Uh when the you do uh do your testimony the you have to keep your uh camera on okay I'll bring up that one more time please when you do your uh testimony you do have to keep your camera on.

On oh yes.

I want to have you to you don't have to keep it on now.

Okay.

Uh but when you're when your um item comes up, you do have to uh keep your camera.

Okay.

Thank you.

Sure.

All right, turn the camera off.

Okay.

We're recording this, so we have to wait for them to be ready.

So hopefully it'll be just a minute.

I appreciate your patience.

Good morning.

Could you please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance?

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.

Thank you.

Please be seated.

Good morning, everyone.

I want to welcome you to the December 15th, 2025 land use hearing officer hearing.

My name is Susan Finch, and I'll be presiding as the hearing officer over today's agenda.

Let me start by introducing Miss Colleen Marshall.

She's with the development services department.

She'll introduce other members that will participate in today's hearing and go over any off the agenda changes.

Ms.

Marshall.

Good morning, Colleen Marshall Development Services.

To my left is Cameron Clark of the Hillsborough County County Attorney's Office.

To my right is Carmen Mason, the Development Services staff.

Alexis Myers, the planning commission staff will be presenting virtually.

During the course of the hearing, a number of other staff planners will be presenting their findings for various cases, and we'll be introduced for each item.

There are no changes to the published agenda.

All right.

Thank you so much.

I appreciate it.

Let me start by going over our procedures for today's hearing.

Our hearing today consists of agenda items that require a public hearing by a land use hearing officer.

I'll conduct a hearing on each agenda item and we'll file a decision within 15 business days following today's hearing.

Our hearing today is informal.

I'll ask questions related to the scope of direct testimony.

I may call and question witnesses as I deem appropriate, and I will decide all questions of procedure.

I'll take evidence but will exclude evidence that is irrelevant in material or unduly repetitious.

Evidence may be presented in written form, and all testimony must be under oath.

Hearsay evidence may be used to support supplement or explain other evidence, but shall not be sufficient alone to support a finding by me unless it be admissible over objections in a civil action.

Our order of presentation today is as follows.

We'll start with the development services department, who will provide a for variances, we'll provide uh findings regarding their staff report for a period of five minutes.

Next up will be the applicant.

The applicant and everyone on their team, 15 minutes to make their presentation.

Next, we'll turn to proponents.

Anyone who wants to speak in favor of an application, everyone combined 15 minutes.

Same is true next when we go to opponents.

Anyone who would like to speak against an application.

Everyone together, 15 minutes.

We'll circle back to the development services department, who will have five minutes to make any changes or comments based on today's testimony.

And then finally, the applicant has the last word for with five minutes for rebuttal.

Now, the majority of our cases are variances, and that is the order.

The only difference in the presentation for the last several items which are special uses is the applicant goes first.

So for variances, the staff goes first.

For special uses, the applicant goes first.

Otherwise, identical in presentation.

I don't think this is an issue, but I'll go over it just in case.

Uh for those who want to speak in favor or against, when we get to that section of the hearing, I will ask you to raise your hand if you plan to speak.

We have people both participating in the room and also online.

So I'll take a show of hands and we will divide that 15 minutes as equally as we can to make sure everyone has a fair shot.

When you are uh up to speak, either in the room or online, start by giving me your name and address for the record.

We are recording this hearing, and we want to make sure we have your information correct.

If you're in the room and you're done speaking at the podium, if you could see Susan and Germain, raise your hands, guys.

They're at from the clerk's office.

They are keeping a written log you'll see on top of the dais.

And then so when you're done speaking, if you could check in with them and sign in with your name, address, and the case number to which you spoke, and that makes sure we've got everything correct.

All right.

With that, let me now turn to Mr.

Clark.

He's with the county attorney's office, and he will provide you the legal requirements for appealing a decision made by a land use hearing officer.

Mr.

Clark.

Thank you, Madam Hearing Officer.

Uh good morning.

My name is Cameron Clark, Assistant County Attorney.

This land use hearing officer public hearing is for variants and special use requests.

This is the time for interested parties to present evidence and testimony.

Once the hearing officer has closed a case, the record of that case is also closed, and no new evidence regarding that case may be submitted thereafter.

Any decision by the hearing officer may be appealed to the land use appeals board.

Should a decision of the hearing officer be appealed, the evidence and testimony presented at this public hearing shall be the only evidence that is subject to review by the appeals board.

In reaching a decision, a final decision on petitions, the appeals board will only consider the decision of the hearing officer and the record made at this public hearing.

If an appeal is filed, the appeals board hearing shall consist of oral argument by the party appealing decision, by county staff, and by any interveners, each of whom may be represented by the old counsel.

The following shall stay to appeal a decision of the hearing officer or to intervene in an appeal.

First is the applicant, and second is anyone who appeared before the hearing officer, presented testimony or other evidence, and is adversely affected by the decision of the hearing officer.

It's the role of the counter officer to ensure that no new evidence or testimony is allowed before the appeals board that was not presented to the hearing officer at today's hearing.

The county attorney will recommend that the appeals board disregard evidence or testimony that is outside the record made today's public hearing.

Any evidence presented to the appeals board that is outside today's record could jeopardize the legality of the appeals board decision and the presenter of that evidence could hurt their own cause.

The safest course of action then is for you to write in any comments that you make today and to repeat those comments to the appeals board.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

I appreciate it.

As I mentioned, all testimony must be under oath.

So if you plan to speak today, if you could please stand, raise your right hand, and I'll swear you in.

Do you swear the testimony you are about to provide is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

Thank you so much.

Please have a seat.

And with that, Ms.

Marshall, we are ready to call the first case.

Today's agenda, we have no vested rights, fee waivers, remands, reconsideration requests, or site development variance requests, which brings us to Section G, sign variance requests.

Item G1, variance 260102.

The applicant is University Community Hospital Incorporated.

The request is a variance to sign requirements.

Staff findings will be presented by Sam Bob.

Good morning.

Morning.

The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the front setback requirements to replace an existing monument sign at the entrance to an existing medical office.

Section Well, LDC Section 7030 C1C requires that an eight-foot tall monument sign have at least a 19-foot uh front setback.

The applicant is requesting a 19-foot um minimum setback reduction to allow the eight-foot tall to have a zero front setback.

Uh the property has uh 285 feet of frontage, which would limit the property to one ground sign, so which means that the existing sign would have to be removed.

Umless you have any questions, that's concludes my question.

Uh not for staff.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

Is the applicant here?

Good morning.

Good morning.

Uh David Smith, 401 East Jackson Street, suite 2200, 33601 for the applicant.

Um Advent Health Carroll would this is just a restatement of what staff has just said.

We're asking for a 19-foot setback for an eight-foot tall monument sign, uh, which would provide us a zero foot setback.

The location of the sign is uh on this graphic is in a blue square on the left-hand side.

Um it's immediately at the corner of the driveway entering into the uh medical office building site.

Here's a site plan that depicts it as well.

Uh arrow points to where the uh sign would be located, and also confirms that we would be removing the existing sign.

Mr.

Smith, can I interrupt you?

I I hate to do that during the presentation.

Can you go back to that site plan?

Yes.

Where is the existing sign on this graphic?

It is is pretty much at the same location but about 16 foot, 19 feet further back where that arrow is.

So the the red line on the right hand side is the curb line of the driveway, which is the property line.

And so there's an existing monument sign uh that's much further back.

And you'll see that in the graphic one uh further on.

Okay.

One of my questions also was what does that red line mean?

Yeah, that red line is the property line.

Okay.

Yes, so there's different parcels.

Uh staff asked that we put the following, you know, the folio boundary uh to give a reference because you have to meet side yard setbacks.

Right.

And we will meet that as well.

Okay.

Thank you.

Go ahead, sorry.

Absolutely.

So uh I'll get into graphics that uh indicate, you know, or demonstrate what uh the issues are.

But the width of uh they may be right away pushes the property line well back from the highway's edge of pavement, uh, with signage having to be placed even further away from the travel lanes and driver view corridor.

Compounding this are numerous street light, electric transmission, the distribution poles all along the right-of-way line, abutting the subject property, and the polls further obstruct patients' view of the office building signage.

It should be noted that several of the utilities poles are large dimer metal type polls adding to visible obstruction.

Um there's also a treed stormwater pond on the southern property line that obstructs the visibility of the medical office building.

Uh County Landscape Code compliance also requires buffer and screening of the parking areas, and as you'll see in the graphics coming up, uh effectively obscures the sign from being seen.

That's the the existing sign.

Um last but not least, there's an elevation change uh for the property.

The property is higher uh than the travel lanes for uh Dale Mabry, and it also uh causes site visibility challenges.

So this series of graphics coming up, um the numbers represent where the follow uh photographs uh that will follow are located.

Uh number one is about 633 feet away, coming down Dale Maybury Highway.

And I think it should be you know pointed out that Del Maybury Highway has a 45 mile an hour speed limit.

Uh so it's not a local road.

It's uh people are traveling fairly quickly.

409 feet looking north, 299 feet looking north.

You can see the medical office building now, but you still can't see the sign.

At 128 feet on the right hand side underneath the trees is the existing sign.

It's a small red sign just by a light pole.

Here, 89 feet, looking on the right hand side.

Again, you can see it's obstructed by uh a street light pole uh for a parking lot and is far off Dale Maybury.

Here at 54 feet, you can actually get a clear view of the sign.

