OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Hillsborough County Zoning Hearing Master Meeting - December 17, 2025

Hillsborough County Archive View Page — Wednesday, December 17, 2025
BodyHillsborough County, Florida
SessionHillsborough County Archive View Page
DateWednesday, December 17, 2025
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 2:31:46

Transcript — Verbatim
0:47

Good evening, everyone.

0:48

Uh, my name is Steve Luce on the zoning hearing master tonight, and I'll be conducting tonight's hearings on each application.

0:57

Before we get started, if we could all stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.

1:06

Pledge allegiance through the flag, the United States of America, and to the Republic, for which it stands.

1:14

One nation, under God, indivisible, liberty, and justice for all.

1:19

Thank you.

1:20

You may be seated.

1:26

At this point in time, I'd like to introduce Michelle Heinrich, who will introduce the other uh staff members here at the DS and other staff members that will join us, and also go over any changes to tonight's agenda.

1:39

Sir.

1:40

Again, Michelle Heinrich Development Services.

1:42

To my left, we have Mary Dorman with the County Attorney's Office.

1:46

Uh to her left is Melissa Leinhardt with the Planning Commission.

1:49

And then to her left is Richard Perez with Transportation Review Staff.

1:53

And we do have one change to the agenda that will require hearing officer action, and that is agenda page nine, item D1, PD rezoning 25-0582.

2:07

The applicant is requesting a continuance to the February 23rd, 2026 ZHM hearing.

2:14

Okay, is that staff initiated or applicant initiated?

2:18

The applicant would need to request it.

2:19

Okay.

2:20

Is the applicant here?

2:22

Good evening, Colin Rice here virtually.

2:26

Okay, go ahead.

2:28

Yes, thank you, Ms.

2:29

Heinrich.

2:30

Uh, appreciate that introduction.

2:31

Yes, so we are working through a couple of traffic components.

2:34

Uh we're feeling good about everything.

2:36

It will result in a much smaller scale project.

2:39

Uh we just need time for those changes to come into place and be thoroughly reviewed.

2:43

So we're requesting to February.

2:44

Uh happy to answer any questions you might have.

2:47

No, no questions.

2:48

There are anyone in the audience that wish to speak to the continuance only.

2:57

Um, sir, can you please um state your name and your address for the record?

3:01

Yes, my apologies.

3:03

My name is Colin Rice, attorney with the law firm of older one D, 1000 West Cass Street.

3:09

Okay.

3:10

Okay.

3:10

I see no one responding.

3:12

So therefore, this item will be continued to the February 23rd zoning hearing master hearing at 6 p.m.

3:21

in these chambers.

3:22

Thank you, sir.

3:23

Thank you.

3:25

Okay, I have a few instructions to read into the record.

3:28

I believe the county attorney's office has a few instructions to read into the record, and then we'll get started with tonight's agenda items.

3:36

Our hearing today consists of agenda items that require a public hearing by the zoning hearing master.

3:43

I will conduct a hearing on each agenda item and will file a recommendation within 15 working days after the conclusion of today's hearing.

3:53

Those recommendations are then sent to the Board of County Commissioners who will make the final decisions.

4:22

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

4:28

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

4:41

The order of presentations are Ms.

4:44

Heinrich will first introduce the item.

4:48

Then the applicant and their witnesses will have 15 minutes to present their case.

4:54

Then development services will have five minutes to present their staff report.

5:00

Then the Planning Commission staff will present their findings of consistency with a comprehensive plan.

5:07

They have five minutes for that purpose.

5:09

Then those in support of the application will have a total of 15 minutes to speak in support.

5:15

Those who are in the audience that wish to speak in opposition to the application will have to 15 minutes total to speak in opposition.

5:23

Then development service will have an opportunity to correct anything on the record, answer any questions.

5:30

And finally, the applicant will have an opportunity for rebuttal, and that is five minutes maximum.

