My Preview
CRA Agenda
Evening Agenda
Morning CRA meeting YouTube (note there’s a 3 minute clip of the meeting end.)
Evening Land Use YouTube
In the preview I discussed the agenda for the CRA and that it was primarily focused on the revamping of grant programs. Specifically the business grants. Again, I can’t sing the praises of the changes that have been made within the CRA from a staffing and process stand point enough. Speaking to the grant program, I do get an itch when we start talking about “stacking” grants that are administratively approved. I trust Assistant City Attorney Massey to write these to be as objective as possible but favorites can still be played. This is going to require oversight from the CACs as well as the public. Fortunately for us, CRA staff are already prepared for quarterly reporting.
The only other item on the agenda of significance was the CAC Chair report for Ybor City CRA district. The Chair is someone I recognize from their service as the Chair of the Bario Latino Commission. Their dedication to Ybor is unquestionable. But from the cheap seats, it sounded like a Chamber Of Commerce report. I also took offense (and judging from some looks in the crowd, I wasn’t the only one) regarding their comments about Ybor and affordable housing. Which gets back to the “sounded like a Chamber of Commerce report.” There was mention of possible artist studio/loft opportunities which is absolutely laughable to someone who knows the history of artists in Ybor. But again, the focus of the meeting was on the improvements in process, transparency and making the grants more accessible to more businesses in all of the CRA districts with better targeting of economic development.
Evening Land Use
Reminder all the items on the agenda were first readings and except for the items that failed, there will be a second public hearing with an opportunity to speak, either in person or by emailing city council The evening Land Use hearing was not short of major developments. The main event kicked off the evening with the Future Land Use amendment for the Tampa Heights YMCA property. Which is probably a good time to reiterate what was stated by Council member Hurtak regarding having FLUA hearings on the same night as the zoning change. It’s just a bad idea. But I believe is allowed by state statute at the request of the applicant. So first Council was asked to change the future land use designation for the property to the second-highest category in terms of density, U-60. But because the zoning hearing was the same night, residents spoke to the specifics of the project and issues that concerned them with the building proposed. Which wasn’t at issue. That didn’t stop council members from circling back to the issues and drawing out this part of the evening. They weren’t voting on the item height or number of trees removed or anything other than “do we want more people living in this spot in the future than currently planned?” Council voted unanimously that yes, this is where we want density.
The second act of this trilogy was dealing with the property across Palm, the end of Franklin St and the odd Y shape. No one is sure why it was done, it wasn’t part of the original design of the block. It looked to me when they showed the map someone had the idea that a circular could come down Tampa St and then turn back up Florida Ave. Funny how the applicant emphasized all of the transit at this location. The plan to remove the Y and build a plaza as part of restoring the Central Oil Building makes sense and passed without issue.
The final act was about the actual planned development. I noted in the preview the ARC voted against recommendation of the project. Since then the applicant revised their plan leaving the property east of Florida Ave in the local historic district as zoned and scaling back the planned size of the building. The final design for that building will still need to go through an Architectural Review. This will be the new home of the YMCA. Noted during public comment is that the YMCA are not outright selling the property, they are developing it with a land lease to better ensure funding long term. They emphasized what this would do for their ability to provide services in more parts of the city.
At the heart of the opposition to the project is the height. The building between Tampa St and Florida Ave, where the YMCA is now, would at it’s peak be 26 floors (give or take a floor, there was several heights mentioned but a max height of 270 ft I believe was put in the site plan). The eastern side of the building along Florida, facing the historic district would be capped at 150 feet creating a step back for the top of the building. I don’t blame the folks east of the building being upset with a mountain being erected and blocking out the sun. I’m not sure what height wouldn’t cast a shadow. Council member Clendenin talked about “signature” buildings and asked the architect about them and this one. His firm also designed The City Center at Hanna Ave and he noted it being a signature building and design. While elevation was mentioned regarding the lack of evacuation required for this land, it wasn’t mentioned what a 26 story peak would add to the city skyline considering how much higher than downtown it sits. I imagine the architects considered it. Ultimately first reading passed 5-1 (Carlson abstaining, Viera voting no).
Item 6 – 2402 W Cypress St when I reviewed this, simply reading the variances, I didn’t think it stood a chance. When I saw the presentation, and recognized the property, I thought it had a shot. An odd lot on the corner of two transit oriented roadways with a small existing single family building. Proposal was to build another building ala a duplex. But the proposed building would be 3 stories because apparently the required parking for a duplex is 5 parking spaces. I couldn’t help but wonder if a more modest sized home with a parking waiver would have faired any better. There was also neighborhood opposition to the project that I’m not sure smaller/less parking would have satisfied.
Item 9 was the other major development before Council. Reimagining West Shore Mall. The questions I had about trees were answered. The land needs to be raised for flood mitigation and in the words of the project arborist, “sad parking lot oaks”. It would be interesting to know if those trees could be moved/rehabbed. They are 25-30 years old with stunted root growth but even if a handful could be saved and planted somewhere they could flourish, they could live 10 times that long.
The main sticking point on the project, and resolving it before second reading being a contingency for several votes, was a 15 foot wide piece of land the mall is offering at no cost for an additional lane on Westshore. IF FDOT determines it’s needed. The current language proposed gives FDOT 3 years to make the determination on the lane otherwise the mall will utilize the land. The concern is what about in 10 years? The traffic engineer for the project covered all of the work in the pipeline for the new $1.2 billion dollar interchange to the west of the mall and around the West Shore area to reconnect the grid. He touched on the projected reduction of traffic it will have on Kennedy and West Shore. I’m going to go out on a limb and say he’s probably discussed with FDOT the issue and that’s where the 3 year time line came from. But the neighborhood south of Kennedy and the mall is well organized and represented and will get their assurances before this passes second reading.
Item 11 I had a lot of questions that ultimately were unfounded. This is Zoo Tampa land and gives them another 100 parking spots. The grass parking is to protect trees, the drive aisles will be paved.