Land Use Hearing Officer - 11.09.26

because they are a threat to public health. There are many mosquito-borne illnesses that they can pass on to humans and other animals. Therefore, we want to mitigate their populations. And we're only spraying whenever we have justification, and that could come from our surveillance data or from our inspectors who go out and are looking at different larval production sites every single day. We don't have a spray schedule because everything we do is based on data that we collect. So it's based on the number of mosquitoes that we find in our traps every day. It's based on what the inspectors are finding out in the field. If they're finding a lot of breeding, they'll obviously treat then. But we don't have a set schedule because everything is based on data that we find. We don't do any individual spray requests. You can always submit a request for a spray, a request for a property inspection, or report any standing water that you have around your house. And we'll come send out an inspector. They'll come look at that area, see if it's breeding, and then based on the data that they find, we'll see if that area is eligible for treatment. But we don't do treatment based on special events. We're spraying right at sunset because dawn and dusk are the most active times for mosquitoes. So in order for our treatments to be the most effective, we obviously want to treat when the mosquitoes are most active. And we're going to be able to mitigate the population best at those times. Thank you, everyone. Good morning to this morning's Land Use Hearing Officer hearing. And before we get started, if we could all stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. You may be seated. At this point in time, I'd like to introduce Colleen Marshall from Development Services staff who will introduce the other staff members that are here today and go over any changes to this morning's agenda. Good morning, Colleen Marshall, Development Services. To my left is Mary Dorman and Jared Delfina of the Hillsborough County County Attorney's Office. Carmen Mason of Development Services staff is joining us virtually. Alexis Meyers of Planning Commission staff will be presenting virtually. During the course of the hearing, a number of other staff planners will be presenting various cases and be introduced for each item. We have no changes to the published agenda. Okay. Ladies and gentlemen, if you have cell phones, put them on silent. We have a lot of agenda items on today's hearing agenda. So fewer interruptions we have, the better. I have a few instructions to read into the record. Then the County Attorney staff has a few instructions to read into the record. It won't take long. And then we'll get started with this morning's first item. Our hearing today consists of agenda items that require public hearing by the land use hearing officer. I will conduct a hearing on each agenda item and will file a decision within 15 working days after the conclusion of this morning's hearing. Our hearing will be informal. I will 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 will take evidence, but will exclude evidence that is irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly repetitious. 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, regarding the order of presentation for the variances. Development services presents the staff report and findings. They have five minutes for that purpose. And then the applicant will have 15 minutes to present their case. And those members that wish to speak in support of the application will have 15 minutes for that purpose. And those members in the audience who wish to speak in opposition will have 15 minutes for that purpose. Then development services will have five minutes to address any comments that I may have or questions I may have. And finally, the applicant will have five minutes for rebuttal. I'll talk about the procedures for the special uses at the point in time those applications come up at the end of the agenda. Regarding the time for proponents and opponents, the 15-minute time frame is the time needed for everyone. If there are a number of people to speak, we will add up the total number of people and the 15 minutes will divide it as equally as possible. You may wish to designate a single spokesperson to more efficiently use the time. When you come up to the podium to speak, please start by giving your name and address for the record. There is this meeting is being recorded and we want to make sure we accurately document who is speaking on the record. When you're done speaking, please sign in with the clerk's office. With your name, address, and the application number of the agenda item you are speaking to. So when you're done speaking, there's a pad at the end of the podium and the clerk can raise your hand. That's who you go see to sign in after you're done speaking. The county attorney will now provide the legal requirements for repealing a decision made by the land use hearing officer. Good morning, Mary Dorman from the county attorney's office. This land use hearing officer public hearing is for variance and special use requests. This is the time for interested parties to present evidence and testimony. Once the land use 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 be appealed, the record evidence including the testimony presented at this public hearing shall be the only evidence that is subject to review by the land use appeals board. In reaching a final decision on petitions, the land use appeals board will only consider the decision of the hearing officer and the record evidence, including any evidence from this public hearing. If an appeal is filed, the land use appeals board hearing shall consist of oral argument by the party appealing the decision, county staff, and any interveners, each of whom may be represented by legal counsel. The following shall have standing to appeal a decision of the hearing officer or to intervene in an appeal. One, the applicant or two, anyone who appeared before the hearing officer presented testimony or other evidence and is adversely affected by the decision of the hearing officer. It is the role of the county attorney's office to ensure that no new evidence or testimony is allowed before the land use appeals board that was not presented to the hearing officer at today's hearing. The county attorney will recommend that the land use appeals board disregard evidence or testimony that is outside the record made at today's public hearing. Any evidence presented to the land use appeals board that is outside the record could jeopardize the legality of the land use appeals board's decision, and the presenter of that evidence could hurt their own cause. The safest course of action then is for you to write down any comments you make today and repeat them to the land use appeals board. Okay, thank you. All testimony must be provided under oath. Therefore, if you plan to speak today, please stand and raise your right hand so I may swear you in. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so I hope you got it. Okay, thank you. You may be seated. Okay, and with that, Ms. Marshall, we're ready for the first case. Today's agenda, we have no vested rights, fee waivers, remands, reconsideration request, or reconsideration request, which brings us to section F, site development variance request. Item F1, variance 26-1289. The applicant is Jason Kendall. The request is a variance to encroach into the wetland setback and variance to landscaping buffer requirements. Staff findings will be presented by Wayne Doyen and Sierra James. Good morning, Wayne Doyen Development Services. This is variance application 26-1289. Request summary. The applicant is requesting a variance from the 30-foot wetland conservation area setback requirements section 4.0107.B.4 of the land development code. The applicant's specific request as shown on the site plan submitted on 10-19-2026 is to allow for max encroachment of 14 feet for a pervious parking area, concrete sidewalk, and a dumpster enclosure within a concrete pad to be within the 30-foot wetland conservation area setback. Section 4.0107.B.4, LDC requirement. No filling, excavating, replacement, permanent structures, or other impervious surfaces shall be allowed within the required 30-foot wetland conservation area setback. Variance request is 14 feet, resulting in 16-foot remaining setback. I will now turn this over to Ms. James to finish the variance request. Okay. Good morning, Sierra James of Development Services. The applicant is also seeking a variance to the required scenic roadway easement and buffer area required in between incompatible uses. Per LDC section 60606, sorry 60603i, properties along rural scenic roadways must provide a 30-foot scenic easement that shall be left in a natural state. They are seeking a variance of 5 feet, resulting in a 25-foot scenic roadway easement. Per LDC section 60606a, a 20-foot type B buffer is required between commercial and residential uses. The applicant is requesting a variance of 10 feet, resulting in a 10-foot buffer where adjacent to residential uses. I'm available for any questions at this time. In the findings, it says there's a wetland setback compensation plan. Was that submitted and is it part of optics? That will, they did submit it on their plans for me, but it will be finalized during the site construction intake process. But there is, their actual plan is in the mapped area of the, their plan is, the site plan. The site plan, but not the compensation plan. The compensation plannings, they, they outline how many of each they're going to plant. They are in the site plan. All right, could, I don't know if you know how to use the ELMO. Could you point that out to me? It wasn't particularly clear to me. No, it'll be mainly cleared up during the intake process for the development. We'll be able to see, you're not, you're not, you're not going to be able to see it because it's in the writing. It's in the indexes and stuff on what type of plants they're going to do. The hashed out area is where the plantings are going to be along the remaining setback area. It's going to be on the top of the page where you're seeing the dashed out lines. That's where the plantings will be, but that's all done during the construction plans. It's okay. Thank you. Yeah, when it comes to commercials, they deal with all that during the actual construction intake. All right, thank you. Okay, at this point in time, the applicant, please. Good morning, Justina Gale, Forward Planning and Design, 514 Howell Street, Dunedin, Florida. And I'll be presenting the variance application for the project overview. The site is located at the southeast corner of, I'm sorry, southwest corner of Tarpon Springs Road and Jorian Road in Odessa. It consists of two parcels that is approximately 1.67 acres. And there are approximately 0.365 acres of wetlands. Existing zoning is CN, commercial neighborhood. And it is located in the Keystone Odessa community plan area. The requested variances, there's three. It's from the wetland setback. And this variance is from the 30-foot wetland conservation area setback requirement. There's a maximum