5:36

Regarding the time of proponents and opponents, the 15-minute time frame is a total time for each category.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Zoning█████████████████████████████████████████████49%
Land Use Hearing████████████13%
Transportation Planning████████████13%
Urban Planning███████8%
Procedural██████7%
Agricultural Support█████5%
Environmental Protection███3%
Legal█1%
Public Engagement█1%
Summary of Proceedings

Hillsborough County Zoning Hearing Master Meeting - December 17, 2025

This meeting of the Hillsborough County Zoning Hearing Master (ZHM) was held on December 17, 2025, beginning at 6:00 PM. The hearing officer, Steve Luce, presided over a series of rezoning and major modification applications. The meeting included a call to order, Pledge of Allegiance, staff introductions, and a continuance request on agenda item D1. The bulk of the evening was devoted to public hearings on individual applications, with presentations by applicants, staff reports from Development Services, consistency findings from the Planning Commission, and opportunities for public testimony. Many applications were heard and left pending recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) or to a Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) hearing, with a few items continued or withdrawn.

Continuances and Withdrawals

  • Nineteen items were listed under Section A (Withdrawals and Continuances). One application (MM 25-1341, Apostoleres Properties Inc.) was withdrawn. All others were continued to future ZHM hearings, mostly to January 26, 2026, with some exceptions (e.g., RZ-PD 24-1257 continued to June 22, 2026; RZ-STD 25-0174 continued to July 20, 2026; RZ-PD 25-1061 continued to March 23, 2026).
  • Item D1 (RZ-PD 25-0582, Protek 34th Holdings, LLC) was continued to February 23, 2026, at the applicant's request, due to ongoing traffic component work.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Grace McComas (805 Old Darby Street, Seffner, FL) opposed item C1 (RZ-STD 25-1281), arguing that the proposed commercial intensive (CI) zoning is inconsistent with the Seffner Mango Community Plan, which discourages commercial encroachment east of State Road 579 and outside the urban service area. She urged denial.
  • Beth White (5338 Van Dyke Road, Lutz, FL) spoke in support of item D2 (MM 25-0586), citing the applicant's long-term community service and the need for flexibility due to a planned roundabout that could impact the existing gas station.

Discussion Items

B.1 – RZ-PD 25-0500 (Todd Pressman)

  • Request: Rezone 9.7 acres from AS-1 to Planned Development (PD) to allow a family agricultural trucking business (Navarro Produce) with one residential unit, truck dispatch office, warehouse, and open storage for nine commercial and nine domestic vehicles.
  • Staff/Planning Commission Position: Both Development Services and Planning Commission staff recommended approval, subject to the companion CPA (SMU-6 designation). The site is in a rural area; surrounding uses are agricultural and commercial. The applicant requested a variance to the urban scenic corridor requirement along State Road 60, which was noted.
  • Public Comment: None.
  • Result: Heard and pending recommendation to the CPA meeting on February 12, 2026.

C.1 – RZ-STD 25-1281 (Todd Pressman)

  • Request: Rezone 4.45 acres from CG to CI (commercial intensive) on Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, with a companion CPA to Light Industrial future land use.
  • Staff/Planning Commission Position: Staff and Planning Commission recommended approval, finding the request compatible with the existing mix of industrial, commercial, and utility uses in the area. The site is within the Seffner Mango Community Plan, which directs commercial to the MLK corridor.
  • Public Comment: One opponent (Grace McComas) argued inconsistency with the community plan.
  • Result: Heard and pending recommendation to the CPA meeting on February 12, 2026.

C.2 – RZ-STD 25-1320 (RU Project Management Group, LLC / Ruth Londono)

  • Request: Rezone 0.34 acres from RSC-6 to CG-R (commercial general restricted) for furniture refinishing, repair, upholstery, and a six-foot fence. The site is south of a railroad and north of Downing Street.
  • Staff Position: Development Services recommended approval, noting compatibility with nearby commercial uses.
  • Planning Commission Position: Found the proposal inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan due to the intensive use in close proximity to single-family residential across the street, and the lack of a planned development to incorporate mitigation measures.
  • Public Comment: None.
  • Result: Heard and pending recommendation to the BOCC Land Use meeting on February 10, 2026.

C.3 – RZ-STD 25-1418 (Farmer Enterprise Florida LLC)

  • Request: Rezone 1.03 acres (split-zoned ASC-1 and CG) to CG to allow a commercial building for a painting distribution business. The site is on US 92.
  • Staff/Planning Commission Position: Both recommended approval, finding the request consistent with the area's commercial character and meeting commercial locational criteria.
  • Public Comment: None.
  • Result: Heard and pending recommendation to the BOCC Land Use meeting on February 10, 2026.

