Welcome to the works.

In today's episode, we're taken to the skies with Hillsborough County Mosquito Control to find out how they combat the spread of disease and the rising mosquito population.

So when it comes to mosquitoes, how exactly are we combating them in the sky?

Nobody complains about larva.

They complain about mosquitoes and specifically adult mosquitoes, female mosquitoes.

The ones that bite you, right?

But it's a lot easier to control adult mosquitoes by control at the larva.

What we do is we use a larva side product that attacks the larval and the swamps of the bankrove areas along the coast here.

We stop the growth so they never grow up and become adult mosquitoes.

The planning commission provides innovative leadership and long-range vision that contributes to the creation of a thriving prosperous community that offers opportunity, fairness, and choice in how we live, move, learn, work, and play.

For more information about the Planning Commission, please call 813-272-5940.

Follow us on social media or visit our website at Planhillsboro.org.

Please be sure to state your name at the beginning of your remarks for the benefit of the clerk.org.

To all participants, please note that tonight's hearing concerns proposed changes to the comprehensive plan.

Presentation should not include matters related to zoning applications and site plans that are not before the commission.

Zoning conditions are not relevant to plan amendments and may not be considered by the planning commission.

The planning commission's purview and making a recommendation is limited to consistency or inconsistency with the comprehensive plan.

And with that, I'd like to ask the clerk's representative to please call roll.

Good evening, Commissioners.

Balden.

Cardenas.

Here.

Kona.

Jamison.

Kugler.

Here.

Lincas.

Here.

Lauk.

Seven.

Here.

Orton.

Renee Cayman sitting in for Miss Orton.

Rodriguez.

Here.

Sink.

Here.

Joseph?

Here.

All right, thank you.

You have Quorum.

All righty.

Our first and only agenda item is Action Item 2A, PC CPA 26-02 comprehensive plan map amendment 302 Sparkman Road, and the presenter is Krista Kelly.

Thank you.

Good morning.

Sorry.

Thank you.

Krista Kelly Planning Commission staff.

This evening I'm presenting PC CPA 2602.

This site is located at 302 Sparkman Road.

This is a privately initiated small scale amendment.

It's approximately 33.9 acres in size and is currently pending an annexation of the site.

The plan amendment is contingent on the approval of the annexation.

The applicant is requesting a change from Hillsborough County Residential 1 to Plant City Residential 6 and Residential 9.

As you see on the location map, the site is located in the southern portion of Plant City.

It is on the north side of Sparkman Road, east of James L.

Redmond Parkway and west of Gerald Hall Road.

It's approximately 2.7 miles north of State Road 60 and 5 miles south of I-4.

This is an area of the site outlined in pink.

As you can see, currently it's used for agricultural purposes.

And also there are multifamily apartments to the northwest as well.

The site is adjacent to the plant city city limits, which are delineated by the blue dotted line.

As you can see, the areas outside of the city limits to the west, I mean to the east and the south east of the site are rural in character.

It changes distinctly to along James L.

Redmond Road or Parkway to the north again.

You see the multifamily to the north, and then further north, there's a concentration of a variety of retail uses.

To the northwest across James L.

Redmond, you see the parkway plaza.

It contains like grocery store, a bank, a medical facility, and then you see a church also to the west of the site.

This is the street view looking northeast across the subject property from Sparkman Road.

And this is looking northwest across the subject site from Sparkman Road.

Beyond those apartments is James L.

Redmond Parkway.

This is looking west from the subject park from the subject property towards James L.

Redmond Parkway, and the subject side is to the right and behind this view.

And again, this is looking east from the subject site down Sparkman Road.

The subject side is to the left and behind this view.

This is the adopted future land use map showing the site outlined by the block black dotted lines.

As you see, the site's currently designated Hillsborough County Residential One, as are the areas to the east and south, which are outside the city limits.

This is the gateway district.

This purple colors, the gateway district.

It's specifically delineated to promote an a commercial activity center in this area.