encroachment of 14 feet for a pervious parking area, concrete sidewalk, and dumpster enclosure with concrete pad within the 30-foot wetland conservation area setback. There's also a variance for the scenic roadway easement. There is a requirement that requires 30 feet for a scenic roadway buffer. This is asked to be reduced by five feet for a five-foot pedestrian boardwalk. That's proposed within that setback. And then there is a requirement for a buffer for the residential to the south. And that variance is a variance of 10 feet from the required 20-foot type B landscape buffer located at the southeast corner of the site. And here are the requested variances from each one that I just went through. So it's a variance of 14 feet for the wetland setback. So there's 16-foot remaining as a result in the rural scenic roadway. There's a variance of five feet. So there's 25 feet of the scenic roadway easement remaining. And for the buffering 20-foot type B buffer to the south, there's still 10-foot buffer adjacent to the residential uses. And here is the site plan. As you can see with all of the requirements and setbacks, it's very minimal reductions that we're asking for. Could you go back to your site plan? Sure. Can you point to where the encroachments are into the wetland setback? I'm not sure how to point with this. Well, you can do old school. You can look at it. Oh, you have a PowerPoint. Yeah, I have a PowerPoint. I don't know if you have a pointer. I don't know if there's a pointer. No. No. Okay. But it's pretty much to the south where you can see that southern, the darker gray, that's the pervious parking paver buffer. So it encroaches mostly within that. And the setback goes to 16 feet. Everything else is about a minimum of 20 feet. And then there's just a sidewalk around the edge of the building and so forth. Okay. And also present is our engineer. So he can go into a little bit further detail and in our ecologist about the types of plantings and so forth for that that we're proposing. All right. We'll let the ecologist know. I'd like to hear from him when you're done. Sure. Her. Her. Thank you. Yeah. So we did have on July 16th, the EPC did inspect this site and to show all the wetlands. And that is approved and the service will remain valid and it'll expire in 2029. And the gross acreage is approximately 1.67 acres. And because of all of the right-of-way preservation is 20.3 along the roadway, plus the 30-foot scenic roadway easement, that takes away about 50 feet from the frontage. And then because of all the wetlands and everything, there's only about 0.77 acres of usable development land. So it's very constrained because of all the LDC and site constraints. And we did respond to all the variance criteria responses. I can go. I don't know if I need to go through all of them. But as I said, only 0.77 acres remain usable within the setbacks. All the encroachments are very minimal with the wetland buffer, landscape buffer, and scenic roadways, mostly for circulation of the site and for safety reasons of the sidewalks and so forth. And staff found that the wetlands setback compensation will be reviewed and approved through the commercial construction plan review. And we recommend and request approval of the variance. Thank you. And if there's any questions, like I said, ecologist and the engineer. Yeah, if the ecologist could come forward. Yes. Good morning. Hi, good morning. Abby Naylor, 14706, Tudor Chase Drive, Tampa, Florida. Yeah, if you had a chance to strike down, I'm sure you're involved with this project and you understand the encroachments proposed. Let's start from the basics. Are they impacting any wetlands on the site? No, there are no wetland impacts proposed. And I do think it's important to note the encroachment is the distance of 16 feet remaining isn't across the entire wetland line. That's just the shortest location where we're encroaching into the buffer. Some of it is going to be a 30-foot buffer maintained. So they're just minor encroachments. Something I think that's important to note. So our total buffer encroachment in terms of square feet is 1,445. The total buffer to remain is 5,913. So and we are planting that entire buffer. So it's more than three times the encroachment is what's to remain and we're planting that entire area. Okay, so your wetland encroachment compensation plan is to put plantings in the remaining buffer that's not being impacted. Correct, right, right, which is 5,913 square feet. Okay, and have you had any preliminary feedback from county staff? Well, yeah, so obviously staff is supporting the variance. In terms of meeting the compensation planting guidelines, we are meeting the recommended planting guidelines that's published by Hillsborough County. There are guidelines for compensation plans? Correct, yes. Okay. Yeah, there's Hillsborough County published guidelines for compensation planting and we are meeting those guidelines. There's also in those compensation planting guidelines a list of species that are recommended. It's not only, you don't have to exclusively use those species, but the particular habitat that's out there, we selected plants that either are already there or are species that are typically found within that type of community. So not that maybe anybody knows what these are, but we've got wax myrtle, gallberry, American beautyberry, and shiny coffee, obviously all native plant species. So it should create a really nice buffer because we selected shrubs. There's already a canopy, a tree canopy, so we selected an understory of good shrubs that should create a really dense buffer. I think it's also important to note the lake that's there, it's really a wetland fringe and a lake. Historically, there was a wetland there, if you look back at historical aerials, and that lake was actually man-excavated. I don't want to call it fully man-made from uplands, because that's not true, but it is an excavated lake where that dredge material was used to, I think for the adjacent neighborhood. So it is a little bit of a man-altered system, albeit I think our planting compensation that we're going to provide will create a really dense and nice buffer from the commercial. All right, anything else? I think that's all I've got, unless you have any more questions. No questions, thank you. All right, thank you. All right, ma'am, can you sign in? Is the applicant that conclude your presentation? Ma'am, does that conclude your presentation? Yes, thank you. All right, very good. Okay, at this point in time, is there anyone in the audience that wish to speak in support of the application? I see no one responding. Anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application? Yes, sir. Please come forward. Good morning. You're over in the corner, so I wasn't really sure about you. Okay, that's fine. Okay. Good morning, Melissa Nordbeck, Keystone. I will use the applicant's own words. Setback circulation with parking requirements in stormwater areas cannot physically fit limited building and circulation envelope. The parcel is subject to volume sensitive stormwater management requirements that cannot be accommodated through traditional surface basins due to the limited development envelope. Wetland buffer setback must be encroached upon for parking and circulation. The stormwater vault circulation and building footprint cannot be safely and or efficiently arranged. This property does not have sufficient area to accommodate a full CN commercial use. Site burdened by significant constraints. The hardships are the result of inherent property characteristics and county mandated protections. The applicant claims that the denial of the several variances they are requesting would make this site undevelopable. That is untrue. The truth is, even in their own words, and the very fact there's a need to request several variances, the plan for this site is too intensive. And regardless of the applicant's veiled legal threats, this parcel does not even come close to inverse condemnation threshold. It is buildable. And every condition the applicant is referencing was in place when they purchased the property. Also in place when the applicant purchased the property is the Keystone Odessa community plan. The plan clearly states that all roads will remain two lanes. The community plan also has guidelines for architectural requirements, signage and lighting issues the applicant has yet to address. Because this is a franchise of a large corporation that has branding requirements, I will assume more variance requests to come. I own the horse farm to the right of this property. The creek that separates the farm from Joreen Road during the rainy season, the water was high enough that we could not use this portion of the property. So here's your site here. And this is the creek that runs down. Filling in any of the wetland at the head of the creek will result in even more water pushed onto the farm. There's also a home at the rear of the applicant's property on the property line. But because that property is zoned AR instead of residential, the applicant is not required to have 500 feet from a drive-thru speaker box or meet residential buffering requirements. Instead, they are requesting to limit the setback and encroach into the wetland, which will greatly affect this homeowner. So please deny these variance requests. So please deny these variance requests. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Okay, next speaker, please. Good morning. Good morning. Good morning. Okay. Yeah, I can see that. Okay. Beth White, Keystone Odessa. Applicant is requesting three variances in this application, which include destroying existing wetlands to put a dumpster in the wetland conservation area. Please deny these three variance requests. This application is for an extensive commercial general development, which includes a Duncan drive-thru, not a commercial neighborhood zoning. There is an existing Duncan three and a half miles away in an appropriate PD zoning. The intent of CN zoning allows for smaller scale commercial uses that serve residents without disrupting the residential character of the area with a limited impact on traffic noise and infrastructure. Drive-thrus are designed for people passing through, not the people who actually live there. Because a proposed drive-thru is not a permitted use, but a conditional use, these three variances are the beginning of many variances, design exceptions, and modifications needed for this overly intensive development on or about an acre of land in rural Keystone. There can be no vehicular queuing onto either Tarpon Springs Road, a two-lane road or Joreen, a narrow country road for residential use only. The corner of Tarpon Springs Road and Joreen and Keystone is an established bus stop for elementary school children. Any and all hardships this applicant claims in these three variances are self-imposed. The applicant is an established developer that had a site and subdivision review with Hillsborough County April of 2022, a year before purchasing either folio. They submitted a natural resource permit to remove 111 trees on this property February of 2024, prior to purchasing the second folio. There's no deprivation of rights under the literal LDC application. Applicant has had well over four years to understand the county's comprehensive plan, including land use codes, allowable uses, and the Keystone Odessa Community Plan, which outlined the literal enforcement of the LDC. Please deny these three variance requests. