Proposed expansion of Cedar Key's Historic District and erroneous planning maps came under attack at the January 31 workshop meeting at City Hall. Under the strict guidelines of Mayor/commissioner Paul Oliver, the meeting was orderly, but long. For the first time in the planning process since the 2004 charrette, attendance of a planning meeting was strong. 
Margie Vanlandingham pointing out errors in the draft Comp Plan.
|
The expansion of the Historic District was addressed first, in deference to the many attendees concerned with just that issue. Some citizens expressed uncertainty regarding the historic status of their properties. However, there was little uncertainty about the opposition to the expansion of the Historic District boundaries. The chief objection, clearly stated by Commissioner Gene Hodges, was the control of one's own property. The symbolic and proverbial choice of one's screen door design typified the objections. The Historic District, established in 1990, is a ten-block rectangle between First and Third Streets. The proposed expansion of the district would include twenty-four additional blocks northward to the Cedar Key School. The possibility of a referendum to allow voters to decide the issue was raised by Commissioner Sue Colson and may be possible according to City Attorney David Coffey. The idea was countered by Commissioner Hodges with the suggestion that only voluntary participation by individuals would be acceptable to him. Mayor Oliver ended the Historic District discussion by saying that he will vote for voluntary participation when it comes to a vote at a later time. (No voting may take place at a meeting in the workshop format.) The next step in the revision of the Comprehensive Plan will be for the Commission to request a recommendation from the Local Planning Agency regarding the wording of the Historic District portion of the Comprehensive Plan. Future workshops are promised. The remainder of the January 31 workshop covered technical problems in the draft Comp Plan. Lack of precision in the planning maps, zoning issues, seawall issues and density issues predominated. Bob Treat, who has attended nearly every planning session in the past forty-two months, said the shoreline maps erroneously show marsh where there are buildings and dry land that is marsh. A specific example he cited is an error of forty to fifty feet of marsh shown as dry land, based on a very recent survey. Treat closed his presentation saying," Bad documentation is bad government." As a specific recommendation he said that, "land use judgments should be based on current surveys." Margie Vanlandingham followed Treat's presentation, noting that she had not colluded with Treat. However, her critique of the draft Comp Plan focused initially on specific errors in the planning maps. She pointed out that better reference maps are available than those used for preparation of the draft. In just eight blocks in the downtown area she identified eleven errors in land use designation. Vanlandingham provided the Commission with a five page report entitled "Problems, Concerns and Suggestions on the City of Cedar Key's Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments Presented January 31, 2008." Beyond the map errors tallied her report refuted the draft Comp Plan's conclusions regarding future housing densities. She concluded that good rezoning, zoning and density decisions can only be made based on reliable data and maps. |