C.4 – RZ-STD 26-0037 (Melva Rodriguez)

  • Request: Rezone 0.66 acres from AI to M (manufacturing) for open storage of vehicles. The site is on Benjamin Road, surrounded by high-intensity uses.
  • Staff/Planning Commission Position: Both recommended approval, noting compatibility with surrounding industrial/commercial zoning and the Town 'n' Country Community Plan's support for redevelopment.
  • Public Comment: None.
  • Result: Heard and pending recommendation to the BOCC Land Use meeting on February 10, 2026.

C.5 – RZ-STD 26-0124 (Tampa Electric Company)

  • Request: Rezone 1,620.20 acres from AM and PD (82-0223) to AM (agricultural mining) to allow solar/energy uses on uplands. The site is in a rural area, owned by Mosaic.
  • Staff/Planning Commission Position: Both recommended approval, subject to environmental compliance reviews. The rezoning is part of a companion PRS (parcel removal from PD).
  • Public Comment: None.
  • Result: Heard and pending recommendation to the BOCC Land Use meeting on February 10, 2026.

D.2 – MM 25-0586 (Raed Petrus)

  • Request: Major modification to PD 92-0099 to increase intensity from 0.04 FAR to 0.25 FAR, add a car wash and limited retail, increase building height to 50 feet, expand building envelope, reduce setbacks, and remove a scenic corridor requirement. The site is a Shell gas station at Van Dyke and Lakeshore.
  • Staff/Planning Commission Position: Both recommended approval, noting the area's increased development and proposed roundabout project. The applicant presented a

Meeting Transcript

Good evening, everyone. Uh, my name is Steve Luce on the zoning hearing master tonight, and I'll be conducting tonight's hearings on each application. Before we get started, if we could all stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. Pledge allegiance through the flag, the United States of America, and to the Republic, for which it stands. One nation, under God, indivisible, liberty, and justice for all. Thank you. You may be seated. At this point in time, I'd like to introduce Michelle Heinrich, who will introduce the other uh staff members here at the DS and other staff members that will join us, and also go over any changes to tonight's agenda. Sir. Again, Michelle Heinrich Development Services. To my left, we have Mary Dorman with the County Attorney's Office. Uh to her left is Melissa Leinhardt with the Planning Commission. And then to her left is Richard Perez with Transportation Review Staff. And we do have one change to the agenda that will require hearing officer action, and that is agenda page nine, item D1, PD rezoning 25-0582. The applicant is requesting a continuance to the February 23rd, 2026 ZHM hearing. Okay, is that staff initiated or applicant initiated? The applicant would need to request it. Okay. Is the applicant here? Good evening, Colin Rice here virtually. Okay, go ahead. Yes, thank you, Ms. Heinrich. Uh, appreciate that introduction. Yes, so we are working through a couple of traffic components. Uh we're feeling good about everything. It will result in a much smaller scale project. Uh we just need time for those changes to come into place and be thoroughly reviewed. So we're requesting to February. Uh happy to answer any questions you might have. No, no questions. There are anyone in the audience that wish to speak to the continuance only. Um, sir, can you please um state your name and your address for the record? Yes, my apologies. My name is Colin Rice, attorney with the law firm of older one D, 1000 West Cass Street. Okay. Okay. I see no one responding. So therefore, this item will be continued to the February 23rd zoning hearing master hearing at 6 p.m. in these chambers. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Okay, I have a few instructions to read into the record. I believe the county attorney's office has a few instructions to read into the record, and then we'll get started with tonight's agenda items. Our hearing today consists of agenda items that require a public hearing by the zoning hearing master. I will conduct a hearing on each agenda item and will file a recommendation within 15 working days after the conclusion of today's hearing. Those recommendations are then sent to the Board of County Commissioners who will make the final decisions. Evidence may be presented in written form, and all testimony must be under oath. Hearsay evidence may be used to supplement or explain other evidence, but shall not be sufficient alone to support a finding by me unless it would be admissible over objections in a civil action. The order of presentations are Ms.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com