Publication Date: 07/05/09
A proposed settlement between the city of St. Augustine and Fish Island Development LLC over the size of a dock/marina on the Intracoastal Waterway is still on the table. The St. Augustine City Commission has pledged to make a decision one way or the other on July 13.
At issue is whether or not the developer will be allowed to build a 1,300-foot dock/marina for 75 boats. Should the city agree to the settlement or, in effect, lose a lawsuit in court over property rights and pay the developer not to build it? Either way the city pays out dearly.
Agreeing to a settlement puts the city in court against the opponents. They're already vocal about environmental impacts on the waterway and the damage to the scenic vista and have an attorney on board.
The city loses either way. It's time to end the debate.
The developer first asked for a 1,300-foot-long dock with a 10-foot-wide walkway and 100 slips for boats of 50 feet in length or longer. The proposed settlement is for an eight-foot walkway with 70 slips for residents and five public slips, and a see-through dock so that light can filter to the fragile underwater environment. The settlement also requires that the dock move closer to the Mickler-O'Connell Bridge over State Road 312, presumably to remove some of the complaints about a spoiled vista, and that no fuel be sold on site. It sounds reasonable only because the developer is already allowed a dock/marina under the property's 1998 rezoning.
The settlement proposal is sought to end a $9 million lawsuit against the city filed under the Bert J. Harris Act, a state private property rights law. If the settlement is reached, the presumption by the city is that the lawsuit will be dropped and both sides will pay their own attorneys' fees.
We hate it that the city is putting its shrinking tax revenues into court fights. We also don't like a vista being destroyed and the environment being harmed. If any mistakes were made by the city, it was in approving a marina/dock there 11 years ago. That's literally water under the bridge.
In 2007, a Record editorial said the city's decision must be based on facts, not emotions. That's still our view with a new twist. It's time for the city to consider buying the property.
We don't know how much it will cost; likely more than the $9 million to make the dock go away. But, the city's strong bond rating and bonding capacity should be enough to start the conversation and the exploration of how to pay it back.
Instead of throwing more money away on lawsuits, the city would gain valuable land. Above all, historic and environmentally rich Fish Island would be saved from development and serve the highest purpose: The public good.
Click here to return to story:
http://www.staugustine.com/stories/070509/opinions_1710520.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
No comments:
Post a Comment