View both agendas.

CRA Agenda

It’s fitting the CRA Director will be presenting the Fiscal Year 2026 budget while the board figures out how to fund in the current fiscal year two $5 million projects. One already approved in the Sanchez Y Haya project and one up for a vote in the UrbanWorx project.

UrbanWorx is up first on the agenda, continued from June. The East Tampa Citizen Advisory Council (CAC) approved $2 million for this project but the developer went forward to the board with their $5 million request. In the latest memo from staff, it is clarified staff is only recommending $100,000 per unit for a total of $2 million to “effectively match 100% of the equity already invested by the developer of this project.” That said, those are staff’s and the CAC’s recommendations to the board. It wouldn’t be the first time a CRA Board or council voted differently. It’s really a matter of what is in the budget.

As to the budget presentation (item 3), what was provided with the agenda is woefully inadequate. There are general buckets for each district with amounts, but no detail on how anything breaks down. If the board is going to be re-appropriating funds for the Sanchez Y Haya project for this fiscal year (see below), then the public should be able to see how the $1.8 million in FY26 breaks down. Is it part of the $5,799,347 bucket for capital projects? What else is in that bucket? Or the $6.75 million for “affordable housing initiatives.” How does that break down? Those same questions can be asked across all of the districts. Considering the constraints on the city’s budget this year and the confusion around the special grants process, it would be malpractice to not provide more transparency in this budget. The board will not be voting on the budget this week so there’s time to gather the information. It’s just disappointing it wasn’t provided with the presentation.

As to the Sanchez Y Haya project (item 10), I’ve written about this project numerous times: when it first appeared at the CRA, when it appeared on the evening agenda and when the seemingly related rules change appeared on the last CRA agenda.

In short:

• March 13 — The CRA Board approved a $5 million grant without a presentation or discussion. The application noted less than 50% of revenue could be derived from alcohol sales. The project is also receiving $3 million in county, state and federal aid for historic preservation.
• May 22 — Four special use alcohol sales applications were presented, 3 with Sanchez Y Haya Real Estate Company (LLC) as the applicant. All 4 passed first reading unanimously with Clendenin absent at vote.
• June 12 — CRA Board approves a rule change that removes the stipulation grant applications can’t have special use alcohol permits or be limited to less than 50% of sales derived from alcohol.
• June 26 — council approved on 2nd reading the SU applications.

Thursday, July 24, the board will be asked to re-appropriate funds to cover $1.8 million for the first year of the grant. To achieve that, the request is to move (all from within the East Tampa district):

• $628,108 from sidewalk construction
• $43,598 from funds set aside for land assemblage
• $100,000 from funds set aside for “outreach professional services”
• $264,314 from funds set aside for business assistance and economic development
• $374,790 from the loans and grants fund
• $389,190 that was set aside for a youth career development program.

That is for the current fiscal year, 2025. An additional $1.8 million in FY26 and $1.4 million in FY27 are part of the approved grant for a total of $5 million. It is still unclear how this project was presented to the board and approved without a clear fiscal impact and plan on how to fund it. It is also unclear from what was provided for the FY26 budget how the $1.8 million would be appropriated.

Item 8 is another funding request, this one for $9.7 million for the housing component of the East Tampa Innovation Center. This is part of a project that has long been in the works. So much so that the city awarded this project 1.08 acres of land to build them on. Which makes the $2.1 million in this request for land acquisition for parking troubling. This was supposed to be part of a larger development with a campus, so needing that much more land for parking is hard to understand. So it’s $2.1 million in FY25 (where ever that’s coming from all of a sudden) and another $2.5 million each of the next 3 fiscal years. Which again, there’s no clear indication in the budget presentation how any of these numbers impact other projects. Either this year or the outgoing years. The agenda item doesn’t even mention the amount, nor does the memo reflect the vote of the CAC.

Additionally, the CRA Board will be asked to approve the realignment of $500,000 for the down payment assistance program for East Tampa and $100,000 for the East Tampa tree trimming program–something that was requested by Board member Hurtak in May. They will also be voting on whether to realign $600,000 from the Fremont Ave Linear Park fund into the Fremont Ave grid reestablishment in West Tampa. Finally they will be voting to approve the updated plans for the Central Park, Tampa Heights Riverfront, and downtown districts.

Evening Agenda

Quickly since there wasn’t a wrap-up of the council meeting post-budget presentation, Abbye Feeley, Administrator of Development and Economic Opportunity touched on SB 180. That was a law passed by the legislature and signed by the governor which limits local governments from restricting development in areas affected by the hurricanes. The lawyers are still trying to figure out exactly what it means, but the concern is we are in the middle of a land use code rewrite. Until the lawyers fully understand the implications of the bill, the city might have to work around it potentially delaying the rewrite. Before anyone worries about who the next mayor is, maybe folks need to start reevaluating who they are sending to Tallahassee.

Prior to the land use applications, council will be holding the second public hearing for FY26 Action Plan which relates to state and federal funds for housing and how they will be used. The city will not be budgeting additional funds for housing this year outside of CRA funding, so the $13.2 million in this plan is all there is. Council will vote to approve the plan August 7.

Item 2 is an application to rezone the property along Sligh Ave just east of 2-75 from Seminole Heights Commercial General to SH planned development in order to build mini storage. There are 7 waivers associated with the application and staff found it inconsistent. The planning commission found the project consistent. I suspect there will be opposition to this application beyond the one well worded letter that’s already in Onbase.

Items 3 and 4 is another application staff found inconsistent, this one a modification of an existing planned development in Rocky Point with 6 new waivers requested. The new proposal is to build a 13 story development with 300 units. The original PD that was never built was for 161 units. Part of the proposal is to pay a $2.2 million bonus agreement in order to attain the higher density.

Item 6 is an application that was denied by council in Jan of 2024. Since then, the applicant attempted to remedy the reason for denial. In the staff report, it notes “For the record, it has since been determined by Development Coordination staff that the zoning designation for both parcels located south of the subject site is PD (recently corrected as a Scrivenor’s Error)…” which in essence removes one of the waiver requests, resulting in a consistent finding from staff.

The last application staff found inconsistent was item 7, a proposal to rezone from commercial general and multi-family to a planned development. The proposal is to build 14 units at Platt and Fremont.