 16 Report this
PMallory
It looks as if the entire large structure is not on any
land but completely over the water. Seems like that would be “state waters” and unbuildable.
Any one out there have some insight on this?
Tuesday, June 16 Report this
JBurns
Goodbye to what little is left
Wednesday, June 17 Report this
Karen1952
I attended the original TRC hearing and was appalled. Flick, the developer involved in the Trengali nightmare, is running this sideshow. He wants to extend the property 80ft out from the shoreline, which puts it into the boat traffic lane. In the eminent domain case, Bean, Sturges and Ayscue voted down the suit because they didn’t like the city taking property from someone who didn’t want to sell. This is the express point of eminent domain and those three individuals are responsible for this mess. Plus that lawsuit had problems as the surveyor used submerged land for their assessment. To top it off, I believe the ACOR had to approve this,
Wednesday, June 17 Report this
RobertR
I am a bit confused so please bear with me. Did not the City of FB just move forward with over $1 million to fund removal/demo of Bret's and the pier soon(determined three plus years ago) to suffer a catastrophic failure? From this preliminary design I see a complete commercial development on piers in a navigable river. Am I missing something?
Center Street is wall to wall shops, etc. Why more? I really thought the waterways(like a river bottom),Waterfront and river views belonged to We The People not commercial development. Look at any other waterfront successful public use development plan. It is not what is shown on this "design". What happened to all the harmonization with open spaces on Amelia Island Parks&Rec has been espousing? Allowing this design is yet another step in the ever advancing killing of what has made this island unique.
Thursday, June 18 Report this