So imagine if you're a patient looking for a medical office building, you're anxious about your doctor's appointment, and all of a sudden you're going 45 miles an hour, and oh, there's a sign.

They have to go all the way up, turn around, come back.

It's not a good situation.

And that is uh, you know, to make a safe turn.

So these graphics just show okay.

If I'm standing on the sidewalk, and this sidewalk is right along the property line.

Uh if I'm standing on the sidewalk, I can't even see the sign that's in the medical office building.

Here at 16 feet, I can see the sign, but you're looking over a hedge, and that's the first time you have a clear view.

The variance requested, this is the site looking south.

So where the we're requesting the sign to be allowed to be placed, you can see that there's a more unobstructed view uh in this view corridor, uh, and it would be right on the property line.

Uh Dalmai and the public sidewalk is you know further to the west.

This is an exhibit of the sign.

This is the placement of the sign where the variants would allow us to place it.

Again, you can see here it's much further west than the existing sign, um, but it gets us out beyond uh the landscape area.

Uh you know, when you look at the landscaping code, when you're near under power lines, you have to use trees that are low.

When you get trees that are low, they end up full and they obstruct the signs.

So based upon the evidence presented, uh, we believe we meet the criteria of the code.

The hospital's location and site constraints are unique to the property, and they create the hardship not suffered in common with similarly located properties.

Um the unique nature of the hospital campus and patients requires consideration, not required of other properties in the district, and regulated by the sign code.

Without the variance, the little application of the code deprives the hospital of rights enjoys by others.

The variance of granted will not negatively impact any of Jezuan property owners, as this sign is well away from any other signs in the area and will not impact them.

The protection of the health, safety, and public well general welfare, as stated in LDC 10202, is in harmony with this request of the public safety benefits of the hospital campus and sign location improvements requested.

The situation where the variant seeks relief from is not a result of the illegal act or actions of the applicant.

In the handout that I gave you for the record, uh there's a report from Steve Henry.

Um he's confirmed that this sign location meets all site visibility standards and also would provide for uh a safer turn to be made uh given the sign location given the speed of Dale Maybury Highway.

Um I have uh John Michael's excuse me, the last one, variance requested provides enhanced public safety and health benefits consistent with the protection of public benefits promoted by the LDC and will provide uh substantial justice and furtherance of the LDC when weighed against the hardships.

I have uh John Michaels from Advent Health.

Um just give some testimony relative to uh why we're asking for this variance based upon uh the doctor's complaints.

Okay.

Thank you.

Here to answer any questions.

I do have some questions, but I'll wait here to switch to the presentation.

Good morning.

Good morning.

If you can give us your name and address, please.

Uh John Michaels, the address of the facility.

Whichever address you'd like to give us.

It's 6919 North Dale Maybury Highway.

Okay, go ahead.

Thank you.

Yeah, so it's a medical office building, um, as David has mentioned, and uh it's there's several uh suites within the the facility, and a lot of the uh physicians that that run the suites, they come expressed to me that their patients have complained that they pass right right by the building before they uh can turn in and it's an inconvenience, and uh just asked if the sign could be you know increased so that uh there'd be better visibility.

So I I've had emails come across my desk.

I'm the facility director for the hospital, and uh we own the building, and uh you've heard from several of the the tenants.

We have some lease tenants and we have some of our own people in the building, and they've all expressed you know concerns about the signage.

All right.

So we're asking to have this uh completed.

Thank you so much.

Don't forget to sign in.

All right, thanks.

Thank you.

Oh so uh a couple questions.

One is you you've already answered uh the location of the existing sign and what that red line means.

So in reading your narrative, that the property boundary was not obvious to me.

So I had a question about you cite that the um the stormwater ponds that are on the south end and so forth.

Those are outside of the ownership of this property.

Is that your testimony?

Now I'll get the graphics.

So in put the graphic back there you go.

So yes.

So if you look on this graphic, kind of to the right of number three, um, there's a little notch.

That stormwater pond is all along that side of the property.

That's that's owned by the hospital, but it is a different folio number.

So um we were only asked to put the folio number on there.

And so is it the same property owner?

It's just a different folio number.

Yes.

But the here's the let me give you a let me see if I can get the graphic up.

Whoops, to show you.

This is the graphic that shows the mature trees.

Those trees, you know, Hillsboro County is not as bad as the city of Tampa, but they're pretty protective of their trees.

And so those trees were required to be preserved during the construction there along that um stormwater pond.

Okay.

And you also cite the difference in elevation between the site and Del Maybry.

Do you have that specific information?

The difference?

I do not have the measurement, but as you can see here on this graphic, the driveway here is I mean, excuse me, the travel lane is lower.

As you go up, you can see that the driveway comes up to the uphill.

Also, because of the elevation change, um, the medical office building was required to put that additional sidewalk in because the slope was too great to make a direct connection.

So it gives you an idea that if if you have to put in an ADA compliant sidewalk, that there's a significant grade change uh between the existing grade of the office complex and uh the public right-of-minute.

Okay, and that picture you have up.

It does this building um encompass the emergency room, or is that a no the emergency room is totally separate.

As you can see in the this graphic, further to the north, there's a lower sign that's red and white in the foreground.

Yes.

And you can see emergency, but on Del Maybrie itself, there's a sign um as well.

And we actually had to get a variance to move that sign up because um uh similar obstructions.

There's been some landscaping changes there uh since.

Um, but this is required landscaping under the code.

I see.

All right, that's the end of my questions.

Thank you so much.

Thank you much.

All right, we'll call for um anyone that would like to speak in support.

Anyone in favor that would like to speak.

See no one, anyone in opposition to this request.

All right, development services.

Ms.

Marshall, anything else?

Nothing further.

All right, Mr.

Smith, you have the last word if you'd like it.

Nothing.

All right, thank you.

Then with that, we'll close variants 26-0102 and go to the next case.

This brings us to Section H variance request.

Item H1, variance 25 1452.

The applicant is Alejandro Alique.

The request is a variance to minimum lot size by available utilities.

Staff findings will be presented by Orlando Boris.

Good morning.

Morning.

This is Orlando Burraz with Development Services.

Uh, this time the applicant is um seeking the variance uh from the section 60106 from the land development code.

Minimum load sizes by uh utilities.

In this case, the applicant is trying to split the property, creating a second one.

Um therefore uh the variance will be resulting in uh load one being 0.27 acres and then load two being um 0.28 acres.

I don't know if you have any questions for me, but more than happy to just a basic question.

If you if you know, um I know that requirement has been in the code for a very long time, but if you know what the purpose of the half acre minimum was or is uh oh for the uh for the load, it will be um half an acre.

Um but the purpose of having it be a half acre as opposed to a quarter acre or something different.

Why do you know why it was chosen to be a half acre of minimum upland?

Um I I do know, and maybe Glenn may assist me on these one, but I do know it's it's supposed to be half an acre, and eventually I believe it was in August, if I am not wrong, um there was a change in an amendment in the code uh which allows um for these two to be happened.

For the variance to be required.

Understood.

Ms.

Marshall, do you have anything to add to that?

I believe believe it was originally um for uh like drainage purposes, but uh the Department of Health ultimately determines if the septic is acceptable at the location.

Right.

And the and the uh to uh gentleman's point, the ability to uh request a variance to that is new relatively the so the for this section of the code that has actually been in place, however, um section four, I believe it's four oh two oh three that in 2021 the exception to allow uh the for the first two splits of a parent parcel to remain on septic was taken away.

Um, but then that was changed in August.

I see.

So if you're in the urban service area now, they have the opportunity to remain on septic, but they are still subject to this requirement.

Minimum but they could seek a variance understood.

All right, thank you, sir.

I appreciate it.

Is the applicant here?

Is the applicant here for variance 25-1452?

It's uh item number H1 on our agenda.

Any information?

All right.

We don't know, right?

Okay, so what we'll do is we'll hold this application and if we could try to contact the person, then we'll come back if we can.

All right, then we'll call the next case.

Next item is item H2, variance 2600 three eight.

The applicant is Todd Pressman.

The request is a variance to accessory structure requirements and variance to lot development standards.

Staff findings will be presented by Jaren Fallon.

Good morning.

Good morning, Jared Fallon with Development Services.

Uh, this is a variance request uh for accessory structure standards to allow an existing accessory structure to occupy more than 20 percent of required rear yard and allow it to be closer than three feet from the property line.

Uh this application also is requesting a variance to lot development standards to allow an existing single family home to encroach into the front yard and rear yard setback.

Uh so the accessory structure is existing um and they're asking for a 32.5 percent uh increased variance to allow or or result in a 15 52.5 percent uh percent of required rear to be occupied, and they're asking for the setback to be a 2.1 foot rear yard setback.

Uh and then for the accessory or sorry, for the single family home, the uh side yard setback, they're asking for a variance of 3.5 feet, resulting in a 1.5 foot side yard setback, and for the front yard, uh is asking for 1.5 feet variance for an 18.5 foot front yard setback.

Uh also add there is an existing code compliance case on this for the unpermitted construction of the accessory structure.

No questions at this time.

Thank you so much.

Is the applicant here?

Good morning.

Good morning, hearing officer staff.

Todd Pressman, 200 2nd Avenue South, number 451 in St.

Petersburg.

This is variance 26-0038.

Locate as indicated on the broad map, looking closer.

The single residential home is located on Pittsfield Avenue, uh, just a little bit north of Timberland Street.

And looking closer for the property pays or this is the site on Pittsfield.