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Next speaker, please. Good morning. Good morning. My name is Jane Whitehurst, 10502 Lake Williams Drive. I am the president of the Keystone Civic Association, and I'm in here to speak on behalf of the KCA board and many of the members in the community. I'm going to speak quite quickly so that I can defer most of the time to Dustin Sampson and Eddie Santiago, who are two of the neighbors that will be affected directly by this development, one of them being the lot right next to the applicant's property. And speaking about this, we know that only one of the six criteria need to not be met for this to be denied. I don't see how any of the six criteria have been met. The applicant claims hardship of the parcel, which is why he needs large variances for wetlands, wetland setbacks, corridors, and right away. The parcel is no different than any of the other parcels on Tarpon Springs Road, and those businesses have not needed to change the boundaries for wetlands and such. His hardship is due to his chosen site layout and not from the land. He seems to want to cluster as many buildings as this land cannot tolerate that. Being a commercial neighborhood zoning, this, as stated before, is not going to benefit anybody in the neighborhood. It's only going to benefit the commuters that use the Tarpon Springs Road to drive through and stopping and getting something at the drive through, and therefore causing more traffic problems on a road that is very scary at this point to even drive out on. Thank you very much. All right. Thank you, ma'am. Next speaker, please. Thank you for the time. Sure. You've seen my house a couple of times already today, and it's interesting, right? Just before you get going, state your name and address. Dustin Sampson, 18323 Joreen Road. My property is right across the street, the southwest border of the property. A lot of things have been said, and it's interesting, right? It sounds really nice. It sounds really great from one perspective. Not once did we hear what the impact that would be on the residential area and the two-lane highway or the two-lane exit onto Joreen Road. If you pull up that video that I sent, that I submitted, I gave you the UP. Okay. Well, I submitted a video of the standing water that is consistently available on that road, on that corner. Every storm, we get standing water. The drainage as such is an issue already. Now, if everything is concreted over, the drain will only compound the problem and it will drift into my property further. The buffer zone. Why do you need to be 10 feet away from residential area, from a house? What's the point? The original justification, semi-pervious paving. Now, it's going to be a concrete slab. On that wetland area, there's going to be a dumpster and a dumpster structure that is now being put on that plan. Neither is allowed in the wetback setback under 4.01.07.B-4. What's interesting is that we talked about the impact to the overall community. There's not one sidewalk on the road in the whole county. And now we're going to put in a completely paved 50 parking spaces right there across from a conservation area. The lighting. We've talked about it. They say, oh, we're going to take care of it. We'll take care of it and make it a condition because the lighting is going to be on all the time. And I've raised five kids and all five kids have been at that bus stop every morning. And they get dropped off in the afternoon. Just so you know, lighting is not on the agenda this morning. Great. It should be a condition going forward, though. That's fine. It's not on the agenda. We don't have to talk about it. The water table. All of us are on septic. Whenever that standing water happens and now you've got a commercial septic system that's already next to the wetlands, all of our water has then become at risk. The two way driveway on Doreen. I mentioned it earlier. It's a narrow dead end road with no sidewalks, no striping, no lights. Kids walk to the bus stop at the Tarpon's corner. And every morning people come into a drive drive through a drive through. Really? And now everybody's going to be leaving off of my road where all the kids walk to that bus stop. I'm sure you understand that that also is not part of the agenda this morning. That's fine. It should be part of the condition, though, upon moving forward. And I recognize that it's its own commercial neighborhood. In no way does this business support our neighborhood. Not one bay. Not one bit. And at the same time, we're open to other kinds of things like Keystone Corner, which is just down the road. It's very small. There's no variance that's needed to be built and developed on that property. It's just the scope and scale of the current proposal that is out of whack. Do you have any questions? No. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Next speaker, please. Good morning. Good morning, Mr. Officer. My name is Edwin Santiago. I live on 18324 Doreen Road. Just to echo what Mrs. Norbeck and Mr. Sampson said, which was very well articulated. I am very concerned because my house, I don't know if they can show that graphic again, is directly not across the street, not a mile down the road, directly behind. Yeah. To the south. What they're trying, correct. What they're trying to build. The only thing separating my house from this development is just a small fence. And I'm speaking on behalf of myself, my wife and my grandchildren and my children. So I'm very concerned about this and I'm 100% opposing it. Okay. I see the kids walking down to the bus stop, people riding on their bikes. It's a very beautiful neighborhood and I don't think that the noise pollution itself is going to be welcomed by the neighbors, especially myself because it's going to definitely affect me and my family. The headlights of the cars that are going to be parking there, it's also going to be an issue because it's going to be directly into the windows of the house. We're trying to get some sleep and go to work the next day. So I really hope you take this into consideration and that's all I have to say. Okay. Very good. Thank you, sir. Thank you, sir. Good. Please sign in. Is there anyone else in the audience who wishes to speak in opposition? See no one responding staff, anything further? Nothing further unless you have any questions. Okay. The applicant has an opportunity for rebuttal. My name is Eric Kendra. I'm Kendra and associates engineer. I just want to bring up a clarify a couple of points. This design plan was to us. I just want to clarify everything you can see there. Sorry. Yes, sir. Let's see if I can get that glare out. But this, before I back up, sorry. We were talking about wetland impacts. There are no wetland impacts. As wetland buffer impacts, there's a big difference between the two. So we're not impacting the wetland where the only the conservation buffer that goes out there that we're supposed to require. So I wanted to highlight that for you so that we can see that the concern was having the dumpster in there. You can see this is the only little impact that we had for the dumpster as we placed it. This area here is the pervious parking. As you can see highlighted in the shading is where we're the sidewalk in a little bit of the building that we're encroaching into the wetland buffer. As far as stormwater is concerned, there was talking about out of the water table on the street of Joreen. Though those aren't part of our design criteria because this site is a volume sensitive basin. We're going to store all our water on site. So there's no zero discharge. We will not impact that outside. Which direction does drainage go after it pops off your site? We're popping off into the wetland as a emergency offfall. And then sidewalks that he talked about that is off the street that we're supposed to prepare for. That is a requirement of development services to make an ADA accessible route throughout all commercial developments. And I believe that's all I have for the rest of the evening. Okay. All right. Thank you. Can you sign in? Sorry. I just want to say one more thing. Abby Naylor, 14706 Tudor Chase Drive, Tampa. Just two other points real quick. The area that Eric was showing in the green here, that's all pervious pavement. That's actually allowed by land development code under encroachment. The main reason for our variance is this tiny corner of the dumpster. So if you see most of the dumpster is not located in the wetland setback, it's very, very small, you know, square footage. And then I know Eric also pointed this out, but then that small encroachment. So most of our encroachment would otherwise be allowed by the land development code without a variance, but we just have these very small encroachments. And then just to reiterate, our planting will be within all of the remaining buffer where you see kind of the other hash mark, lighter hash mark. And we are actually proposing more than three times the required planting per the Hillsborough County guidelines. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. All right. That concludes your rebuttal. With that, that concludes this application. And Ms. Marshall, we're ready for the next case. Next item is item F2, variance 26-1450. The applicant is Stuart McPearson. The request is a variance to encourage into the wetland setback. Staff findings will be presented by Wayne Doyne. Wayne Doyne Development Services. This is variance application 26-1450. The request summary of the applicant is requesting a variance from the 30-foot wetland conservation area setback requirement section 4.0107.B.4 of the Land Development Code. The applicant's specific request as shown on the site plan submitted on 8-27-2026 is to allow for maximum encroachment of 16.7 feet for structures, AC units with pads, asphalt, sidewalk, and a portion of the lift station within the 30-foot wetland conservation area setback. LDC section section 6-4.0107.B.4 LDC requirement no filling, excavated replacement of permanent structures or other impervious surfaces shall be allowed within the required 30-foot wetland conservation area setback variant 16.7 feet result 13.3 foot remaining setback. findings. A wetland setback conservation plan was provided on the site plan dated 8-27-2026, which provides compensation planning for the encroachment to the wetland conservation area setback. The mitigation does meet our requirements, but this will also be finalized on the construction side also, but they did put that on their plan on what they were going to plant. Right. And then number two for EPC, approval of this variance petition for Hillsborough County does not constitute a guarantee that the Environmental Protection Commission of Hillsborough County approved permits necessary for development as proposed will be issued. Does not itself serve to justify any impacts to wetlands and does not grant any implied or vested rights to environmental approvals. Okay. Thank you. At this point in time, the applicant, please. Good morning. Good morning. My name is Nicole Berlin. I'm an authorized agent on behalf of the applicant. 