It allows for a density of up to 16 dwelling units per unit, whereas the rural residential one category in the county allows one unit per acre.

This is a proposed map showing the site now designated both residential nine on the western side and residential six on the eastern portion of the site.

Again, uh it is surrounded by the gateway district, which is an intense land use category, however, it does provide a nice stepping down or a gradual transition to the rural area.

Currently, the site can be developed with up to 33 dwelling units or 369,171 square feet of non-residential use.

If the plan amendment is approved, up to 271 dwelling units could be considered as well as 467,46 square feet of non-residential uses.

In summary, the proposed amendment would allow for an additional 238 dwelling units and an increase of approximately 98,000 square feet of non-residential use.

Staff reviewed the amendment for consistency with the comprehensive plan.

These objectives you see on the slide were considered in the evaluation, and they generally relate to the proposed amendment.

Staff found the amendment to be consistent on the basis of the growth management strategies outlined in the plan and expressed in the objectives and policies here listed on the right.

Under the land use section addressing annexation, staff found that the proposed amendment aligns with the city's intention to direct growth based on the city's vision map.

The site lies within the annexation boundary shown on the visit vision map.

Additionally, it would suppose it would support the increased density and intensity in the area planned as a focal point for suburban and urban mixed-use development in the southwest portion of plant city.

Within the residential development section, staff found that the amendment is supported by related objectives and policies that call for maintaining a sufficient inventory of land designated for residential uses to accommodate growth and development and also to provide a variety of housing types.

Consistent with this aspiration, the amendment, which would designate 22 acres residential nine, located is located next to existing multifamily development, and the designating the remaining 11 acres, approximately residential six.

This area borders rural development surrounding the site, increasing both the amount of residential land in the city and opportunities to develop at a variety of housing types ranging from single family to multifamily housing.

Lastly, under the public facilities section, staff found the amendment consistent with the plan amendments growth management strategy requiring new development to be coordinated with the availability of public facilities and services.

Based on these findings, the planning commission staff recommends that the proposed map amendment be found consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of Plant City's comprehensive plan.

And that concludes my presentation, and I'm happy to answer any questions you might have.

In addition, the applicant is here, and I will turn it over to her.

Good evening, Cammy Corbett with the law firm of Hill Ward and Henderson representing the applicant.

We have a very brief presentation, and I'm gonna ask Stephen, our planner, to go through it for you.

Good evening, Stephen Spizzato, planner with Level Up Consulting here in Tampa.

And uh as Cammy said that uh we had prepared and and what a what we have have uh planned to say or in our PowerPoint this evening is very consistent with what Krista presented, so I I will be brief and try not to be repetitive.

Um additional detail is that we did um meet with Robin Baker, her staff as well as uh engineering uh staff with the city and our plan approach as well as our application is consistent with those with those meetings.

From a macro perspective, the what we're proposing is consistent with the city's guidance on development.

Okay.

So the theme and I guess our plan approach really is that we are transitioning or stepping down in density intensity from the gateway district, which is on our western edge, which allows for the 16 units of the acre to the to our proposed nine and then six, and then directly adjacent to us, there is four existing and also res one.

And so you can see on the map that that that same condition is basically uh found on the north side of the property as well, where you see the res six existing um within the within the city.

Um again, we're compatible with what is uh uh found adjacent.

Here's just a little bit more detail of what is to the north of us, which is the North Point Grand Apartments, and then directly to the west is the PRO's uh apartments, and then compatibility um will also be more fully uh addressed during the uh during the PUD in terms of uh environmental or the physical geography of the property is suitable for intensification.

Um as Krista also uh presented there's a demonstrated availability of uh public uh public services request is consistent with the city's comprehensive plan.

It all it provides for orderly growth and uh is compatible, and we have um no objections, we've been found consistent and have a recommendation of approval.

Thank you.

Cammy Corporate again that concludes our presentation.

We're here to answer any questions you might have.

Thank you.

All right, we had one individual sign up in the public comment on this one, and they are virtual.

So I will see if Corlean Finley's on the line.