So there are a number of variances uh which the staff just reviewed with you.

Um I would say the first two are different than the second two.

The first two have to do with the existing front yard, existing setback, and the side yard setback for the home.

And then the other two variances, three and four, are for the accessory structure.

So I'm going to kind of break those up between the two because they're quite both different.

So variances to the existing home, the home is indicated in the center one story masonry, showing the front setback and the side setback.

And one thing that's important is under the property appraiser in 1962, they show the unfinished carport, which I've highlighted there, which was a part of the home in 1962, and that's verified by the property appraisers office, who noted that, as indicated here, the area coded UCP is what they define as an unfinished carport.

So in 1962, that structure was there, has been there for a long period of time.

This shows the site by aerial.

And what I would say in regard to those two variances is that, which I'll get into more detail, that the really unique singular condition of this parcel is it is the smallest by far in the entire vicinity.

So when you look at the parcel here showed by 50 by 100, and just one at the corner is 100 by 100, but when you start going through all the square footages on this block, let alone across the street Pittsfield, which you can see are tremendous much larger lots, it is by far the smallest lot, and is the smallest lot on the entire block.

And even when you pull further away, as far as I could see, it was in the vicinity, the smallest lot that would be possible, or that's existing.

So when we look at variances for the accessory structure to the rear, we feel that's substantiated by the size or the small size of the property.

So looking at condition number one, hard to surprise difficult is their unique or singular subject property.

We we believe our they are because the property is by far the smallest in the vicinity, and in most cases, tremendously much smaller.

In regard to the existing home, I've shown you that the side canopy was existing in 1962.

The front setback is minimal at 1.8.

The staff report says 1.5.

1.5.

Um which would be a condition of the formal home which was done with permits.

Uh, and again was done by permit, but we would suggest that the element of the small nature of the property uh being the smallest in the area is a factor in regard to a minimal variance in that regard.

The little little requirement uh criteria number two, little requirements of land development code to provide the rights commonly enjoyed.

So we can certainly see throughout this block and across the street in the vicinity, others would have the ability under the code to have a larger accessory structure uh on their properties, and because of the singular unique nature of this property, they would not be able they are deprived of the right that others commonly can have.

Criteria number three were not substantially fair with the range of the rights of others.

I did check the record late last week.

There were no emails or letters in, I'm not sure who filed the citation, uh, but as far as I can see as a day, unless someone comes forward, uh, this would be an accessory structure that would be permitted and in other properties.

It does have a closer setback, um, but it would still under item number three, because accessory structures are permissible, and the rear setback is point in the rear, I would.9 feet is extremely minimal and would have no difference of effect on impact or encroachment at 0.9 feet.

I don't think the human eye or anyone can stand there and recognize a difference of.9 uh variance for an accessory structure.

Criterion number four is that the variances in harmony with the serves the general tent of purpose of the LDC.

We believe it does, because again, the hardship and unique nature, singular nature of this lot allows or should allow an accessory structure that others in the immediate area and vicinity can.

Excuse me.

Criterion number five sought to be relieved by variance in that result from a legal act.

Uh, we're obviously here today to bring that variance in line.

Um the first two variants again have received or the first two items.

Uh the first item, the setback received a permit.

The side setback, as I've indicated, has been there for a long time since the home was built and long nature.

And item number six, and I think this is important that the variance will result in substantial justice being done, considering again size of the property, the small nature of the property, um, and the individual hardships that are being suffered to grant a variance.

So with that, we appreciate your attention and happy to answer any questions you might have.

Just one quick one.

You've covered most of it.

Um the primary structure of the house was in its current location and configuration when that your client bought the property.

Is that correct?

No, I have to clarify that.

So the side setback, yes.

The front part of the home was evidently um enclosed, uh, which again is a permit on record.

I couldn't pull up the permit, but it's listed with the property appraiser when I click for the permit.

I assume it's pretty old anyway.

Um it wouldn't come up, but yes, a permit was issued.

So to clarify, the side was when the home was built, the front was done sometime after under permit.

All right, thank you.

That was my only question.

I appreciate it.

Don't forget to sign up.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh we'll go call for anyone who would like to speak in support.

Anyone in favor?

See no one, anyone in opposition to this request.

No one, Miss Marshall.

Anything else?

Nothing further.

All right, Mr.

Pressman.

You have the last word?

You'd like it?

Uh no, thank you.

All right, thank you.

Then with that, we'll close variance two six-zero zero three eight and go to the next case.

Item is item H3, variance 2600 eight six.

The applicant is Barrington Watson.

The request is a variance to community residential home separation requirements.

Staff findings will be presented by Michelle Montebano.

All right.

Good morning.

Good morning, Michelle Development Services.

Uh, the applicant is requesting a variance to the community residential home separation standards to accommodate a proposed type A C or H facility.

Uh LDC section 611 28A states community residential homes housing six or fewer residents shall not be located within a radius of a thousand feet of another such existing home, the six or fewer residents.

Um, in this case, the Florida Agency of for Healthcare Administration records show an active type A community residential home at 4534 Hampshire Road in Tampa.

Um, the variance for 100 815 feet resulting in a 185 foot distance separation to an existing type A community residence home residential home available if you have any questions.

Just a quick question about the intent of the separation distance, that a thousand feet.

What is that trying to achieve?

I think it's trying to limit like a cluster of homes in one area for the other like um families and cigarette single family residents in the area.

And the the um the other existing facility that's within the the thousand feet, as does that have any connection to this applicant?

I don't believe so, though.

All right, thank you so much.

I appreciate it.

Is the applicant here?

Go ahead and come forward, sir.

Good morning.

If you give us your name and address to start.

My name is Barnton Watson, 4519, Devon Sherro, Tampa Florida, 32634.

Okay.

If you could tell me a little bit about your request.

Uh my requested is to open a facility because there's not as much small facility in the neighborhood.

So I want to open my own facility because I've been doing these jobs over 15 years, and I decide I want to go on on my own and open my own facility.

And I I read the backup to the request.

It said when you did the research for this particular site, there wasn't another facility in the distance.

Is that correct?

Yes, ma'am.

All right.

And what type of uh what is your clientele?

Are they elderly or elderly people?

Um other questions.

If that completes your presentation, that's all I have.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

I appreciate it.

If you could please sign in.

Is there anyone who in the audience or online that would like to speak in support?

Anyone in favor?

See no one, anyone in opposition?

No, Ms.

Marshall?

Nothing further.

All right, sir.

You have the last word if you'd like it.

Anything else to say to add?

Oh, you gotta go to the microphone, sorry.

Thank you.

Oh, it's our lack of grand severance through openest facility.

All right, thank you so much for your testimony.

I appreciate it.

All right, then with that, we'll close variants two six zero zero eight six.

Do we have any information on the applicant?

The prior case.

Yes, um, he he's on virtually now.

Okay, so let's before we get too far ahead.

Let's go back and pick up that case.

Um item H1.

And we uh so we're gonna open variance two five-142.

My recollection is we did the staff presentation and we were ready for the applicant.

So if the applicant is online, if you could give us your name and address, please.

Hey, my name is Alejandro Aye, and my well, my address is 1110 Lithia Pinecraft Road.

Sir, let me let me stop you before you go forward.

The county requires that we all yeah, you turn your camera on so that we have a visual in addition to your voice.

Can you do that for me?

Yes, ma'am.

There you go.

All right, name and address and whatever you'd like to testify to.

Yeah, my name is Alejandro Yeege, and uh address is 1110 Lithia Pinecrest Road and Brandon, Florida.

Okay, and why what tell me about the variance request, please?

So we're submitting a variance because we're looking it, we're just now getting into like construction and control.

We're kind of learning with the process the first time submitting a variance, but I feel like you know I've I've looked up a lot onto it and I feel pretty important of how the process is going.

But we have a property um that we purchased and we demoed the existing home there.

And the lot is relatively, you know, it's a good size, it's about 0.67 acres, and we wanted to divide the lot into two in order to uh you know a construct two uh single story homes, and the only issue we're having is that um we need at least 0.5 acres or what we need at least an acre for a septic system, and we're we are there the code and won't allow us.

Okay, and what about the opportunity to connect to public sewer?

It's not well, it's it's not possible, like at least for us because we they said the distance is over a thousand feet, like a thousand two hundred feet.

So they said it could be upwards of cost of you know hundreds of thousands, and it would require for us to you know halt traffic, and it would it's a huge process that could take us a very long time, and we don't know if it's something that you know is it would work for us for this situation.

All right, and there are other um neighboring lots that are uh of similar size on septic tank, is that correct?

Yes, correct.

Actually, the neighbor is a new construction home that it was built within the last three years.

I don't remember off the top I had the exact date, but it's a brand new home.

They did a septic system, they designed it where the septic system is in the front of the house, and the well is all the way towards the back corner.

We're looking to do something similar with ours while also maintaining distance from theirs because we know there's regulations between you know ours the distance between our sat big and their wells and uh you know it and etc.

All right.

Well, those are my only questions.

If you and uh you don't have anything else to add, we'll move on if that's okay with you.

Okay, that's all right.

That's it.

Thank you, sir.

I appreciate it.

Is there anyone in the room or online that would like to speak in support?

Anyone in favor?

See no one, anyone in opposition to this request.

All right, Miss Marshall, anything else to add?

Nothing further.

All right, sir.

You have the last word if you'd like it, but you don't have to take it.