200 Central Ave, Suite 600 St. Pete, Florida. I'm the civil engineer of record. Okay. To add to our application, we have received EPC wetland approval for our wetland impacts. That was on July 17th of 2026. We have received wetland impact, impact approval through the Southwest Water Management District. And we have an approved PD from January 13th of 2026. We are in a volume sensitive basin and we have complied with all of the Hillsborough County standards for that as well. And I'm here to answer any questions you may have. Okay. No questions. Thank you. To the application. No one responding. Staff, anything further? Nothing further. Okay. And ma'am, anything in rebuttal? Okay. No need for rebuttal. With that, that concludes this application. Ms. Marshall, we're ready for the next item. This item is item F3, variance 26-15-32. The applicant is Dereem Carter. The request is a variance to encroach into the wetlands setback and staff findings will be presented by Wayne Doyen. Wayne Doyen Development Services, variance application 26-15-32. Request summary. The applicant is requesting a variance from 30-foot wetland conservation area. Setback requirements section 4.0107.p.4 of the land development code. The applicant's specific request as shown on the site plan submitted 9-14-2026 is to allow a maximum encroachment of 17.7 feet for an existing retaining wall with stairs, new pool, pool decking, pool house, and outdoor kitchen within the 30-foot wetland conservation area setback. LDC section section 4.0107.b.4. LDC requirement, no filling excavation or placement of permanent structures or other impervious surfaces shall be allowed within 30-foot wetland conservation area setback. Variant 17.7 feet, result 12.3-foot remaining setback. Findings for EPC approval as variance petition over Hillsborough County does not constitute a guarantee that the Environmental Protection Commission of Hillsborough County approvals permits necessary for the development as proposed will be issued. Does not itself justify any impacts to wetlands and does not grant any implied or vested rights to environmental approvals. The retaining wall and pool that was there, that's been there for, you know, historic. So now the work they have to do, they have to come into code, get the variance. And that's also why we're not doing mitigation plannings because the area by the wetland is clean. They're not touching it. Okay. So that's the reason. All right. My understanding of reviewing the application is that no encroachments are going forward of that retaining wall. Correct. Right. And so therefore the fill work that was done was done a long time ago. Correct. Right. Yeah. Landward of the retaining wall. And their improvements, likewise, have been there a long time. Correct, sir. And so they're redoing of their backyard. Yes, sir. They're putting in additional stuff, a new pool. Right. Within that area that's landward of the retaining wall. Correct, sir. All right. Understood. Thank you. Okay, sir. Okay. I'm going to be here in regards to variance application 26-1532 representing address 16303 Villarreal de Avila, Tampa. And the previous gentleman is fairly accurate. Our improvements that we are making, I am the general contractor and the pool builder as well. Those improvements will not impact the lower area. That pre-existing retaining wall is elevated about four and a half feet above the top of bank, which is also elevated about two feet above the actual lake. So we will not impact the retaining wall build beyond the retaining wall. And we'll also be installing fringe terrain systems to help with the water management on the site. The actual improvement of the pool house, swimming pool, outdoor kitchen. Those will remain above grade, not going past the existing retaining wall. We are also not trying to install a new seawall or retaining wall. So we'll work within the allotted space that is pre-existing. We've had the EPC review done already. That happened in July of this year. As long as, from my understanding, if the zoning board approves, EPC approves, and it's a conditional approval, the HOA has already approved based on the Hillsborough County findings. That's all I have. All right, very good. Thank you, sir. Please sign in. At this point in time, is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak in support of the application? I see no one responding. Anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application? There's no one responding. Staff, anything further? Nothing further. Okay. An applicant, an opportunity for rebuttal. Is there anything further? Okay. Again. All right. With that, that concludes this application. Ms. Marshall, we're ready for the next case. This is a section G signed variance request. Item G1, variance 26, 14, 21. The applicant is Stacy Friglo. The request is a variance to sign requirements and variance to Brandon Main Street development regulations. Staff findings will be presented by Michelle Montevano. Good morning. Good morning. Michelle Montevano Development Services. The applicant is requesting variances to the Brandon Main Street overlay district standards for a proposed poll sign for a shopping plaza. Per LDC section 312.12. In addition to the materials used within the building, accessible materials for signage also includes wood and painted metal. Plastic and similar synthetic materials are not permitted. The applicant is requesting to waive part of that requirement to result in a poll sign with changeable polycarbonate or plastic tenant panels. The next variance is to 312.12.12.2, which states no sign should be composed of more than three colors. The applicant is requesting to waive this restriction to allow for a poll sign composed of more than three colors. The last variance is to LDC section 312.12.12.2.A, which states the maximum height of the entire sign should be 15 feet above the elevation of the nearest sidewalk. The applicant is requesting to waive this requirement to measure the poll sign from grade like we usually do to result in a poll sign 15 feet in height measured from grade. I'm available if you have any questions. I have no questions. Thank you. Thank you. The applicant, please. Good morning. Good morning. I'm Stacy Friello with Sign Source, variance number 26-1421. Location for the variance is 1025 Brandon Boulevard, Brandon, Florida. My client has done everything that they could to comply with the overlay district. Unfortunately, hardships are accumulating. Therefore, this is why I'm here today. Council has been retained by one large tenant. Other tenants are not renewing their leases. During the hurricane, they lost a very large pylon sign. Honestly, probably was a good idea that it went down. It was quite huge. So this client of mine has actually held on to this this long, trying to see if they could get these tenants to kind of comply, come up with something, help them with their wall signs, cleaning up the landscaping, everything else. And it has just gotten progressively worse. And therefore, when council was retained by one of the larger tenants, we had to move forward. I understand that the restrictions in regards to the overlay district, I've explained this to the client. We have to comply with as many of the requirements that the overlay district enforces. This new sign will comply with all of your requirements except for three things. The first thing is two of them combined into one. We're asking for the tenant panels to be a polycarbonate plastic, so we're able to comply with the large franchise tenant logo names. Petsmart and 10th Century 21 being the two tenants to contain multicolors for their names. The other tenants comply with the color amount allotted. The overlay is asking for the faces to be aluminum with the one color routed acrylic face. So that is kind of the color restriction. And then, of course, the plastic request. In regards to the sign height, we're complying with the height requirements for the sign code. We're out of the sight triangles. We're not into any type of viewing distance obstructions. But the exception that we're asking for is where the sign is located or where the sign is going to be proposed. It's about one and a half feet higher than the grade on sidewalk. Therefore, the difference in height is what we're asking for. If we try to shrink the sign down, we're going to take away from the viewing distance. Even though the sign is set quite far back, as you can see in the documents that we've provided, we are out of the sight triangle. But we were concerned that maybe we should comply with that viewing distance and ask for a variance to measure this from grade of where the land is and not from the sidewalk. Basically, that is it. There's no other signs on this parcel. The shopping center sits quite far back. You know, again, I'm not going to ask for something that everybody else is going to want. But in this shopping center here, seeing these hardships happening, this is why, again, I'm here today. Yeah. Any questions? Do you have any historical photographs of what the old sign used to look like? Actually, I do. I actually printed this. I used to work on this sign. Can I bring it to you? Could you put it on the Elmo? Face down, right? There's a technician right behind you that will help you. I used to work on this sign back then. And we'd have to just really just get there and work on her. And we would just sometimes hope that maybe the man upstairs would want her to go to the grave. All right. And it happened. But unfortunately, it kind of took a hit on these tenants. All right. So this is much higher than 15 feet. Oh, she's about 32 feet tall. And it has more than three colors? Oh, yes. Multicolors, electronic message centers. Obviously, this sign was grandfathered in before overlay started kicking in. Okay. And is that sign that I'm looking at generally in the same location? No, it is not. This sign is actually on the Verizon parcel right next door. Okay. And I think in time, I think tenants just started to slowly get on this sign. So that was another thing we had to explain. So Verizon, like I said, they're on a parcel by themselves. They have no sign. Got it. All right. No further questions. I want to get a copy of that. You can have that if you'd like. And you know what? You can give this as well. I went copy crazy and made that for everybody. All right. At this point in time, that concludes your presentation? Yes, sir. All right. Please sign in. Thank you very much. Thank you. At this point in time, is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak in support of the application? See no one responding. Anyone in the audience wishes to speak in opposition to the application? See no one responding. Staff, anything further? Nothing further. Okay. And the applicant, opportunity for rebuttal. Ma'am, anything further? Anything further? All right. Very good. It's okay. Multitasking. All right. With that, that concludes this application. And Ms. Marshall, we're ready for the next case. Next item, item