Hillsborough County Zoning Hearing Master Meeting – February 23, 2026
Hillsborough County Zoning Hearing Master Meeting – February 23, 2026
On February 23, 2026, the Hillsborough County Zoning Hearing Master (ZHM) convened at 6:00 PM in the County Center, 2nd Floor, to hear rezoning (RZ) and major modification (MM) applications. The hearing officer presided over the proceedings, taking testimony under oath and receiving staff and planning commission recommendations. The hearing officer will file a recommendation for each application on March 16, 2026, with final decisions by the Board of County Commissioners scheduled for April 7, 2026 (Land Use Meeting).
Consent Calendar
- Withdrawals: 21 applications were withdrawn or continued before the hearing. Notable withdrawals include RZ-PD 25-0785 (Florida Design Consultants, Inc.) and MM 26-0153 and MM 26-0178 (Todd Pressman).
- Continuances: Most other applications were continued to future ZHM hearings (primarily March 23, 2026). One application (MM 26-0154, Todd Pressman) was continued to June 22, 2026; RZ-STD 26-0310 (David Wright) was continued to April 27, 2026. Two applications (RZ-STD 26-0290 and RZ-PD 26-0217) were continued by the applicant.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Item D4 – RZ-PD 25-1382 (Brent & Hannah Townend, Dance Center): Two members of the public spoke in support. Nicholas Karas (3723 Holloway Drive, Valrico) stated his wife and daughters are students at the dance center and registered strong support. Jessica Benitez (610 East Lumsden Road, Brandon), a neighbor, said her daughter attends and walks to the studio, expressing support. No opposition was voiced.
Discussion Items
-
Item C1 – RZ-STD 26-0297 (Raul Riano): Proposed rezone of 0.32 acres at SE corner of W Sligh Ave & N Himes Ave from RSC-9 to RMC-20 to allow six one- and two-bedroom apartments. Applicant Eileen Rosario testified the property is needed for affordable housing and no neighbors objected. Staff recommended approval; planning commission found the rezoning consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. No public testimony. Outcome: Heard and pending recommendation.
-
Item D1 – RZ-PD 24-0921 (True Builders, Inc.): Request to rezone 2.45 acres at 4020 N Frontage Rd from ASC-1 to Planned Development for a contractor’s office (without open storage) with a maximum building area of 20,000 sq ft. The site is in a rural area (R-1 future land use). The applicant sought a waiver of commercial locational criteria (being 2,750 feet from the nearest qualifying intersection). Staff recommended approval subject to conditions; planning commission found the proposal inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan due to incompatibility with rural residential character. The applicant noted that an adjacent property (approved in 2014) had a similar waiver. No public testimony. Outcome: Heard and pending recommendation.
-
Item D2 – RZ-PD 25-0582 (Protek 34th Holdings, LLC): Request to rezone 3.54 acres at 6920 E Chelsea St from PD to PD to allow contractor’s office (with and without open storage) and warehouse. The site’s future land use had been changed to Light Industrial Plan (LI-P). Staff and planning commission found the proposal consistent. No public testimony. Outcome: Heard and pending recommendation.
-
Item D3 – MM 25-1372 (Torose 6302 LLC): Major modification to PD 83-0173 on 50.01 acres at 6302 E Dr Martin Luther King Jr Blvd to add M zoning district uses (except heavy industrial) at a 0.27 FAR, with a 50-foot height limit and restrictions on truck access to Chelsea Street. Staff and planning commission found the modification consistent. No public testimony. Outcome: Heard and pending recommendation.
-
Item D4 – RZ-PD 25-1382 (Brent & Hannah Townend): Request to rezone 1.42 acres at 911 Bryan Rd from RSC-6 to Planned Development for a neighborhood-scale dance studio (no outdoor use). The existing building would undergo interior renovations only. Staff and planning commission found the proposal consistent. Two public supporters spoke (see Public Comments). Outcome: Heard and pending recommendation.
-
Item D5 – MM 26-0216 (Jacob Cremer / Barbas Cremer, PLLC): Major modification to PD 13-0177 on 45.46 acres north of W Waters Ave & Northbridge Blvd to redefine uses from a community residential home (assisted living) to a standard single-family mobile home park with 669 equivalent dwelling units. A concurrent Comprehensive Plan amendment (from R-9 to R-16) is required. Staff and planning commission found the modification consistent. No public testimony. Outcome: Heard and pending recommendation (to be heard with the CPA at the April 9, 2026 meeting).