Okay, that's all I have to say.

Okay, thank you very much for hopping online with us.

I appreciate it.

Then with that, we'll close variance two five-1452 and go back to our agenda.

Awesome.

Okay, I'm gonna go.

Yes, thank you, sir.

Uh awesome, thank you.

Appreciate it.

Next item is item H4, variance 260094.

The applicant is Todd Pressman.

The request is a variance to community residential home separation requirements.

Staff findings will be presented by Tanya Chapella.

I can present.

Okay.

She was here, I saw her.

The applicant's requesting a variance to the distance separation requirement for a type A community residential home to allow a type A community residential home with it in a thousand feet of an existing facility that's located on North Boulevard.

The requested variance is 700 feet to you for uh resulting separation of three 300 foot distance separation to the existing community residential home.

And they the existing home North Boulevard Group home is uh community residential home for up to six residents that's located at 1312 on North Boulevard available if you have any questions.

Just a couple.

There are um letters and a petition and opposition in the backup for this file.

And several of them talk about that this is the second time this request has been made on this uh property.

And can you give me a little background about that?

Sure.

There is a rezoning um the uh for uh rezoning proposed for a plan development for a type B community residential home, which has um more residents uh that was denied.

Um so this request is for a type A community residential home, which would be limited to six.

Um this is just for the distance separation.

So not not the same application, just related in that it's the same use, but not the same application type or correct.

It's the same use, but the different um there's the three different types based on the number of residents.

So um the original request was a type B and now they're going down to a type A.

And certainly a different process because this is the variance rather than a rezoning.

Yes.

Understood.

All right, thank you so much.

Is the applicant here?

Good morning.

Good morning, hearing officer Todd Pressman, 2002nd Avenue South, number 451, St.

Petersburg.

So, yes, as you've heard, um, I'm here with Latanya.

There she is, Latani Boykins, uh, and her husband.

Uh, we did uh we had applied for a 12 bed 12-bed B which we brought through the process, and at the 12-bed uh there was opposition from residents.

Um review by the Board of County Commissioners that was denied, and we decide to come forward with just the six-bed uh as an A.

So this is variance 260094.73 acres, currently RSC 6 zoning category, uh, and indicated here the history.

So seeking the six-bed A with a thousand feet of another six-bed.

Uh community residential home, uh, six or fewer residents shall be deemed a single family unit and non-commercial residential uses for the purpose of this land development code and residential appearance of the structure is required.

Uh this is in the greater Carewood area, Northdale area 0.73 acres, located on North Boulevard at the corner of 131st.

Uh it's uh south of Fletcher Avenue, as you can see here, and per the property appraiser at the corner of North Boulevard and West 131st Avenue, currently vacant.

I'm considered located with a thousand feet of another community residential home, which as staff indicated, uh, is located approximately 300 feet north.

Uh it's a small six female support home that appears completely residential from the exterior.

As that site is very small, blends in well the residential area and provides a support use.

So this is the other use as I'm showing by an aerial orientation between the site proposed and the sixth bed, which is existing to the north, and that's a photo uh of the uh site, which again is very residential in nature.

So when you look between these uses, you can see that there's uh two or three residential homes, and it's a very heavily forested area, a north boulevard, so there's uh significant visible uh separation between them.

Uh and as you travel up the roadway, as you can see, a lot of the forestation.

This is the proposed site on North Boulevard 131st.

This is the home abutting on the east.

You can see there's good separate or forest station between home abutting to the north.

So this is the view westward on 131st, looking in North Boulevard, the sites on your right, and then looking up the street as I indicated when you look up looking north on North Boulevard, it's a very forested trees tree site or street.

So there's again good separation uh both physically uh and uh visually.

Um a word about Latanya.

Um she owns five facilities, 80 residents total.

She's been doing this since May of 2020, privately owned, operated.

These are some of the photos uh of the uh site uh or one of her sites.

Uh she's a licensed core trainer with state of Florida.

Uh they have to take a 26-hour training course and pass Andrew question tests, and she teaches core training for state regulations for ALFs.

She was recently nominated by the mayor in Hillsburg County with the Trailblazer Award centered on her work with seniors, providing them with safe environment, building homes for people in her community who need the most.

And these are just a few photos, just familiarized with her with her sites that she keeps very well in shape and condition.

Under the comprehensive plan, there's a few policies that are important, neighborhood and community serving uses serving uses that certain residential uses, including but unlimited to resident support and pulp facilities, shall be allowed within residential neighborhoods to directly serve the population.

These issues shall be located and designed in a manner to be compatible with surrounding residential pattern.

Equal access to housing objective 1.6, promote, facilitate, provide housing opportunities to serve as well the older population.

And there has been a push, as you're well aware, over the last many years at the local, state, and federal level to have these uses in the community, not in sterile large ALFs, uh major arterial roadways that we want them in the neighborhood.

We want them to have social ability, feel part of a residential community, which is exactly what this would be proposed to be.

Also, under the housing chapter, uh, to promote residential infill, flexible building envelopes, parking access setbacks, development of community residential homes will be allowed within each of the land use categories that permit residential development and 1.6.15 to promote and prioritize senior housing and opportunities to age in place, which is exactly what this use does.

That's what the comp plan desires and directs.

Uh and again, as a reminder, uh, to emphasize community residential homes, six or fewer are deemed a single family unit and commercial residential use as well.

The greater Carawood Northdale Community Plan.

Goal one of the community plan is to provide community facilities and residential support uses.

So with that, we appreciate your attention.

Happy to answer your questions.

And I think Latanya has a comment or two, which if you'll allow her to do that as well.

Absolutely, go ahead.

Good morning.

Hi, good morning.

Uh Latanya Boykins.

Um, do I say my address?

Yes, please.

Uh 13315 Orange Grove Drive, Tampa 33618.

Um, thank you.

Last time we were here with the 14 bids, I actually listened to the neighbors, and a lot of them came over to visit one of my sites, and and I spoke with them, and they're the reasons that I championed to do it again, because I was like, okay, they they said no, I'm done.

And they said, we just didn't want it to feel commercial.

Why don't you do a six-bed and just build the home so that residents can, you know, we just don't want that commercial feeling in the neighborhood.

So I said, okay, and one of the persons that spoke, which was a neighbor who lived next door, and she said, I will welcome a six-bed.

I bring over cookies.

I just don't want it to look commercial.

And I heard them, and I agree with that.

And I said, you know what, sometimes I don't get everything I want, but my mission is to serve seniors.

I also have a 53-bed, and some of those residents, they just don't thrive well in the large facilities.

And so I have family members watching, probably right now, going, I hope you're allowed so that I can put my mom or dad in a smaller place.

And the um person that is on Boulevard, he has a women's disability, and they're women, and I go over there sometimes, and he understands what I'm trying to do.

We serve a different population.

I have a special needs brother.

I've been caring for for 16 years.

So my life has been dedicated somewhat to caring for people, and I just feel like seniors need these small environments.

Um, I don't know if many of you, you know, as we age or you have people that age, everyone, it's just not a one-size-fits-all, and some of them really do need to just feel as if they're in a home, and that's all these are, just to help our seniors.

So I hope today that you guys will allow this usage.

It's needed in our community, and I really feel very passionate and strongly about helping our senior population.

Let me ask you while you're at the podium, let me ask you.

So obviously the property is vacant.

There's nothing there.

And you plan to build a single family home.

Yes.

In compliance.

All right.

Um, and do you have finally, do you have any connection with the other home facility that's within the distance?

Oh, no, not at all.

All right, thank you so much.

I appreciate it.

Thank you.

All right.

Then with that, let me call for anyone who would like to speak and support.

Oh, if you could sign in, thank you.

Is there anyone in the room or online that would like to speak in support?

All right, seeing no one, anyone in opposition to this request.

All right, I have one person in the room.

Do I have anyone online?

Madam Chair, nobody is online.

No one online.

Okay, so if you could come forward.

Just start by giving us your name and address, please.

Good morning.

Good morning.

My name is Susan Dennis, and I live at 13109 North Hamner Avenue, which is one parcel away from the parcel requesting this variance.

This neighborhood has seen a encroachment of similar style for profit care facilities disguised in residential homes.

Over the past decade, more homes have converted to these money-driven care facilities.

The following map.

The variance request is the orange one.

The red ones are the existing ones that are in place.

Although several homes of these parcels are over the required thousand feet separation, the sack the saturation of homes being used for commercial purposes seems excessive for such a small area.

This would be the second parcel for this property owner in our neighborhood with the intention of being a CRH.

The other parcel that is owned is approximately 2,000 feet away from this parcel requesting the variance and is not shown on this map.

Florida statute 419.001.3 allows in Section C the local government to deny the sitting of the home for the use of a CRH at a site selected when the home is located in the radius of 1200 feet of another existing CRH due to over concentration of such homes that substantially alters the nature and character of the area.

Subsection three specifically states denial is reasonable when that home is located within a raise radius of 500 feet of an area of a single family zoning because it substantially alters the nature and character of the area, which in this case the neighboring parcel, which is less than 300 feet, is already established CRH, so it's reasonable for Hillsborough County to deny this variance based on the state statute that the designation substantially alters the nature and character of this area.

On a more personal note, I'm a third-generation homeowner in this neighborhood who I raise my fourth generation.

If we continue to allow conversion of single-family homes for for-profit businesses, the availability of home inventory in this affordable neighborhood significantly declines, preventing the possibility of home ownership in the neighborhood.