HTV Corlean has not checked in.

All right.

That was the one individual we had sign up.

So I will turn it over in that case to the commissioners for questions, comments, discussions of this item.

Commissioner Lickers.

Um, I guess I just want to observe or ask a few questions about the fact that we have R1 right abutting the high density gateway district, and I I think we've seen quite a few cases of this nature at this point, and um you know we have the one one common, and we do have Ms.

Finley's comments in writing here today.

But um, I guess Mike my question is is this part of the I-4 expansion area that's being looked at, or is there are there plans to look at um this area more broadly because it does seem like potentially a point of conflict given the sort of low density right next to the gateway area?

Sure.

Um this is not a part of the I-4 corridor study area, but it is part of the areas I think that Plant City would like to have a joint planning area with the county for.

Um that's actually something their plan has has had as a strategy for a while, and um Robin Baker, who was mentioned as their planning director is very eager on seeing that strategy come to fruition and doing some uh joint planning with the county as it goes south from Plant City in this area, as well as going west towards that yellow line in the I-4 corridor maps.

Um so I I think that is something that's needed.

That the challenge is is that um any time the the unincorporated county has rural land use categories because they're not served by water and sewer.

Um it's typically in the rural area one unit per five acres, or maybe up to one to one or or higher if there's an existing zoning pattern from predating the plan and development pattern, then we recognize that which occurs around a lot of plant city.

Um when they annex into the city of Plant City, they're gonna serve them with water and sewer, and they want them to connect with at least four units per acre or higher.

So there's always gonna be kind of this mismatch on the edge.

Um it reminds me of a case I'm looking at for another um work in sort of the Greater Ocala area.

Um I guess it's actually Lake County, but they they're looking at things like identifying potential non-annexation areas where where people really do want to keep a rural character, but exploring where it is appropriate to have annexation and and that folks might be more interested.

So I I'm happy to hear that it sounds like this is an area that will be looked at um potentially a little more carefully because it's that inner jurisdictional issue here, and and I think it could be an area for a lot of folks to kind of have unhappy feelings if we if that's not handled a little more.

So thank you.

I appreciate the answer.

Commissioner Coogler.

Thank you.

Um I noticed in the packet that it said that uh you uh as far as urban service area not applicable.

And I I do I took that to mean that it already is in the urban service area.

I just want to make sure my my reading is correct.

See looks like Krista has a response to that.

Um in what section can I ask you that you're referring to?

It you in the presentation material.

We I I got it online.

I I I got it through Gmail and I was reading through it, and it said USA not applicable.

Oh, yeah.

Okay, I understand that's right.

I was thinking I wrote that in my staff report.

Um, right.

Uh the plant city does not have an uh a formal urban service area.

Okay.

That's basically the county in Tampa.

Thank you.

Right.

So it's either in the plant city limits or it's not.

Okay.

The urban service area is essentially kind of like a city limits for the unincorporated area, because it's where they'll serve with water and sewer.

Yeah.

All right.

Are there any more questions, comments?

Commissioner Cardenas, your mic is on.

Is that no?

All right.

Any other thoughts, questions, comments, discussions from the commissioners before I close the public comment, going once going twice, then I will close the public comment on this one and open it up to motions from the commissioners on this item.

Commissioner Lincas.

I'll make a motion to find PC CPA 2602 comprehensive plan map amendment 302 Sparkman Road consistent with the City of Plant City comprehensive plan.

Commissioner Sink.

I second that.

All right.

We have a motion of consistency finding by Commissioner Lincas.

Second to that consistency motion by Commissioner Sink.

Are there any comments, thoughts, questions from the commissioners before we take our vote?

Not seeing any.

Then we'll all signify their agreement by saying aye.

Aye.

Those opposed.

That motion carries unanimously.

All right.

That was all for that public hearing for Plant City.

So I will close the public or adjourn the public hearing for Plant City at 6 34 p.m.

And turn us over into our read us into our temple terrace public hearing.

So bear with me for just a moment, everyone.

