To be honest, I haven’t reviewed the CRA meeting Thursday morning but I did watch Thursday evening’s rezoning hearings. Council went until midnight (and had 4 other items on the agenda that lucky for them were missed notices and not heard). There were a couple of items that I didn’t highlight in the preview that turned out to be more contentious than the one I did. That one, in Tampa Heights at Florida & Columbus proved less controversial. The developer adjusted their plan to accommodate the concerns of Architectural Review Commission (ARC) by moving the massing towards Florida and stepping down to the east as it approached the neighboring 3 historic homes. Interestingly they increased the number of units while reducing parking. They contended in their initial presentation when asked why they hadn’t reduced parking considering the location, the developer said that’s where the market is and sounded firm in their decision. They did stand firm on the amount of retail on the ground floor. First reading passed 5-2 with Carlson and Viera voting no.

Items 1 & 2 are related to a development at Columbus and Boulevard. Procedurally it was confusing. The initial plan was to present both items (vacating an alley and the Planned Development – PD) and then Council would vote separately on each, but after hearing the full plan. Instead, Council changed their minds for some reason and voted on the vacating of the alley before hearing the presentation for the (PD). Once the alley was vacated, Council was basically committed to approving the PD. I will be very interested to see if the Tampa Heights Civic Association have any comment between first and second reading. The developer presented a letter of support from them. The neighboring folks in Ridgewood Park made clear that a year ago, with the original PD, they too gave their support. Then the developer snuck in this new plan to vacate the alley, use another alley off of Columbus as an entrance to exit onto Boulevard. The developer justification is that they didn’t realize they couldn’t build so close to Boulevard and the power lines that are at that corner thus having to shift the development west, vacate one alley and bring in delivery trucks through another. It seemed disingenuous at best to use a neighborhood association’s endorsement if you haven’t presented the newest plan. The rezoning passed first reading 5-2 with Carlson and Maniscalco voting no.

Item 9 was the one I missed that had the most public opposition.Suffice to say it was a common refrain that this might have been one of the most egregious applications to come before Council in a long time. It also had the most organized community response that I’ve observed. They had a powerpoint presentation they split up between several community members. They had their timing down with speaker waiver forms. They could give a clinic to other neighborhoods on how to do it. There wasn’t a motion to approve and the motion to deny the application was 7-0.

All items that were approved were first readings with second reading January 9, 2025 morning session. There will be no further action on item 9.