This is supported by the Hillsburg County Comprehensive Plan 1.6.17 stating that we should stabilize existing neighborhoods by preserving the affordable housing units.

A few of the documents that were submitted on Thursday prior to 5 p.m.

have not been uploaded to the PGM store.

So I'm providing these documents today just to be sure they're included in the variance file.

It's possible that they'll be uploaded another time.

I do want to note that we don't believe that Miss Boinken has any nefarious intentions with the property.

If this is designated CRH, it can be used for multiple different purposes, not just for elderly living, but for other purposes.

And as a neighborhood, we would not be able to make any opposition to that adjustment if and when her portfolio does get sold, which inevitably business purposes will happen at some point.

I hope to retain my residence for God willing gives me another 40 years, and I suspect that we would see that change within that time period.

So thank you for your considerations.

Thank you for coming down and you can give all your documents to the clerk's office to be submitted into the record.

Thank you.

All right, seeing no one else to testify in opposition, we'll go back to development services.

Is it accurate to say that a community residential home type A is considered a residential support use and not a commercial use?

Correct.

All right.

And uh we can ask, perhaps if this is not your expertise, but the question about used for other purposes other than the care of elderly people.

That this is a licensed facility, correct?

Correct.

Go ahead.

Um as a community residential home, they would have they would be licensed through either the agency for health care administration, uh the agency for persons with disabilities, or the um the Department of Children and Families.

So it could potentially be a group home if in some instances under that definition of a community residential home that could have you know not necessarily elderly, but other um people that need assistance.

But is it accurate that when uh this facility applies for that appropriate licensing that they have to identify who they are caring for, what type, if it's the elderly, is it um children, is it they have to identify that?

Is that correct?

And we can ask Ms.

Boykins when on rebuttal.

Yes, when they when they submit for um their zoning verification for their um zoning sign-off for their their licensing, um it'll it's through the specific um agency that they're licensing for.

All right, and then if they in the future were to change that, what is the process to amend that licensing?

Yeah, um it would be a new zoning verification that they would come in.

So they would have to go back through the process.

Is that accurate?

Correct.

Okay, all right, thank you.

Then we'll go now to uh back to the applicant.

Mr.

Pressman.

Thank you, also may I may I ask to use the aerial that the young lady presented.

So on the overhead, I just wanted to draw some um clarifications uh with respect to the young lady.

Um this is Fletcher Avenue.

The site is here.

I'm not sure why this to the north is designated.

It's not part of the property as I showed you the precise location of the um parcel.

So I just wanted to clarify for you.

I'm sorry.

Let me make sure I have my orientation correct.

So this is North Boulevard.

This is Fletcher.

The site is located at the corner.

Uh to my view, this area here is extended more than it should be.

It should be just a corner property, as I've shown you from the property appraiser on my PowerPoint.

The other clarify, not clarification, but to bring your attention, this site here is one of those large facilities.

Its orientation is only to Fletcher Avenue.

There's no or it's it's uh a commercial use that is primarily off of Fletcher Avenue.

So that is a site that as we get the reports is not within the thousand feet, but I just wanted to clarify for you.

I don't know about the other sites that really do the sites.

I've assumed the one we're researched, I'd assume is correct.

But um I did want to at least uh clarify those two points for you in the aerial.

Thank you.

All right.

Oh, and then I'm sorry.

So just to re-emphasize from the last request, this is 50 percent less.

It brings it down from a class B to a class A.

Uh when Latanya and I spoke after the hearing, and as you heard she spoke with neighbors, uh, we wanted to bring back something that we felt would be a lot more acceptable to the community.

We did have a pretty large crowd at the uh first hearing, and I'm glad to see that that's been dissipated quite a bit.

Um so with that we appreciate your attention.

Thank you.

Ms.

President, before you leave, and maybe your client can participate in this.

Um, the assertion that this could if today's use is for the care of elderly, what is that procedure if you wanted to come back and change to another type of care?

For instance, people say drug rehab or something like that, if you could address that issue.

Uh Latinas better to answer that.

Perfect.

Yes, as a core trainer for the state of Florida, it just doesn't happen that way.

They would have to apply and they would have to be approved.

If we open this up just for seniors through the agency for health care administration, that's all that this use would be able to be used for.

I couldn't tomorrow go, I want to open up a drug treatment center, or I want to do something else.

So the I want to clarify this is not a as you recognize.

I just want to state from a Latin just said this is not a professional rehabilitation center, this is a community residential home.

And your intent is to care for elderly citizens.

Yes, my population is between 75 and 104 currently.

All right, thank you.

I think that answers the question.

Mr.

Pressman, does that complete your testimony?

Yes, thank you.

All right, thank you.

Then with that, we'll close variance 26-0094 and go to the next case.

Next item is item H5, variance 260109.

The applicant is fakir Hussain.

The request is a variance to let development standards.

Staff findings will be presented by Sierra James.

Good morning.

Good morning, Sierra James with Development Services.

The applicant is seeking a variance to the rear and side yard setbacks in LDC section 60101 to accommodate their proposed home expansion in the RSC6 zoning district.

The required rear yard is 25 feet and the required side yard is 7.5 feet.

The applicant is requesting a variance of 22 feet and 1 inch, resulting in a 2 foot 11-inch rear yard setback and a variance of 5 inches, resulting in a 7 foot 1 inch side yard setback.

Thank you so much.

I appreciate it.

Is the applicant here?

Good morning.

Good morning.

Mr.

Hussein couldn't make it for medical reason.

So I'm the homeowner.

Okay.

If you give us your name and address, please.

Cigar Sah 1004, Eccles Drive, Tampa, Florida, 33612.

Thank you so much.

Just tell us a little bit about your request.

So I'm something here.

So I'm here for uh today to request a two feet eleven inch of variants.

Um we'd like to add a small office room in the back of the existing house and a small Lenai for uh recreation.

Um please note that the back side of my properties are very unusually shaped.

The space between the uh, you know, between the lake and the um structure, there's a lot of a lot of unused square footage, uh buffer land.

Um, you know, some places are more than 50 feet going um to the towards the lake.

Um I have been maintaining this space and uh with um in the lawn care and everything for the last 13 years.

And um I'm sure the small expansion will not hinder uh to my uh to my neighbors in any way.

Um I do not have any neighbors in the backyard.

It it just opens up to the lake.

Uh my family is experiencing uh hardship lately.

Uh we need some extra square footage for living space.

Um my uh my parents, my elderly parents are moving in with me, and uh I'm the primary caregiver uh caregiver.

Uh we are planning to hire a uh overnight overnight uh nurse aide and uh for my parents and she will need some kind of uh accommodation uh to stay the night.

And also my wife works uh full-time as a um healthcare professional, and she requires a uh separate room with key and log per HIPAA requirements, and my son is growing up, so he needs a room too.

He sleeps with us currently, but uh we have rooms, but we need uh an extra room would help.

So yeah, and um, you know, I s he's my GC is not here, so I'm not very technical.

Um there is uh the the Lenai, which which is uh actually uh there's a um invisible line there, which is uh I guess this is the property line.

I'm not sure which one is the property line because there's a lot of land behind the line and there's seawall here.

Um there's a two feet eleven inches that's a 45 degree angle.

There's a little window of the Lenai is close to that line.

So uh requesting So the home is there, and this is just for an expansion.

Yes, ma'am.

I understand.

All right.

To the existing home.

If I have to change the roof anyway, so I thought it'll be the good time to do it.

Understood.

All right, I understand your request.

Thank you so much for coming down.

If you could please sign in with the clerk's office.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Is there anyone in the room or online that would like to speak in support?

Anyone in favor?

Seeing no one, anyone in opposition to this request?

Ms.

Marshall, anything else?

Nothing further.

All right, sir.

You have the last word if you'd like it, but you don't have to take it.

Okay, thank you.

Then we'll close variance two six-0109 and go to the next case.

Next item is item H6, variance 260110.

The applicant is awakened assisted living LLC.

The request is a variance to community residential home separation requirements.

Staff findings will be provided by Jared Fallon.

Thank you.

Hello, Jared Fall with Development Services.

Uh so this is a request for a variance to the distance separation requirements for a type A community residential home to allow a type A community residential home within a thousand feet of an existing facility.

So this proposed home is going to be within 650 feet of an existing home.

So it's a variance of 350 feet.

Happy to answer any questions.

No questions.

Thank you so much.

It's the applicant here.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Richard Coson, 330 Paul's Drive, Brandon, Florida, 3351, on behalf of the applicant.

The applicant is awakened assisted living LLC.

It is operated by Shamara Bryce and Otavia Edwards.

They're both uh registered nurses, and they currently operate a second uh community residential home, and they would like to operate a community residential home at the location of the residents at 1235 Yellow Rose Circle in Riverview, Florida.

That uh zip code is 33569.

The property uh is zone PD, it's a an existing neighborhood.

Future land use is R4, and it's approximately 0.0, excuse me, 0.38 acres.

Um it's an existing home, it's a five-bedroom, four bathroom home, and it's perfect for the type of facility they would like to utilize.

Um it's going to be for care of up to six elderly uh residents.

Uh the existing home that's about 650 feet away as the crow flies is also a community residential home A for up to six residents.

Uh the unique thing about this uh proposed project is that it's only 650 feet away as the crow flies, but it's approximately six-tenths of a mile over three thousand feet away if you walk or drive it.