Welcome to the June 8th, 2026 public hearing of the planning commission on City of Temple Terrace comprehensive plan amendments.

We thank you for attending this meeting.

Your comments and participation are encouraged.

For those attending in person and wishing to speak on any agenda item, please sign the register at the rear of the room and turn off any devices that may be a distraction.

To minimize feedback in the audio, all online participants in the meeting will be muted until it is their opportunity to speak.

Planning commissioners should unmute themselves to indicate they would like to speak.

Please be sure to state your name in the beginning of your remarks for the benefit of the clerk.

There will be an opportunity for members of the public to provide comments when your name is called.

If anyone has difficulties or is watching via HTV and would like to provide comments to be included in the record for the local government hearing, please email them to planner at plancom.org.

For those of you who are not familiar with our process, the meeting will be conducted as follows.

The agenda item will be introduced.

Staff will give their presentation with a 15-minute time limit.

The applicant will be given the opportunity to make a presentation with a 15-minute time limit.

Following presentations, members of the public may address the planning commission when recognized by the chairman.

Public comment will be heard for three minutes per person.

The applicant will be afforded a three-minute period for rebuttal or response.

Planning commissioners will then ask questions.

Public comment will be closed, and upon a motion, a second and discussion of vote will be taken.

To all participants, please note that tonight's hearing concerns proposed changes to the comprehensive plan.

Presentation should not include matters related to zoning applications and site plans that are not before the commission.

Zoning conditions are not relevant to plan amendments and may not be considered by the planning commission.

The planning commission's purview in making a recommendation is limited to consistency or inconsistency with the comprehensive plan.

And with that, I would like to ask the clerk to please call roll again.

Okay.

Beldon Cardenas.

Yes.

Kona.

Jamison.

Coogler.

Here.

Lincas.

Here.

Loc.

Seban.

Sing.

Here.

Orton.

Renee Kaman from Ms.

Orton.

Rodriguez.

Here.

Joseph.

Here.

All right.

Thank you.

All right.

Our first and only action item is 2A TTCPA 26-01 comprehensive plan map amendment.

Southeast Quadrant of Harney Road and U.S.

Highway 301.

And the presenter is Yanika Mills.

Good evening, Unica Mills Planning Commission staff.

I'm here to present TTCPA 2601 located at the Southeast Quadrant of U.S.

Highway 301 and Horney Road.

This is a privately initiated amendment.

It's a little over 12 acres.

And the applicant is requesting the change of future land use designation from Hillsburg County Community Mixed Use 12 to Temple Terrace's Community Mixed Use 12.

Again, the site is located on the south side of Harney Road east of U.S.

Highway 301.

It's east of the Amazon Logistics Center, west of the Tampa Bay Bapass Canal, west of Interstate 75.

The site also falls within the designated uh economic development area.

Uh this area is identified as developing out as a regional activity center, as well as attracting target industries and employment.

Here's an area of the site uh outlined in pink.

The site is currently vacant at this time.

The blue dashed line to the west represents the jurisdictional boundary.

The dash blue line to the east represents the Tampa service area boundary.

Some of the surrounding uses include a single family residential and vacant allots along uh Bowls Road to the east.

We have a construction company just to the uh south of the subject site, and then across through uh highway 301, we have the Amazon Distribution Center, and then to the northwest.

Uh there uh are a mixture of uses.

There's some commercial as well as a church as well as residential uses.

Here is uh the northern boundary of the site at the intersection of Bowles and Horney Road.

Here is a photo looking north uh along U.S.

Highway 301.

The site is off to the right of this photo.

Here is a photo looking north toward the intersection of Bowles and Horney Road.

The site is off to the left in this photo.

And here is uh the subject site directly to the south that I was speaking of, the construction company.

And here's a photo looking west from the subject site, uh and that's the Amazon Distribution Center.

And we have uh this is off to the southeast of the subject site, uh, which is a uh subdivision.

Again, as I noted, uh the site is found within the uh designated economic development area, designated on the vision map, and it was adopted and approved by the city uh council in 2020 2012.