G2, variance 26, 14, 39. The applicant is Atlas Sign Industries. The request is a variance to sign requirements. And staff findings will be presented by Michelle Montevano. Michelle Montevano Development Services. The applicant is requesting setback variances to permit two new monument signs for a gas station. The two variances are for two signs and they are both requesting variances to LDC section 70300C1C which states monument signs shall be setback a minimum of 15 feet from the wide array line but shall be permitted an increase in height of one foot for each one foot of additional setback provided from the wide array line, sign N2 and sign N1, or eight feet in height, which requires a minimum 19 foot front setback. Therefore, they're requesting variances nine feet for a 10 foot front yard setback for sign N1, rebutting Sun City Center Boulevard and for sign N2, rebutting Cortado Drive. I'm available if you have any questions. No questions. Thank you. All right. The applicant, please. Good morning. Gina Penny with Atlas Signs here representing Racetrack. My address is 1077 West Blue Heron Boulevard and that's in West Palm Beach, Florida. Presentation. And just mouse over or click over for the next one. I'm here today to request relief for two proposed eight foot tall monument signs. The required setback for these signs is 19 feet. The proposed setback is 10 feet and the requested variances for nine foot difference. The relief requested for both signs. It's for N1 off of Sun City Center Boulevard and N2 off of Cortaro Drive. The request is limited to sign placement, no increase in allowed sign height, sign area, or the number of signs are being requested. The sign location plan. The site plan illustrates the proposed location of the two monument signs. Both signs are proposed at a 10 foot setback from the respective right of way lanes. Monument sign N1 is located along Sun City Center Boulevard. That sign is we're requesting a 10 foot setback, but from the actual travel lane, it's over 100 feet due to other easements that are in front of this sign. And then there's also landscaping shrubs in front of it that would make the visibility deteriorate. All right. To be clear and specific, you're talking 100 foot from Sun City Center Boulevard? That's correct. Okay. And then for a monument sign N2, located along Cortaro Drive. Could you back up then? How far back from the travel lanes is that sign? That one is approximately 10 feet from the travel lane. Okay. For price sign N1, the site conditions required setback moves the sign further into the property, closer to proposed landscaping. The landscaping plan was established as part of the development process. The practical impact that additional setback will increase the viewing distance for motorists traveling along Sun City Center Boulevard, reducing legibility of fuel prices. The proposed landscaping will further impact the ability to read the sign while approaching the project. The request to relieve the proposed 10 foot setback maintains the original design sign location provides improved roadway visibility without increasing the proposed sign height or area. The sign will not be in the site safety triangle. It's well out of the way. For sign N2, a right-of-way dedication associated with this development affected the property boundary and available setback area along Cortaro Drive. The practical impact as part of the development process. A portion of the property was dedicated for public right-of-way along Cortaro Drive. This dedication shifted the property boundary closer to the proposed monument sign, reducing the available setback distance. According to the project team, the proposed sign location itself remains unchanged. The request of relief is for the 9-foot variance would allow monument sign N2 to remain in its originally proposed location, maintaining the proposed sign height and area. Site-specific circumstances, although both signs require the same setback reduction, the circumstances affecting each sign are different. In one roadway visibility required setback would move the sign further into the property and closer to proposed landscaping, increasing viewing distance and reducing fuel price legibility for approaching motorist. Right-of-way dedication for N2, the right-of-way dedication affected the available setback along the Cortaro Drive impacting the originally proposed sign location. Relocating the sign further into the property would increase viewing distance and reduce fuel price legibility along Cortaro Drive. Both requests are limited to a 9-foot setback reduction to mean the proposed 10-foot sign locations. Limited nature of the request. The requested variances are limited to sign placement and they do not increase the proposed sign height, the sign area, or the quantity that we're requesting. For the justification and consideration, in considering these requests, we believe they are three important factors supporting approval. For N1, maintains effective visibility and fuel price legibility for motorists traveling on roadway speeds while avoiding placement closer to proposed landscaping. For N2, addresses the impact of the development-related right-of-way dedication on the originally proposed sign location while maintaining effective roadway visibility and fuel price legibility. Limited setback relief, the requested variances are limited to a 9-foot setback reduction for each sign without increasing the proposed sign height, sign area, or number of signs. In conclusion, the proposed sign location address roadway visibility and fuel price legibility for approaching motorists while accommodating the site's established landscaping and right-of-way dedication. Each monument sign requires a 9-foot reduction from the required 19-foot setback to the proposed 10-foot setback. No additional signage request does not increase the proposed number, height, or area of the monument signs. We respectfully request approval of this variance for the setback. And that concludes my presentation. If you know the sign N2, it's on essentially two, I guess, local streets. Do you know what the speed limits are on those two streets? For sign N2, I want to say Cortaro is 30 miles an hour. And for Sun City, it differs between 30 and 40 miles an hour. Okay. Is it wrapped by three different roads? There's an access road, it looks like, that goes around here. It wasn't named when I was looking on the overview maps. All right. Very good. No further questions. Thank you. At this point in time, is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak in support of the application? I see no one responding. Anyone in the audience who should speak in opposition to the application? No one responding. Staff, anything further? Nothing further. Thank you. Any applicant an opportunity for rebuttal? No, thank you. No need for rebuttal. With that, that concludes this application. Ms. Marshall, ready for your next case. Next item is item G3, variance 26-1492. The applicant is Target Corporation. The request is a variance to sign requirements. Staff findings will be presented by Michelle Montevano. Michelle Montevano Development Services. The cabinet is requesting a variance to the permitted building sign area to permit new sign-ins for existing Target department store. The variance is the LDC section 703-00A2A, which states the aggregate sign area for each premises cannot exceed 1.25 feet for each linear foot of building frontage facing a public street or parking lot, but in no event more than 200 square feet of aggregate sign area. The subject building elevation measures approximately 557 feet in frontage. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance of 338 square foot increase, resulting in a 538 square foot of sign area on the front elevation. We'll also note the premises has a prior approved sign variance for a wall sign area, which approved 346.8 square feet for the front elevation. Therefore, this variance would increase the permitted sign area by 191.2 square feet. I'm available if you have any questions. No questions. Thank you. Thank you. And the applicant, please. Good morning. Good morning. My name is Shelby Gaziani. I'm representing Target and Katie Fitzgerald with Kimley Horn and Associates in person. Today, I have with me 11 by 17 colored building elevation to show the wall signage that I can project onto the screen. May I have some assistance? Thank you so much. Hello there. And I'm Katie Fitzgerald with Kimley Horn. I just wanted to note, I believe there was a want and request for me to hop on and confirm that Shelby is able to speak and authorize on behalf of me today. I'm sorry. Good. Ma'am, is there someone online that's part of your team? Hi there. So our actual letter of authorization was executed between Katie Fitzgerald, the project manager, and Target Corporation. Katie Fitzgerald and I both work for Kimley Horn and Associates, Inc. And therefore, I am here in person on her behalf today to present the elevation. You're part of the project team. I don't have any objections to that. Yes, yes. That's fine. And for the record, my address is 200 Central Avenue, St. Petersburg, Florida 33701. Thank you so much for having us today. This is an existing Target department store on West Hillsborough Avenue. It's about 645 approximate feet from the right of way. And it does have some blockage from some existing buildings that occupy the out parcels, as well as some very large trees that make the property very beautiful. But we do have some visibility issues that we're trying to address with some new signage that's proposed on this elevation here. The code allows us to have 200 square foot of wall signage, and we're requesting relief from that code to allow us to propose this orientation, which has 538 square footage. We believe this will help our customers navigate the parking lot. It serves as sort of a directional signage. If I'm able to zoom in a little bit closer, this is great. Yes, thank you. So we're able to illustrate in this proposed wall signage, the new branding standard with the bullseye and the low lowercase target signage. This would replace the very large super target that is currently out there. And then we also have an area depicting the grocery area where folks would be able to navigate from the exterior of the building where they might need to go if they're just popping in quickly for some groceries. The order pickup and the drive up areas are also illustrated with some proposed signage here. I'm happy to answer any questions you guys may have. Just to be clear then, the additional areas where the additional interest ways are, which provides like specific kind of uses in those areas of target? Yes. They are part of the aggregate sign area? The wall signage is aimed to be placed in the areas that align with where those interior departments would occur. But the question is, if it's 538 square feet, is it target plus those other sign? Yes, that's correct. All of the proposed wall signage equates to the 538 square feet. That was my question. Yes, yeah. And I've also brought a few extra copies of the 11 by 17 colored elevations that have some of those square footage breakdowns for us, for you guys to navigate. I'll