They're also in distinct separate parts of the neighborhood, so they come in off of different uh driveways off of Boyet Springs Road to act access the uh uh the neighborhood.

We request this operation or this variance for the uh separation requirements for the existing uh facility that's operating at 12210 Netherfield Court in Riverview.

Um if I could uh show you here.

Okay, yeah.

Yes, thank you.

The the existing home is shown here, the proposed home is here, and that distance separation is six hundred and fifty feet.

You can see from the Google maps.

Uh the dark blue is how to access it from one uh direction.

The light blue is accessing it from the other direction, and you can see that the uh the uh entrances off of Boyet Road are for two different entrances to access the two different facilities.

So although they are 650 feet apart, effectively they're over 3,000 feet apart because there's no way to walk or drive directly from one to the other.

Does your client have any affiliation with the home that's within that distance?

They do not, Your Honor.

And they are here and they can answer that question directly if you would like.

All right, thank you.

We recognize that the distance requirement that's set forth in LDC 61128 is designed to prevent the concentration of community resident homes in any particular area.

We think that the uh the way this neighborhood is is uh existing, the separation by an effective distance of over 3,000 feet, either walking or driving distance.

Um the separation of accesses off of the uh off of Boyette Road.

Um effectively these are more than 1,000 feet apart, and they will uh absolutely uh be able to uh effectuate the goal of there not being a concentration of residential homes in an area.

Addressing the various criteria response.

Uh the alleged hardships or practical difficulties are unique and singular to this particular piece of property because of the separation by uh 3,000 feet of roadway when traveling by uh car or by foot.

The little requirements of the land development code obviously would prevent this uh facility from operating because it is within 650 feet as the crow flies, and uh as I've stated, it's not uh if it's effectively 3,000 feet away.

Uh if allowed, the variants will not substantially interfere with or injure the rights of others whose property would be affected by allowance of the variants because it's more than 3,000 feet away, effective distance.

The application fosters and preserves the public health, safety, comfort, and welfare, and aids in the harmonious orderly and progressive development of the area by permitting development that's consistent with the land development code and the uh comprehensive plan.

And the proposal does not negatively affect natural resources or public facilities and it equally permits development of the property or use of the property as it is currently located.

The operation is in keeping with the nature of the surrounding homes because it we effectively not result in a concentration of community residential homes because of the separation by uh the effective separation by 3,000 foot.

And so I think critically in this case, substantial justice will be done in granting the variants because it will not result in the concentration of the homes and it will allow the uh uh the uh service of uh residents in this uh in the uh community I have uh we provided notice uh as required.

I received one call.

I attempted to call the individual twice.

I have received I I don't know if it was an opposite support or support or if they're just asking questions.

My attempt to make uh contact with that person was not uh successful.

Uh received no other calls in opposition or in support.

I have for you.

May I approach?

Yes, if you'd like to submit documents, you can give them to the clerk, and that will be a part of the record.

What this is is a uh presentation by the applicants of the of their operations.

And you can see when you review it in the executive summary, uh they currently operate a five-bed licensed uh assisted living facility at 11102 Purple Martin Boulevard in Riverview.

Uh they successfully serve residents there for a full year.

They have zero violations, zero complaints, full occupancy, and a strong safety compliance and operational performance.

Uh they're seeking approval for the second home uh at the 12335 Yellow Rose Circle in order to operate the same type of facility, uh, and they were going to operate it with the same level of care.

Um as I indicated, uh Ms.

Bryce and Ms.

Edwards are both uh registered nurses.

Um they are uh committed to a strong resident advocacy, honest supportive communication with families, strict compliance with H A H CA standards, uh safe, accountable, compassionate environment, and being a positive and respectful part of the neighborhood.

As part of that, they're planning to make no changes to the existing residential nature of the properties, no make any outside changes.

The only changes that they would make would be to the inside of the property for safety considerations, uh installation of uh grab bars, interior ramps for accessibility if needed, increased lighting, fire alarm and smoke detector upgrades, secure locks, and uh non-structural accessibility changes.

So there's not going to be any external changes, it will maintain its residential nature, and any changes inside will be for the benefit of the residents.

The staffing structure is at uh Shamara Bryce, the RN is going to be the administrator.

Uh Otavia Edwards, an RN is going to be the director of nursing, and they will have trained and licensed caregivers available 24-7.

Um as they have operated their other facility, uh, there will be no disturbance to neighbors.

Uh the they have extremely low traffic, uh, peaceful residential presidents, they have presence, they will maintain a clean uh and well-maintained property, and they will have HOA approval within the community.

I think importantly, they're going to maintain the same level of care and uh compliance with this facility that they have with the other, which they have had no problems with.

And if you have any questions, um uh please feel free.

I don't know if Ms.

Edwards and Ms.

Bryce would like to uh make a statement as well, and they were sworn in earlier.

All right, thank you so much.

Good morning.

If you give us your name and address.

Uh good morning, everyone.

Um my name is Otavia Edwards, um, 915 North Franklin, Tampa, Florida, 33602.

Um, I just wanted to say thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak.

My business partner and I, we've both been registered nurses individually for over 10 years, and we had the opportunity to operate one assisted living facility so far, and it's been great.

Um, or residence level, what we do, and we love what we do.

But what I wanted to um make sure that I made clear is that what we do is like a big need right now.

There are if we could divide the baby boomer population into three, there is uh there's those that are so sick that they need the nursing home, so that could be approved through insurance, and then there is the population that they go into the bigger box facilities and they're able to walk around participating activities.

But there is this growing group in the middle that they're not sick enough for the nursing home, and they're not independent enough for the uh big box assisted living facilities, and that's where we come into play.

So uh we just want to be able to provide that, and I just want to remind you guys that is 3,000 feet.

But if we try to walk the property and we couldn't, because this we'd be going through trees and through buildings and everything.

And just to confirm, you have no association with that other facility.

No, all right, thank you.

If you wanted to add anything, and um give us your name and address first.

Um my name is Shamar Bryce.

Thank you.

Good morning, guys.

Thank you for having me.

Address is 109 West Fortune Street, Tampa, Florida.

Um we're really grateful for um to be in this space where we could like help the seniors.

So like this is a opportunity for us to like provide that service on a higher level, and like just be there for the families and the residents as well.

It would mean a lot for um if you guys could help us um accomplish that goal.

Um, because we do have um residents that are like waiting on us to like you know, be licensed and accept them in the community.

The family are desperately reaching out to Hustle.

We're like, we kind of um we're we're in the process of waiting for um or a license and the variants.

So we really appreciate you guys for having us and hearing our case.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Don't forget to sign in.

Oh, all right.

Uh sir, does that complete your presentation?

I just want to point out uh, ma'am, is it in within the uh package is the licensing uh for the uh for Ms.

Bryce and Ms.

Edwards to show that they have everything, uh, all their licenses and everything.

So that's also included in your packet.

All right, thank you for that.

I appreciate it.

Thank you so much.

All right, we'll call for anyone who would like to speak in support.

Anyone like speak in support of this application?

See no one, anyone in opposition.

No one, Miss Marshall.

Anything else?

Nothing further.

Sir, you have the last word, but you don't have to take it.

Thank you.

We're we're complete.

Thank you.

All right, thank you.

Then with that, we'll close variants 26-0110 and go to the next case.

Next item is item H7, variance 260120.

The applicant in Central Florida Steel Buildings.

The request is a variance to accessory structure requirements.

Staff findings will be provided by Logan McKay.

Good morning.

Morning, Logan McKay Development Services.

The applicant is requesting a variance to lot development standards to construct an accessory structure within the front yard of the property.

The uh property does have a building permit, HCBLD 2502799 is in reviews for said rose accessory structure.

Uh available for any questions if you have them.

Just real quick, um, this property looking at uh the application, they the applicant's narrative and and rationale for the request.

They talk about uh it being a corner lot, and it looks like this is unimproved right-of-way where they that's the front yard off of this street.

Is that correct?

Yes, ma'am.

Fifth street extends beyond their property, but it is unimproved right of way.

All right, and then their um approximately to the east, would it's shown a 20-foot platted alley.

So is that why it's considered a corner lot?

No, ma'am.

The platted alley on the north side of the property um is well, yes, it is considered a court lot because of that.

Um, but the fifth street is the uh road that's inducing the front yard setback for the next extra structure.

That's also their primary access.

Yes, because both are um right-of-ways, uh, regardless of their designation, it considers the property a corner lot because that was my only question.

Thank you so much.

I appreciate it.

Is the applicant here?

Good morning.

So my name is Austin Sigman.

I'm a Central Florida Steel Buildings.

Address is 4750 South Pine Avenue, Wakala, Florida.

Um, we are here today to go over these setback requirements for this particular parcel.

Um, you know, we permit thousands of steel buildings, you know, every year.

And uh this one just kind of has a quirk regarding that fifth street having dual frontage.

Um there's some regular scenario where it's two paved roads, there'd be no question regarding the setback requirements set forth by the LANCO development, but being that fifth street is running on the front as well as parallel on the side of the property line, which I've got a survey of property here.

So currently Fifth Street right here.

Sir, could you bring that microphone to you?

Oh, sorry.

There you go.

Yes, ma'am.

So he has Fifth Street that runs in front of the house that connects to the parcel on this side, and then the fifth street on the right side of the parcel, essentially it's just the driveway into his property.

Um, it doesn't extend any farther.

There's no plans to pave it in the future, and the lot that directly abuts it in the back is a FEMA wetlands area.