This area is envisioned to involve uh evolve into a regional activity center focused on economic development and employment generation.

Here is the adopted future land use map again.

Um it's designated unincorporated Hillsburg County uh community mixed use 12 to the east and south uh is also designated as community mixed use 12.

Further east is uh designated as public quase public in the blue, which is the Tampa Bypass Canal.

Then we have a presence of Hillsborough County Urban Mixed Use 20 and Residential 9, which are located to the northwest.

Further northeast is a presence of Hillsborough County Residential 4 in the tan color.

As for Temple Terrace Future Land Use Designations in the median area, we have uh research corporate park, which is to the west, and that's the Amazon Distribution Center.

And then uh further to the northwest, we have Temporal Terrace Future Land Use Designations, which includes residential nine, urban mixed use 20, and additional community mixed use 12.

And this is the site again proposed as uh Temple Terrace's community mixed use 12.

As for um entitlements, this amendment would keep the same entitlements.

Uh the maximum density that could be considered is 146 dwelling units, and the allowable intensity is over 256 square feet of non-residential uses.

Though the entitlements um are the same, the one difference that staff did note is that uh the Hillsborough County Community Mix Use 12 does have the allowance for research corporate park uses within its typical list use, which Temple Terrace's use list is not.

Staff consider policies related to the coordination of infrastructure as well as the issuance of development orders.

However, staff found the request to be consistent with the following policies objectives.

The request supports the economic development area as the CMU 12 future land use designation would allow uses that could be considered as employment generators consistent with land use policies 3.6.1, 3.6.4, and 3.1.1.6, which speak to the location of the economic development area and the types of uses that are encouraged there.

The request also supports land use policies 3.5.1, 3.5.6, and 3.5.7, 4.1.2, and 4.3.3, designating the intersection of U.S.

Highway 301 and Harney Road as an activity center and multimodal transportation district, encouraging a mixed use, retail service, commercial and oriented um protection-oriented uses.

And finally, the request supports uh compatibility with surrounding residential uses consistent with land use policies 2.2.3, 2.2.5, 3.5.5, 8.5.1, and 8.5.3.

As the CMU 12, future land use would be required to do a plan development at the rezoning stage and have to mitigate for impacts and meet land development code regulations.

And based on those considerations, planning commission staff found that TTCPA 2601 is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Temple Terrace Comprehensive Plan and stand for any questions.

The applicants here for any questions as well.

Thank you.

Publicly initiated.

This is privately initiated.

Okay.

Yeah, presentation.

Okay.

Come on down.

Good evening, Cami Corbett with the law firm of Hill Ward and Henderson.

I don't have a separate presentation.

It's pretty straightforward.

We are annexing this parcel into the city of Temple Terrace.

We are keeping the same land use.

We had considered research corporate park.

My client is Ryan Companies.

Ryan is no longer pursuing this site, but we agreed to continue with the application for annexation and the comp plan for the landowner.

And so I'm here to answer any questions, should you have any.

All righty.

We didn't have anyone sign up in the public comment for this one, so I will turn it over to the planning commissioners for questions, comments, discussions on this one.

Not seeing a lot of excitement.

Then I'll go on ahead and close the public comment since you all want to be that way on this one and open it up to motions from the planning commissioners.

This item.

Well, I accidentally just closed out my turn your mic on.

I I need um someone to give me the name of this one because I can't.

Okay, so um I'd like to make a motion to make CPA 2601 consistent with the Temple Terrace Comprehensive Plan.

Right.

We have second by Commissioner Second.

All right, we have motion of consistency finding by Commissioner Lincas, a second by Commissioner Kugler.

Are there any questions, comments from the commissioners before we take our vote?

Not seeing any, then we'll all signify their agreement by saying aye.

Aye.

Those opposed.

That motion carries unanimously.

And that was our only agenda item for this public hearing.

So it's 6 45 p.m.

This public hearing is adjourned.

Good night, everyone.