Council removes Irma Park from package of affordable-housing support resolutions after debate

Fort Worth City Council on Feb. 25 approved a staff-recommended set of resolutions supporting developers’ applications for state housing financing but removed one project — Irma Park in the Northside — from that package after extended public comment and council deliberations.

The action came during a contentious vote on MNC 25-0107 (revised), a municipal communication containing five resolutions of support that would help projects pursue competitive state financing. Council Member Carlos Flores moved to approve the package “with the following change: Remove references to Irma Park, meaning that the development will not receive a resolution of support.” Council Member Hill seconded the motion. An earlier substitute motion to approve MNC 25-0107 as submitted was moved by Council Member Nettles and seconded by Council Member Beck; that substitute motion failed, and the Flores amendment carried.

The votes followed public testimony both for and against the Irma Park application. Megan Lash, president of OSA Industries and the applicant’s development partner, told the council the proposal had exceeded the city’s housing policy requirements and that it was “the number 1 scoring application in the region.” She said the team had made extra outreach—including “over 800 mailers 2 different times” and multiple neighborhood meetings—and asked the council for a resolution of support to keep the financing application competitive.

Residents and neighborhood advocates offered mixed views. Bethany Bryan, a Northside resident, said the project would “preserve the century old church that currently stands” and help stabilize the neighborhood by bringing taxable property back onto the rolls. Alyssa Banta, who identified herself as a board member of Historic Fort Worth, urged the council to “take the long view” and preserve Fort Worth’s historic fabric; she noted the church site spans about 2.7 acres and is listed for sale at $5,500,000.

A representative for the developer, Reggie Jennings, characterized the council’s vote as an interim, administrative step: “This vote is a piece of paper for the finance application, which allows us to keep going and keep working,” he told the council, adding that the financing-resolution vote is separate from any future zoning decision.

City staff provided procedural clarifications on the record. Casey (staff) summarized zoning implications for the five sites in the package: Avenue at Lancaster (District 11) would require rezoning from family to planned development; Highline at Everman (District 8) and Highline at Reisinger (District 6) would require rezoning from neighborhood commercial to planned development; Pioneer (Irma Park) in District 2 would require rezoning from community facilities to planned development; Pioneer Crossing (District 8) already is zoned high-density multifamily and does not require rezoning.

Council members stressed that removing a resolution of support for financing does not preclude a project from later seeking zoning changes or returning with modified proposals. Council Member Jared Williams said he opposed one of the projects (Reisinger Road) on policy grounds and predicted strong neighborhood opposition at zoning. Several council members said they would support or oppose the associated zoning cases when they come before the council.

Votes at a glance

- MNC 25-0107 (revised): Motion to approve with removal of Irma Park (mover: Council Member Carlos Flores; second: Council Member Hill). Outcome: approved (Flores amendment carried; substitute to approve as submitted failed). Note: no formal roll-call tallies were provided in the transcript. The five projects covered by the packet were Avenue at Lancaster (D11), Highline at Everman (D8), Highline at Reisinger (D6), Pioneer (Irma Park) (D2), and Pioneer Crossing (D8). Staff clarified which sites require rezoning.

- MNC2025-0162 (TIRZ 6 dissolution): Staff recommended early termination of Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Number 6 (Riverfront TIF). After a public hearing, council closed the hearing and approved the municipal communication and ordinance to terminate the zone. Outcome: approved.

- Multiple board and commission appointments (various MNC numbers): Council approved several district board appointments and partial terms (motions carried). Specific agenda IDs mentioned in the meeting packet include appointments for library advisory board (District 2), Park and Recreation Advisory Board (partial term), Plan Commission, and capital improvement plan advisory committee; the transcript records motion and approval but does not list roll-call tallies.

Why it matters

Resolutions of support for state housing finance applications are commonly required steps in competitive funding rounds; winning a resolution can materially affect a project’s ability to secure low-income housing tax credits or other state-backed financing. Council debate highlighted tensions between neighborhood preservation, developer outreach, and the sequencing of city review: the financing application deadline often comes before local zoning is resolved. Many council members emphasized zoning as their most powerful local tool and said they would evaluate each rezoning case on its merits when it comes before the council.

What’s next

Developers whose projects retained council support can proceed with state financing applications; projects requiring rezoning will return to the council for separate public hearings and votes. The Irma Park team can still pursue financing and rezoning in the future, but it will not carry the council’s current resolution of support.

Provenance: transcript excerpts supporting this article appear in the public comment and MNC 25-0107 debate segments of the Feb. 25, 2025 Fort Worth City Council meeting.