-
Item D6 – RZ-PD 26-0220 (Jacob Cremer / Barbas Cremer, PLLC): Request to rezone 57.85 acres on Tanner Rd from AR, AS-1, PD (22-0692), and PD (97-0251) to Planned Development to add 380,000 sq ft of warehousing/distribution (Phase II of an existing development). Variations include PVC fence in lieu of masonry wall and increased stormwater pond slope within buffer. Staff and planning commission found the proposal consistent. No public testimony. Outcome: Heard and pending recommendation.
Key Outcomes
- All six applications that were heard received a recommendation of approval from staff and planning commission (except D1 where planning commission recommended denial, but the hearing officer will make a recommendation).
- No votes were taken; the hearing officer will file a recommendation on March 16, 2026, for each case.
- The Board of County Commissioners will hold final decisions on April 7, 2026, for most items (except D5 which will be heard on April 9, 2026, alongside the Comprehensive Plan amendment).
- The hearing officer acknowledged that for D6, a revised staff report was provided at the meeting updating a condition related to the platting process.
Meeting Transcript
To speak in favor of an application. And it is, that's true. Okay. Anyway, proponents, uh 15 minutes. Sorry, that threw me off. Fifteen minutes, everyone combined, uh, to state your uh beliefs in favor, and then also true when we go to opponents, anyone who would like to speak against an application. Fifteen minutes for everyone. We'll then circle back to the development services department who has five minutes to make any comments or changes based on tonight's testimony. And then finally, the applicant has the last word with five minutes for rebuttal. I don't think we have this this evening, but I'll go over uh when it is that time for proponents or opponents to speak in favor or against an application. I'll ask for a show of hands and we'll count how many people would like to speak total. There are people in the room that we may also have someone participating virtually, so we'll get a count of that, and we will divide the 15 minutes by the number of people that want to speak and to give everyone a fair shot. When you come up to the podium, if you could give us your name and address to start. We are, as you heard, recording this um hearing, and we want to make sure we have your name and information correct. Then when you're done, if you're in the room, if you could see Alison, Allison will raise your hand. Allison's with the clerk's office, and she has a written log that she's keeping on top of the dais. So when you're done speaking at the podium, if you could go and sign in with your name, address, and the petition number to which you spoke. All right, with that, let me now turn to Ms. Dorman of the County Attorney's Office, who will provide you the legal requirements which govern your participation at the Board of County Commissioners meeting. Any evidence presented tonight will become part of the complete factual record of each application, and no additional evidence can be introduced after the closing of each application. The second step of the rezoning process is a public meeting before the Board of County Commissioners, where the board will make a decision on each application heard tonight. Tonight's applications are scheduled to be heard by the board at its April 7th, 2026 land use meeting, unless a different date is stated by staff. When considering applications, the board will only review the record and the recommendation made by the land use hearing officer for each application. The land use hearing officer will file a recommendation for each application heard tonight on March 16th, 2026. The Board of County Commissioners has established a policy that directs which rezoning and major modification applications are to be placed on the consent agenda of the board's land use meeting. The following applications may not be placed on the consent agenda. Applications that propose to add density outside the urban service area, applications on roadways with a failing level of service, applications that do not have consistent recommendations of approval, and applied applications that have evidence or testimony in opposition provided to the record by non-applicant parties of record, either prior to or at tonight's public hearing. The board will allow testimony by any party of record at its public meeting to consider the land use hearing officer's recommendation for any item on the regular agenda. Testimony by a party of record shall be limited to the record of the proceedings before the land use hearing officer unless additional evidence has been found admissible in accordance with section 10.03.04D of the land development code. A party of record is an individual who fits into at least one of the following four categories. First, someone who's present tonight and presents testimony or documentary evidence. Second, someone who's been certified by the U.S. Postal Service as having been mailed notice of tonight's hearing. Third, someone who submitted documentary evidence to the master file at least two business days prior to tonight's hearing, or fourth, someone who submitted documentary evidence by proxy at tonight's hearing. The content of oral argument before the board shall be limited to the content of the testimony and other evidence submitted verbally or in writing to the land use hearing officer. It is the role of the county attorney's office to ensure that only individuals who have met these requirements are allowed to speak before the board and to ensure that no new evidence or testimony is introduced or allowed at the board's public meeting. For these reasons, please make sure that all information you wish the board to consider at its public meeting is entered into tonight's record. Thank you so much. I appreciate it. All right. As I mentioned, all testimony must be under oath. So if you plan to speak tonight, if you could please stand, raise your right hand, and I'll swear you in. Do you solemnly swear the testimony you're about to provide is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Thank you so much. Please have a seat. All right. Then with that out of the way, we are ready to call the first case, Miss Heinrich. Our first application is item C1, standard rezoning 26-0297. The applicant is requesting the rezon property from RSC9 to RMC 20. Sierra Jeems has reviewed this for development services, but I will be providing her staff findings tonight after the applicant's presentation.
openpublica.com