Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Comprehensive Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council amends comprehensive plan to remove 'missing middle' encouragement language after heated debate
Summary
The committee backed a land-use amendment that removes language encouraging missing-middle housing from the proposed 2045 comprehensive plan update; the LUZ amendment passed 6-1 amid debate about community input and projected population growth patterns.
Jacksonville's Neighborhoods, Community Services, Public Health and Safety Committee on April 14 approved an amendment to the city’s comprehensive plan (item 20 25 0090) that removes proposed language encouraging "missing middle" housing concepts, voting 6-1.
Planning staff told the committee the amendment strikes provisions that encouraged missing-middle housing and revises definitions for terms including affordable and workforce housing in the housing element. Ms. Perola, a planning department representative, told the committee the change removes the city's explicit encouragement of missing-middle policies but does not eliminate the ability to pursue zoning or density changes, which would still require council approval.
Councilmembers split over the amendment. Opponents of the change — including Councilmembers Paluso and Boylan — argued that the comprehensive plan is the correct place to state long-term housing goals and that removing the language signals the city is retreating from efforts to diversify housing types and address affordability. Supporters — including Councilmembers Romero and Salem — said the language had created community concern, and that removing the encouragement language preserves the normal public-review and land-use-change processes.
Council members also debated technical points: Councilmember Clark Murray cited planning-department population-growth projections (City of Jacksonville Planning and Development Department; University of Florida Bureau of Economic and Business Research) showing anticipated growth in other city quadrants and asked whether the missing-middle mapping aligned with those projections.
The amendment also included a procedural LUZ change; committee members noted that community outreach for this comp-plan cycle included virtual citizen information meetings and CPAC reviews but that in-person evening meetings had not been held.
After discussion, the committee approved the LUZ amendment and the bill as amended by a roll call of 6 yeas and 1 nay. The clerk recorded "6 yeas, 1 nay."
