The city of Holly Hill, which has been part of a CRA since 1996, is seeking additional time to tackle persistent blight issues, particularly along the US1 corridor. The council discussed the city’s updated redevelopment plan, which aligns with previously imposed county standards ensuring tax increment financing (TIF) funds are used for capital projects. However, concerns were raised that the city’s proposed projects might exceed available TIF funds.

One council member highlighted legislative trends toward limiting the duration of CRAs and pointed out the potential financial burden on the county’s general fund, which the extension could impose. This member suggested Holly Hill should explore self-taxation options to fund its needs, particularly for stormwater management, identified as a priority. In contrast, another member noted the successes of other CRAs, such as Ormond Beach, and advocated for the extension, recognizing Holly Hill’s limited resources and progress.

The council grappled with balancing the needs of Holly Hill against the county’s financial limitations, debating the philosophical and fiscal responsibilities involved.

In addition to the CRA discussions, the council considered a proposed variance for a 195-foot cell tower on Vocal Road. The variance request involved waiving the 1,000-foot separation requirement from residential structures, a contentious point among council members and residents. Concerns about property values, aesthetic impacts, and safety were raised by both the council and the community, though health concerns, as per federal regulations, were deemed inadmissible.

During the quasi-judicial hearing, the applicant’s representatives argued the tower was necessary to address a significant coverage gap along I-95, pointing to the tower’s structural integrity and minimal fall radius. However, property owners near the proposed site expressed opposition, citing potential impacts on development plans and urging exploration of alternative locations.

The council deliberated on the evidence presented, emphasizing the need for substantial evidence to support any decision. A motion to deny the request was proposed but not finalized, with a decision to table the discussion for 30 days to allow further evaluation of the site’s suitability.

Another focal point of the meeting involved discussions on infrastructure funding and the five-year capital projects plan. The council reviewed various projects, including road improvements, stormwater management, and facility upgrades. Notably, a significant allocation was proposed for stormwater management in Holly Hill, reflecting its prioritization amid ongoing flooding concerns.

Concerns about funding mechanisms and budget forecasts pervaded the meeting, with discussions on potential debt issuance for major projects like the sheriff’s facility and solid waste landfill expansion.

Discussions also touched on innovative housing solutions, with interest in exploring tiny homes as a potential affordable housing option. Council members considered the feasibility of a tiny home pilot program, particularly for veterans and low-income residents.