So paving it would have environmental impacts and also the cost to it would be astronomical to clear that lot there.

Um typical side set box would be 15 feet in the scenario if that was considered a side property line.

So that is what we are asking for today is to get that reclassified as a side property line.

That way we can place this building in a spot where it accommodates Mr.

Meredith's use.

Let me ask you, you said there's a wetland area.

Can you show me where that is?

Um, so that is gonna be on I should have printed out a bigger one, but I haven't shrink it.

So this is Mr.

Merit's parcel there highlighted in the yellow, and that big triangle parcel behind it is a wooded parcel that's essentially a landlocked per se, but it does have a uh a wetlands area on it.

And so, but that the wetlands are not on this property, is that correct?

Okay.

No.

So we are close, so we're you know, we have to do foamboard elevations and a flood certificate, which you know we're dealing with with the Hillsborough County permitting, but um this isn't being built in a wetlands area at all.

Is there a wetland setback area associated with that that runs onto this property?

Not that it affects this this building particularly.

There's no the 50 foot plus from wetlands areas or anything like that.

All right, and then tell me it's it's quite a substantial uh structure.

And in fact, it look appears much larger than the home itself.

What are they doing?

Um it's just a general storage, and then he also does uh engine repair, so it'd be a workshop for him to you know work on his projects, have his vehicles inside, as well as clean up the yard and get all the uh trailers, lawn equipment enclosed.

Is that a his business?

His his uh it's uh repair engine repair for his business.

So no, I don't believe it's his uh his business.

Jimmy's here, he can address that further when he he's you know he talks.

Okay.

So all right, did that complete your presentation?

Yes, ma'am.

All right, sir.

If you have anything to say, give us your name and address to start, please.

Uh Samuel Wheeler, uh 4750 South Pine Avenue, Ocala, Florida, 34480.

Uh yeah, so Mr.

Meredith's uh structure is to um really dress up the facade of the property so he's the boats, the trailers, the uh the the equipment to uh uphold the the property and the appearance.

So um he's asking for the variance uh with the setbacks um to dress the property up, make everything look nice, uh so forth.

Can you help me with um the property is looks like a little over an acre in size, yes?

And the the survey your uh colleague put up shows I asked if there was a wetland or a setback area in that southern area, and the answer was no.

So why can why cannot the uh why can't sorry the accessory structure be placed further in the rear of the property?

Yes, so there is a uh aseptic area to the uh southern part of the the house there, um as well as uh some some trees there too.

Okay, uh go ahead, sorry.

Yes, so all of this would be the septic area, and then um a tree as well.

All right, but you could see uh the point of my question, I see where the trees are.

Um, but if you just turned the orientation, it's a one, it's a very large structure, and two, if you or reoriented it, it could more comply with the setbacks uh from the zoning.

And is there so I guess I'm trying to get to why is it uh in a linear fashion, why is it placed in the location that it is and it could it not be relocated more in compliance?

So that uh that area to the south is also about a at least a foot lower uh elevation wise than the area in front.

I see.

Okay, thank you.

That's the end of my questions.

If you all had anything else, nope, thank you.

Thank you.

Don't forget to sign in.

Then we'll call for uh anyone who would like to speak in support.

Anyone in favor?

Seeing no one, anyone in opposition.

All right, Miss Marshall, anything to add?

Nothing further.

All right, sir.

You have the last word if you'd like it.

Uh no, I mean um Mr.

Meredith uh did have two buildings in that build location originally that he took out um they weren't permitted originally, but with how the lot is kind of already situated with his use and how he's been using it.

Um, you know, naturally due to the grade and also the path of the property, that location is the most beneficial for the client.

All right, thank you for that.

I appreciate it.

And with that, we'll close variants 26-0120 and go to the next case.

This brings us to Section I special uses.

Item I1, special use 251135.

The applicant in Sillsboro County Water Resources Department.

The request is a special use for water treatment facility and variants to landscape and buffer requirements.

Staff findings will be provided by Tim Lampkin after presentation by the applicant.

All right.

As we mentioned, the applicant goes first on special uses.

Good morning.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you so much.

Good morning.

My name is Nicole Lynn.

I address 4921 Memorial Highway, Suite 300, Tampa, Florida.

I do have uh five printed copies of the presentation.

You could just give them all to the clerk.

That'll be a part of the record.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

All right.

So today we're talking about the one water campus.

This is an advanced wastewater treatment facility.

And as part of the South Wastewater Conveyance and Treatment Project components, we're just going to quickly mention that there are three different areas associated with this project.

The first is the wastewater and reclaim conveyance pipelines.

The second is the booster or lift station site.

And then the third is the advanced wastewater treatment facility.

These are to serve the south part of the county.

And today we're going to be talking about the most eastern segment of that project, overall project, which is that advanced wastewater treatment facility.

It is a type 3 facility, which means I'll go into a little bit more of the detail, but the wastewater, the size of the capacity of the project is what that type 3 is in response to.

Thank you.

And this went.

Jumped a little bit.

And as I mentioned, the type 3 facility, this has an initial design capacity that's slated for 30 million gallons per day, but also is a master planning to be able to serve a future build out of 45 million gallons per day.

So agricultural res uh rural.

And then the and that's a this is the map from county.

And then the zoning, the existing zoning is agricultural rural.

This is the current aerial of the site.

It is surrounded on the north, east, and west, all by county property owned by Hillsburg County.

And then on the south side of Bomb Picnic Road, there is some existing agriculture and single family homes.

I do want to point out while I have the aerial up that you can see that the site is pretty barren on the north side of this property.

Uh there's an area of trees, so you can distinguish between the two parts of the aerial.

This is the proposed site plan.

Um and bring it to the attention on the bottom of the screen is Bomb Picnic Road, so County Road 672.

Um the west side of the property, there's an existing road named Southeast Landfill Road.

Uh, that is the roadway that leads to the county's solid waste facility just to the north.

And um the site that we're proposing would have access points to get to both of those roadways.

Um the difference between the color on this graphic is intended to uh show that future build-out capacity.

So the blue is all of the infrastructure that would be necessary to meet uh that um 2050 year demand uh to serve up to 45 million gallons per day.

Uh the pink line that's more centrally located in the site plan is that 500 foot wastewater facility setback line, which is um one of the things that we are here for today for this special use.

Um if we were to abide by that, that would uh restrict the ability to serve the community by having to have infrastructure located within that central part.

So in order to fully utilize uh the generally 200 acre um of land, um we're here today for this application to speak to that.

All right.

Um so I will also point out while I have this up that there are uh a couple of other items uh building-wise that we have located on here, mostly the infrastructure like um wastewater treatment itself, the reclaimed facilities as this is intended to connect to those pipeline parts of the project overall project and um and stormwater facilities.

So a large part of the uh stormwater facility you can tell is located what it would be along the southern southern border.

Um this is not only intentional as far as the existing grade is concerned of the site, but also to provide a buffer to uh the few single-family homes that are existing to the south of the county road.

So, along with this application, we have a few waivers and variances.

Um we also had initially uh submitted a couple of uh requests for administrative variances, but those are actually being deferred until the site plan application itself.

So moving on to the waivers section, um, we are asking for reduced setbacks from the requirement of that 500-foot project boundary.

Uh I I referred to that pink line on the internal part of the site plan.

Um this table that's on the presentation is identifying the proposed setbacks along each of the sides with respect to that master plan for the facility for that future build out.

The other thing that we're asking for reduction on is uh specifically the distance to that single family home.

Uh so the request is 115 feet.

Next is the variances.

We have three different variances that we're asking for with the site plan.

The first is the rural scenic corridor uh requirement, and the intention of that scenic corridor is to maintain uh what is in place.

However, on this site, the only thing that's in place is actually sod.

So we're asking to be able to enhance uh the facility along the county road to allow plantings within that green space.

The next variance is the trees per acre.

The requirement of the county code is six trees per acre, so with this being 200 acres, that would lead to uh 1,200 trees, which is kind of astronomical from the standpoint of the site planning perspective for master utilities and and is a maintenance issue.

So we noted there uh that it would really be prevention for the tree canopy, which would uh conflict with uh overhead requirements of the facility, and then also route conflict with infrastructure that from maintenance perspective we're requesting to be able to avoid.

The last of the variances is the off-street vehicular use area buffer.

Um there's a small amount of parking for the facility management folks on this site.

Um however, we're looking to uh relocate those trees that would typically be required along the drive aisles within the facility and push those out to the side.

So something in concert with what I'm showing on the screen right now, which would allow for those plannings to be alongside County Road 672 and then grouped over to towards the entrance locations of the facility.

Um I will just make quick note that there we are the project.

I think when we came for the land use hearing on the booster lift station back in April, it was mentioned then during that presentation that we're the first project being able to take uh advantage of the new regulation in code that allows for segmental approvals.

Uh so I just bring this to attention because the county has been working, staff has been working with us along that regard.

We already have some applications into the county for review of early packages.

So we appreciate that.

And that concludes my presentation.

Just one quick question.

Um you mentioned the setback from residential.

Is that one single family home?

Yes.

It's triggering that.

And have you heard from that resident?

Uh thank you for asking.

We have noticed, and we have not heard uh any questions.

All right, that was my only question.

Thank you so much.

Don't forget to sign in.

Development services.

Good morning.

Good morning to Lampkin Development Services.

This uh special use is uh for a wastewater treatment facility type three in accordance with the LDC section 6.11.102.