hand it over here afterward. Yes. All right. Anything else? We're good? You're good? Yes, that is all for me. Do you have any more questions? No, no more questions. Thank you. Thank you so much. At this point in time, is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak in support of the application? No one responding? Anyone in the audience wishes to speak in opposition to the application? No one responding? Staff, anything further? Nothing further. Any applicant opportunity for rebuttal? No, thank you. All right. Very good. With that, that concludes this application. Ms. Marshall, ready for the next case. This brings us to Section H variance request. Item H1, variance 260958. The applicant is Bose Electric and Gas, David Marquez. The request is a variance to lot development standards and staff findings. We've read it by Michelle Montevano. Michelle Montevano Development Services. The applicant is requesting a side yard setback variance to accommodate an existing generator. LDC checks in 60103 I3 states mechanical equipment may reject three feet or no more than 50% of the required side yards, whichever is more restrictive. The PD 730186 district requires a minimum side yard setback of five feet. Therefore, a minimum side yard setback of two and a half feet for the generator is required. The absence is requesting a variance of one foot to result in a one and a half foot side yard setback for mechanical equipment. I'm available if you have any questions. No questions. Thank you. Thank you. This is variance 26-0958. Is the applicant in the audience or online? All right, Ms. Marshall, suggestions? If you want to continue it till later on the agenda, we can try calling them and see if we can get them online. Let's do that. Yes? I believe you can as the property owner. Yes? You can come forward. No, it matters. If your representative is not here and you're the property owner, you can speak to this application. Joe McCard. Okay. 329 Siena Vista Place Sensity Center, Florida. Okay. And that matches the address I have on the application. Ms. Marshall is 99% sure of this. Yes, they may speak. Good. All right. I'm sorry your representative is not here, but you have anything to add? No, not really. It's just the houses are too close together. There was just no other place to put the, oh, generator. Okay. Was there mechanical equipment in that general location before? No. Yes. Well, yeah, yes. Our air conditioner. Our air conditioner is there. Yes. All right. So which one is it? There was an air conditioner there before? Yes. All right. Got it. And actually the air conditioner sticks out further than our generator does. Okay. And so from the street, you'll see the generator is sticking out further. And like Joe said, there's nowhere else on our lot to put the generator. Okay. They should have put a tiny home in maybe. I don't know. But we're old people. We just want to keep our generator. Okay. All right. I got it. We're good. Thank you. Okay. Thank you very much. You're welcome. And please sign in both of you, ma'am. Yeah. All right. At this point in time, is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak in support of the application? I see no one responding. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak in opposition to the application? I see no one responding. Staff, anything further? Nothing further. Thank you. And ma'am, anything to add? Any rebuttal? We're good? We're good. All right. With that, that concludes this application. It's Marshall Ray for next case. Next item is item H2, variance 26, 1093. The applicant is Carmen Rosario Veras. The request is a variance to lot development standards. Staff findings will be provided by Logan McCaig. Good morning. Logan McCaig Development Services, variance 26, 1093. The applicant is requesting a variance to rear yard setbacks. Per PD 89-0049 and PRS 22-1680. 7,000 square foot lots shall comply with the setbacks for the RSC 9 zoning district. Per section 60101, the setbacks for rear yard in the RSC 9 zoning district shall be 20 feet. The applicant is requesting a 5.7 foot variance resulting in a 14.3 foot setback. We're available for any questions. No questions. Thank you. The applicant, please. Name is Hennessy Veras. Address is 18015 Palm Breeze Drive, Tampa, Florida. Yeah, let's, to be clear, this application looks familiar. Yeah, we were here last time and, I mean, in September. Yes. And there was an issue with one of the measurements. So we had to make some changes and then come back and to continue the hearing. All right. Could you bring me up to speed then? There was an issue with a measurement? Yeah, one of the measurements was wrong in the papers that were turned in. Right. And that was fixed. And so we just had to send the notices out again and repay for the sign and just come back in. Okay. So when you say fixed, a little bit more detail, what did you do to fix it? From what I was told, basically just there was two papers that were turned in. One had the measurements correctly, one had the measurements wrong. So just the wrong paper was sent. Okay. So we just had to switch that document out. Okay. I think it's coming back to me. I think the issue was what you requested wasn't going to address what you wanted to do with your backyard. So I think you needed to increase the encroachment amount. And I'll ask staff if that's the direction we went with the fix. So the request got a little slightly larger. Okay. Okay. I honestly don't know. All right. I'll ask that staff. Okay. Anything else, ma'am? No. If you could sign in, please. Yes. Marshall, do you recall this application? Yes. So initially the measurement was called out, but it wasn't called out to the closest point. And so the initial request was to result in a 15 foot setback. And this is 14.3 feet to address that smaller area. Okay. Very good. Thank you. At this point in time, is there anyone in the audience wish to speak in support of the application? So no one responding. Anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application? So no one responding, staffing further? Nothing further. And ma'am, anything else? Okay. Very good. With that, that concludes this application. Ms. Marshall, we're ready for the next case. Next item is item H3, variance 26-1399. The applicant is Jason Bond-Stone. The request is a variance to lot development standards. And staff findings will be provided by Jared Fallin. Good morning. Jared Fallin with Development Services. So this is a request for a variance to lot development standards for a proposed single-family home on a property zoned RSC2, but is dictated by RSC4 development standards. The lot development standards that they're asking a variance for are for the front yard setback and the rear yard setback. Typically required is 25 feet for the front yard. They're asking for 11-foot variance resulting in a 14-foot front yard setback. And for the rear yard, they're also required 25 feet. They're asking for a variance of 19 feet resulting in a 6-foot rear yard setback. Happy to answer any questions. All right. No questions. Thank you. Thank you. All right. The applicant, please. Good morning. Good morning. David Spence, SIP Homes, the general contractor, making the proposal. Variance number 26-1399. My address is 8209 Alify Ridge Road. I am also a resident in the neighborhood. What other information do you need from me? If you could, if you're the one building the house? Correct. On that property? Anything you can tell me about the size, shape? Yep. If I could get this little monitor thing working here, some assistance here. The technician's still in the room that could help with the Elmo. Oh, there we are. So as you can see, it's just a unique lot on the Alify Ridge Road coming across. In the back, there's an access road accessing those homes behind it. And it's a, it's just a smaller lot in an unusual shape. So the request really is to meet that shape where it's going to infringe on that corner and then in the back. Got it. Okay. It's difficult to put a house in there and every yard meet the setbacks. Right. Okay. Understood. All right. I'm good. Thank you. Thank you. Good. Please sign in. All right. At this point in time, is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak in support of the application? Good morning. My name's Jennifer Clover-Settle. I am at 7823 Alify Ridge Road. I'm a resident as well. It is a tiny piece of property. I'm in support for building this for the beautification of our neighborhood. Personally, I'd like to move my parents into the tiny little house near me and the affordability would be perfect for them. Okay. Any questions? No questions. Thank you. Thank you. You may want to talk to the contractor. Is there anyone else in the audience that wishes to speak in support of the application? I see no one responding. Anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application? I see no one responding. Sorry. Yep. Please come forward. Good morning. Good morning. Mark Frazier, 8606 Alify. I'm directly in front of that property. My concerns were that there's not a designation of how big is that property or that building actually on that place. 0.20 less than a quarter acre and one of the max of that building size. It's shown on very primitive. Yeah. Maybe when the applicant has an opportunity for rebuttal, he'll let you know how big it is. Yeah. Because right now it's showing that it's 6,400 square foot on that property. The what? That building. The building. Yeah. We'll ask him. And if that's the case, then there's some questions, obviously, you know, about septic and size and is actually going to obscure the property that's right behind it. The house is directly behind that. It'll just completely cover it at that size. So there's some concern about the size and footprint. All right. Okay. All right. Thank you, sir. Thank you. I wish to speak in opposition to the application. There's no one responding staff. Anything further? I was just double checking. I believe what the revised site plan, the square footage of the footprint became smaller. Site plan within the staff report is showing the footprint area is 2,450 square feet. I believe it was originally shown larger on the original submitted. Okay. All right. Thank you. And at this point in time, the applicant has an opportunity for rebuttal. Yes. Originally, we did have a larger plan in place and we scaled that back to just try to meet more of the requirements. This is also Jason Stone. He's the owner of the property, if you wanted to allow him to speak. That's fine. And so to confirm, staff said the size of the home is 2,450 square feet. That's what you're currently proposing? Yes. Max. The footprint. Max. What? I'm sorry? Maximum. Yes. Maximum. Yes. Understood. And yes, sir, you want to speak? Hi, I'm Jason Stone. I'm 7807 Alafire Ridge Road, Riverview, Florida, 33569. So I live on the same street, yet not even 2,400. It's 6,400. I think we'd have to have it 26 stories tall. You could see it from space. So no, I really don't even have plans right now. It was just, it's such a small lot to know what to do with it. We kind of, this was phase one. Yes. But if I, but if I do do something on there, I'd like it to be tiny. I think people