Uh as the applicant um went over.

The request includes five waivers and three variances that are detailed in the report and with the applicant's uh justification for the variances.

Uh the properties to the east, uh, west and north sides are bounded by Hillsborough County properties.

To the south, there are small farms, single family homes, and agricultural uses.

Uh staff notes that the applicant proposes predominantly a stormwater ponds along a portion of the southern uh periphery of the property between the facility and county road 672, providing a geographical uh buffer and visual buffer between the proposed use and the agricultural and residential use to the immediate south.

Uh, before I forget the uh revised report, there was a zero instead of a nine in the address, and so that was uh the report that was passed out that I did see that thing.

And uh per LDC section 6.11.102, the applicant's requesting waivers to the minimum 500 foot distance requirement uh which requires that uh type three plants have a distance of 500 feet from the plant to the project boundary.

It further requires that there shall be uh no uh plotted lots or dwelling units within this requirement.

Uh the applicant is requesting these are the waivers, so the waivers are to the north the east.

Uh south uh on the south side of the project is uh bordered by this county road 672, which is an approximately 60 foot wide county arterial roadway, and it separates the proposed facility from the properties to the south.

And as previously stated, the design of the project uh places large ponds, the dry pond area, and administrative building in closest proximity to the properties to the south and places the main functional elements of the wastewater treatment plant on the northern portion of the site.

Uh staff has no objection to the waivers.

And uh to the variances uh because uh County Road 672 is a designated rural scenic roadway and it needs to comply with the tree planting requirements.

And so the applicant is proposing uh not to keep it in its natural state.

Basically, it's already not in its natural state.

Um so normally the requirement is a 30-foot scenic area, and uh because it's already predominantly sodded.

Uh I don't believe the applicant went into that detail, but it is in their application and their variance request.

Uh the applicant's also requesting uh variance of LDC section 6.06.03 point B.

And this is what the applicant went over the uh six uh trees per acre, which um the applicant's proposing uh to provide one tree, but just along the perimeter that's uh not one acre for the entire site.

And then they're also proposing a variance for land development section 6.06.04.

Which is the vehicular use area buffer, which would normally be six feet in width, and the applicant is proposing not to provide the uh VUA buffer and to reduce it to zero.

Uh staff finds the overall request supportable and recommends approvable subject to uh the conditions of approval.

And that concludes my uh presentation, unless you have any questions.

No, no questions at this time.

Thank you so much.

I appreciate it.

Uh we'll go now to the planning commission.

Yep.

Um good morning, electric planning commission staff.

The subject site is located in the agricultural rural uh one to five usually category.

It is in the rural area within the limits of the farm community plan and South Shore uh area-wide systems plan.

Proposed advanced wastewater treatment facility consistent with the intent of the rural area policies as it provides essential public infrastructure that will support uh surrounded areas.

While the facility represents a more intensive use than typical agricultural parcels, the fight consists of a large single parcel that can be uh proposed with the site design measures to maintain the rural character of the area.

Proposed uses are compatible with the existing uses in the area, and there are adequate uh mitigation measures such as buffering, screening, noise control measures, and um odor control measures in place to minimize potential impacts of the adjacent residential properties.

Based upon those considerations, planning commission staff find the proposed special use consistent with the unincorporated Hillsborough County Comprehensive Plan subject to the proposed conditions by the development services department.

Thank you, Ms.

Myers.

I appreciate it.

Is there anyone in the room or online that would like to speak in support?

Anyone in favor?

See no one, anyone in opposition to the request.

All right, Miss Marshall, anything else?

Nothing further.

Ma'am, you'll have the last word for rebuttal if you'd like it.

Nothing further.

All right, thank you very much.

Then with that, we'll close special use GEN 25-1135 and go to the next case.

Next item is item I2, special use 2600 three one.

The applicant is Ricardo McGeini.

The request is a special use to COP alcoholic beverage permit with separation waivers.

Logan McCain will provide staff findings after presentation by the applicant.

All right, is the applicant here?

Good morning.

You give us your name and address, please.

Ricardo Magini, 10277, Big Ben Road Riverview.

Thank you so much.

And just tell me a little bit about your request.

Request for my rest Italian restaurant in Riverview.

It's a small business.

And uh I think the request for beer and wine choose your peel because these uh experience for my Italian restaurant.

It's a good mix for the food and wine.

And uh I need for the experience for my customer because it is uh important for the business.

Have the wine and beer.

Don't have a bar.

It's uh small business, it's only 30 customers.

And uh it's uh uh uh open to the lancio to uh dinner and uh for the uh family um atmosphere and uh that's it.

All right, thank you so much.

I appreciate it.

If you could please sign in.

All right, development services.

Morning, Logan McCake Development Services.

The applicant is requesting a two COP alcoholic beverage permit with distance separations waivers at 1027 Big Bend Road for use with an existing Italian restaurant.

Uh per LDC section 611 E3 provides for approval of separation waivers where there are, quote, special or unique circumstances where the alcoholic beverage use applied for does not have significant impact on surrounding land uses and certain circumstances uh negate the necessity for special distance uh requirements.

The proposed whetstone areas within a commercial shopping center separated from residential and institutional institutional uses and surrounding and surrounded primarily by other commercial locations.

The proposed wet zone area is already under operation as a restaurant.

The addition of alcoholic sales to the location is not intrude uh or does not introduce, excuse me, uh a new use to the site, but a natural extension of the existing and permitted function.

The subject properties located along Big Bend Road, a major arterial roadway where commercial uses are expected to be located of the other alcoholic beverages within the thousand feet of the property.

One of them is no longer in use currently.

The other existing um similar location beverage permit classifications within thousand feet are developed as two restaurants and a bowling alley.

The existing restaurant and proposed wet zone area in the entrance faces north towards Big Bend Road, um, away from the multifamily residential development further south and of the subject property and a large retention pond and vegetation separate proposed wet zone area from the multifamily residential zone development.

Similar commercial uses are located to northeast and west of the proposed wet zone area.

Uh staff finds two COP alcoholic beverage permit to be approvable based on the submitted wet zoning um totaling 1432 square feet as shown in the wet zone survey submitted on or excuse me received November 25th, 2025.

Available for any questions.

No questions at this time.

Thank you so much.

Is there anyone in the audience or online that would like to speak in support?

Seeing no one, anyone in opposition.

No one.

Miss Marshall, anything else?

Nothing further.

Sir, you have the last word if you'd like it.

Thank you.

Thank you for your time.

I appreciate it in coming down.

We'll close uh special use AB26-0031 and go to the last case.

Last item is item I three, special use 260112.

The applicant is 1051 Falkenberg LLC.

The request is a special use for COP alcoholic beverage permit with separation waivers.

Tanya Chapella will provide staff findings after presentation by the applicant.

All right, good morning.

Good morning.

Clayton Bricklemeyer with Hillward Henderson.

Representing the applicant.

Very, very quick explanation.

This is for a 4 COP.

This is an existing 2 COP.

The distance waivers from this residential neighborhood.

And the entrance to the hotel is here on the east side.

No issues that anyone's reported on the existing two COP.

So we appreciate the recommendation of staff and are okay, obviously, with the condition rescinding the two C OP and available for questions.

Did you hear from any of those residents when you applied?

No, ma'am.

And I assume that you had to get this same waiver for the two C OP.

We did.

I didn't, but yes, they didn't someone did.

Yes.

All right, thank you so much.

Don't forget to sign in.

Development services.

Good morning.

Good morning, Tanya Chapella.

I need to present um revised reports.

Um the um the wet zone survey has to be changed.

Thank you so much.

The applicant requests uh approval of a four COP permit to allow the sale of beer, wine, and liquor for on premises and off premises consumption, including package sales within an existing hotel.

Um the proposed premises do not meet the 250 foot separation from residential zone property.

The nearest residential property is located approximately 49 feet uh to the west, resulting in a requested waiver of 201 feet.

Um however, staff finds that uh substantial physical and visual separation exists between the proposed use in the residential uh residential property.

The sites are separated but mature trees, parking areas, and a concrete wall with no direct access between the two.

The proposed wet zone is located over 700 feet from the nearest shared roadway and residential access point.

Um hotel access is oriented to Palm River Road and South uh Falconburg Road, while residential access is oriented to um Balay Run uh Drive, eliminating direct line of sight or functional interaction based on this conditions and the wet zone survey dated uh December 3rd, 2025, reflecting a total wet zone area of uh 15,686.79 square feet.

Staff finds the request approvable, subject to conditions.

Um approval includes rescission of the existing two COP uh permit special use 14-0826 and staff recommends approval.

Let me just ask you, Miss Chapella, real quick.

You submitted a revised staff report, and it's due to the uh wet zone survey.

Is that correct?

What's the change?

Yes, uh this the survey required uh to include the uh 49 feet, and there is a arrow that needed to be included, and when the applicant did that, uh the whole survey was not included.

So the survey consists of three pages, and the applicant just included one page.

So technically it's the same information, but uh we needed to do that.

All right, and I do see that when you submitted is signed and sealed, so that's good.

So all right, thank you so much.

I appreciate it.

All right, uh, is there anyone who would like to speak in support?

See no one, anyone in opposition?

No one, Miss Marshall.

Nothing further, Mr.

Brickmeyer.

Anything else?

Good, thank you.

All right, thank you.

Then with that, we'll close special use AB26-0112 and adjourn the hearing.

Thank you all for your time and testimony.