are looking for affordability. And also for myself, when I get older, I want something on my same street that I could probably move into. So I'd say seven to 900 square feet. All right. We're not going to hold you to it, but we just want to understand the size of the house because the gentleman asked. Oh, yeah, yeah. Yeah. All right. Anything else? No, that's it. Thank you so much. All right. Very good. All right. You just sign in, sir. Okay. With that, that concludes this application. Ms. Marshall, are you ready for the next case? The applicant is a variance to the minimum lot size by available utilities. Staff findings will be presented by Caroline Petal. Good morning. Again, this is variance, or excuse me. Good morning development services. This is variance 261443. The applicant's requesting a variance to minimum lot size by available utilities. Per LDC section 601063. A minimum lot size of one half acre of upland is required for use of septic systems. They're asking for a variance to allow septic systems on two resulting parcels with less than one half acre of upland. That would result in to allow for a septic system on a lot totaling 17,425 square feet and 11,325 square feet. There are no findings. I'm available for any questions. Every time I see one of these applications, I always ask Ms. Marshall if you have any questions. I always ask Ms. Marshall about a utility provision in the land development code. It talks about splitting a lot and allowing septic tanks on those two split lots. If you recall what that provision is. I have to look up the exact section. The code did change, I believe it was last year, as far as in the urban service area, you could prior between 21 and 25, you couldn't based on the code at that time, you anytime you split a property, you had to connect if you were in the urban service area. Once the code changed in 25, you can split into now up to three lots from the parent parcel without connecting to sewer. But then you would still be subject to the minimum lot size by availability utilities. However, you could seek a variance. Right. In this case, this is in the rural service area. So they'd be required to use septic. But they are zoned RSC 4, which would require a smaller lot size by the zoning than what would be required by the availability utilities. So that provision only applies in the urban service area. Correct. All right. All right. Thank you. The applicant, please. Good morning. Good morning. My name is Adrian Fernandez. I'm speaking on behalf of Esteban Fernandez, who is here present. And I don't know what questions to ask. We just would like to know whether we could move forward and if you have any questions for us. Have you approached the health department yet about getting like a well and septic tank on each lot? I believe that we did. You believe you did or what does that mean? I need to ask. I'm sorry. Okay. So we sent emails to them and didn't get a response. Okay. All right. Anything else? We would like to know what are the next steps. All right. Should this variance get approved, you can talk to staff about next steps. After the conclusion of today's hearing. Okay. There's a permitting process to get a permit to build a single family home. But you get out there and find a contractor to design the plans for your homes on each lot. That's a process between you and the property owner. Figure out exactly what you want to build on the property and then start doing all the permitting that's involved. And once you do all the permitting, you can start constructing on a lot. So there's a process involved. The staff can give you more details on that process. Okay. I would like to know who is the staff that we need to talk to? Why don't you start with Michelle, Colleen Marshall. I can have Caroline who worked on your case, I can have her reach out to you following the meeting. Okay. Thank you so much. Is there anything I should do now or the concluded? So following the hearing, the hearing officer has 15 business days to render the decision. So then you'll in about 15 business days, you'll have the decision and then depending if it's approved, then you can move forward with the other permits. That's good. Do you need any more action items for me to speak any longer? Sir, we're good. Okay. All right. Thank you so much for everything. Thank you. Please sign in. At this point in time, is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak in support of the application? I see no one responding. Anyone in the audience wishes to speak in opposition to the application? I see no one responding. Staff, anything further? Nothing further. Okay. Yeah. Sorry. Opportunity for rebuttal. Are you good? All right. Very good. Thank you, sir. With that, that concludes this application. It's Marshall ready for the next case. Next item is item H5, variance 26, 15, 20. The applicant is Louisa Alonso. The request is a variance to lack development standards. Staff findings will be presented by James Baker. Good morning, James Baker Development Services. Variance 26, 15, 20. The applicant is requesting a variance to the 20-foot rear yard setback. The requested variance is for 6.01.01. A requirement is a minimum 20-foot rear yard setback required in the RSC 9 zoning district. They're requesting a variance of 12 feet 6 inches, resulting in 7 feet 6 inches. Also, there's a code compliance violation for failure to obtain a residential new construction and addition permit for construction of an addition to the rear of the home. Okay. No questions. Thank you. Any applicant, please? Morning. My name is Jorge, J-O-R-G-E, last name Camerota, C-A-M-E-R-O-T-A, 1024 West Hills Road Avenue, Tampa, Florida 33603. I'm here on behalf of the owner of the property and our office, Lou Salinson Associates, representing here on this variance request. We are requesting a variance of 12 feet 6 inches from the rear of the property. The property located at 4518 Devonshire Road, Tampa, Florida 33634. The current sign of the property is RSC 9, which requires a 20-feet rear yard under the current land development code. We are requesting a reduced rear setback from 20 feet to 7 feet 6 inches, which results in 12 feet 6 inches. The relief is limited to the portion of the building shown on the site plan that was submitted on the application. This portion blacked out right here on the back. The setbacks leave almost no room to build on the lot. So the lot is 60 feet wide by 107, roughly 107.38 feet on average, which is about 6,442 square feet. The 20 feet front and 20 feet rear setbacks take 40 feet of depth, which is roughly like 37% of the lot, leaving only 67.38 of buildable depth. With two side setbacks, which are five feet each, the compliant envelope is about 3,369 square feet, roughly is half of the lot. And the house being built in 1960, the driveway and the parking already filled that envelope. So the lot and the house were both established way before the current codes were in place. There's also two easements, one right behind the addition and one on the side, which also limits the space that the property has to develop. Also, the property is located in a flood zone. So if we tear down or pre-build anything, that will probably impact the substantial improvement requirement, which will probably end up requiring us to bring the current residents up to code because it was built in the 1960s. There's other owners in the area with the same sonification that have more depth and they can expand or reconfigure within the setbacks. Some others, they don't have these conditions like easements or the property already built and already occupying a big portion of the lot. There is no harm to the neighbors. The structure has existed there for a while now and the character of the neighborhood is not changing at all. We are aware that there was a violation. They did this without permits. We are assisting them with the process. This was the first step to try to see if we can get approval for the setback requirements. And then from there, we can proceed with the building permit, submit all the applications to the building department, and get it approved, and then continue with the process, which is fix anything that needs to be fixed and call for the required inspections to get a final. So that concludes where we need to say. All right. Oh, yeah. Please sign in, sir. All right. Thanks. Now you're going to speak in support of the application? There's no one responding. Anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application? There's no one responding. Um, I'm sure the gentleman who spoke on behalf of the property owner indicated that the property is in the flood zone. Do you know if that's accurate? I can check post hearing but if it is, then there may be a finished floor elevation issue for any new addition to that, to the property? property it does appear to be in a flood zone it looks like with a base flood elevation nine feet thank you sir opportunity for rebuttal if you could come forward the the addition to the rear yes what elevation is it built at the let me see here my notes so it is but the base floor elevation on the on the area I believe is nine feet and the finish floor elevation right now is on 6.71 feet so it's 2.29 feet below the base floor elevation yeah so the base elevation of the existing home is like six feet ish yeah give or take right and the addition was it built to the same level right out the addition right so it's not meeting though finished floor elevation requirements it's not though but being that the house was built the original house was built in 1960s I believe there's a provision that states that the house would be being built before 68 abilities and I don't recall exactly the threshold what it is that any house that is built before that threshold if you do an addition you can comply with you can maintain the same elevation unless if you stay under the 50% FEMA rule so any addition or any addition needs to be under that rule which is the value of the of the residents I believe that's the case so in this case if we let's say if the viruses get approved and they have to cut or modify anything that will greatly impact that threshold so it will more likely than not will put us over that 50% rule which will make them require that the existing residents go up and up meaning the base for the the finish renovation of the outlets plumbing everything is to comply with the current right anything else on rebuttal so I'm just wanted to take that into consideration because that in itself is a huge financial hardship for the owners of the property okay all right very good thank you thank you all that that concludes this application Ms. Marshall ready for next case next item is item H6 variance 26 1533 the applicant is Peninsula Pipeline Company the request is a variance to buffer and screening screening requirements and I'll present the staff findings I did note that there is a typo in the staff report in the variance section for the first variance it should be 16 feet and not 20 feet right the applicants requesting variances to buffer and screening standards in the required south side buffer area a 16 foot reduction to the required buffer areas requested to allow a four foot wide buffer area variance is also requested to reduce the required type v screening to type a screening within the buffer area answer any questions no questions thank you and the applicant please hi good morning my name is Cameron Bernasic I'm a lead engineer with Penance a pipeline company address 2524 Northwest 23rd Avenue of Cala Florida I'm accompanied here today by Ally Myers engineer with Kim Lee Horn whom PPC has retained for engineering and permitting services for this project the variance is at 26-1533 address of the property is 3008 North Maryland Avenue so today we'll be discussing the variance request for this property here we are this is the first of two requests both requests are associated with the Penn the Penns of pipeline companies plant city critical infrastructure expansion project involve district regulator stations that are necessary to provide safe and reliable natural gas service to the surrounding area this request seeks limited relief from the 20 foot buffer requirements of section 6.06.06 of the Hillsborough County Land Development Code for facilities classified as public service facilities and is seeking to reduce type B screening to a type A screening the subject property located at 3008 North Maryland Avenue in Plant City consists of approximately five acres zoned ASC1 the proposed district regulator station is located within a dedicated and recorded 30 by 30 foot utility easement in the southwest corner of the property adjacent to North Maryland Avenue the variance request is specifically related to the required 20 foot buffer adjacent to the residential property located south of the site Peninsula pipeline company is requesting relief to allow to allow a portion of the gravel access driveway within the buffer area and type A screening only within a six foot or only with a six foot high PVC fence excuse me the request has been minimized to the greatest extent practicable all above ground natural gas facilities have been condensed to the smallest feasible operational footprint and remain outside of the required buffer area no above ground pipeline facilities or fencing are proposed within the buffer the buffer area will contain only the gravel driveway and underground utility improvements necessary and underground utility improvements necessary to access and operate the station the driveway encroachment allows maintenance vehicles to safely access the facility and pull completely clear of the public right away the request to reduce the type B screening to type A screening is driven by site constraints including the minimum driveway width and the limited green space available to accommodate and maintain healthy viable landscaping to adhere to screening type A a six foot PVC fence installation of a PVC fence is outside of typical design for station projects of this nature however the engineering and operations team has had discussions internally and determine it feasible for this application specifically to meet hillsborough county standards the proposed facility is unmanned and expected to generate fewer than 10 maintenance services or visits per month it will not create significant traffic lighting odor or noise impacts any existing residential structure to any existing residential structure the hardship is unique to this property because the location of the proposed regulator station is constrained by utility system requirements the location of existing infrastructure and the limits of the recorded utility easement these existing conditions significantly limit the ability to relocate or reconfigure the facility on the site and increase impacts and increase impacts to the surrounding area the requested variance therefore allows the necessary utility infrastructure to be accommodated within the existing easement while minimizing impacts beyond the area already dedicated for utility purposes for these reasons we believe the request satisfies the variance criteria and represents the minimum relief necessary to allow construction of a permitted public service facility that provides an essential public benefit of the community in closing this request represents a narrow and reasonable variance to accommodate access to accommodate access to accommodate access to a critical public utility infrastructure the station has been designed to minimize impacts on adjacent properties all above ground facilities remain outside of the buffer area and the variance is limited primarily to the driveway necessary to safely access and operate the site for those reasons peninsula pipeline company respectfully request approval of the variance thank you and we'd be happy to answer any questions okay just you answered one of my two questions that you are going to do a fence so correct I got that part um do you we don't see these very often do you have a picture an example of what it looks like uh we we have the drawings that were submitted with the application do you have a like an existing facility that you if you don't have a photograph do you know where one is so I could maybe look it up yeah we could uh provide that information to you absolutely um yeah offhand I'd have to go back to our GIS maps and I could get you an exact address or pictures well this is a public hearing and what happens right now sure okay the typical fencing consists of a chain link fence that's usually about six foot high okay I'm not asking about fencing I'm asking about what is it one of these facilities look like that what facilities are referring to are you referring to the one that you're requesting a variance for so the facilities that uh they usually have it above ground uh piping and there's associated gas equipment that's with that piping that usually reduces the pressure to safely deliver that to customers for natural gas purposes um as well as uh other equipment such as relief valves that are required by 49 CFR part 192 so we designed to those uh federal codes for the safe transportation of natural gas uh they typically only come up at about you know four feet above the ground uh and they're painted and coated so that way they are um not they can't corrode and they're protected from the environment uh all of which these are usually encased by fencing oh here um thank you i appreciate that so if you could zoom in there so here's an example of what one kind of typically looks like now this is exaggerated there's not going to be near that much equipment inside the site and i think you could see that in the application that we have of the drawing there's it's a fraction of that but just in general there's above ground piping uh the necessary equipment to safely uh process and transfer that gas and then surrounding fencing is typically that um chain link fence with the privacy slats that's that's very typical for us okay that's very helpful thank you sure now i don't know how that becomes part of the record but um michelle what i mean sorry colleen it's a cell phone picture shown on a normal i don't think a cell phone picture can become part of the record mr hearing officer all right um during rebuttal we can most likely find a location for you for the record so we'll work on that okay all right very good yep and then uh for uh so just for a reference i know looking at that picture and the one the location that will provide uh this footprint here uh has has been drastically reduced you can see the the amount of equipment that's actually above grade it's very limited to compared to something of a larger size and then we've reduced this uh the fencing footprint down just to allow access area here for our uh operations workers to safely pull off the right away and to get out of uh the way of traffic yeah all right thank you all right that concludes your presentation yes sir all right very good thank you please sign in at this point in time is there anyone in the audience that we should speak in support of the application no one responding staff anything further nothing further any applicant opportunity for rebuttal ma'am you good working on the actual location of a station reference site well let's i i've got the general idea my since uh he showed me a picture of it okay we're gonna have to move on okay understood all right thank you with that that that concludes this application it's marshall ready for the next case next item is item h7 variance 26 1542 the applicant is sheree howington the request is a variance to lot development standards staff findings will be presented by james baker james baker development services variance request 2654 excuse me 1542 the applicant is requesting a variance to the 25 foot set yard excuse me side yard setback on each side of the subject property the subject property the property is very narrow is in the ldc section is 6.0.01 a minimum 25 foot side yard setback is required in the ar zoning district the request requested variances for 10 feet 6 inches resulting in 14 feet 14 feet 6 inches side yard setback on the east and west sides the subject parcel is a legal non-conforming lot per non-conforming lot determination ncl 21-1265 due to its non-conforming lot width okay i got it thank you the applicant please good morning good morning my name is sheree howington with plant city housing my address is 6110 north fork court lakeland florida 33809 um we're here just simply to um ask that those setbacks get lessened um my client has uh purchased a home from us and it's a little bit larger um this home this property does sit on lake denota sasa so it's actually waterfront property and my client wants to be able to the house that she bought has a lot of windows so she wants to be able to sit it in there in conjunction with the other homes also that are on the pro on the adjacent properties so that it looks um normal and not a normal sitting on this lot um i believe she paid a lot of money for this lot so it's you know it's a pretty nice actual lot on the water and um so we're just asking because it's a non-conforming lot if we can reduce the side setbacks so that we can sit the house in parallel with the street okay understood anything else that's it all right very good thank you please sign in this point in time is there anyone in the audience that wish to speak in support of the application no one responding anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application good morning mr loose um how much time does opposition have because i believe there's some people on uh phone or on webex and i want to make sure that i allow them to have appropriate time there's a total of 15 minutes a total of 15 minutes can um they go first and then i go after them or do you want me to go first why don't you go first okay you're right in front that's fine okay very very good let me put my remarks and does on the elmo does it go up or down i mean face up face down i'll take care of that okay well hold on i'll hand it to you okay well let me introduce myself my name is janet lorton i am the executive director of the epc but i'm not here in an official capacity um i took pto today and i am the adjacent property owner to this particular uh zoning that is occurring um this zoning came in front excuse me ma'am i'm so sorry may you please state your would you please state your address for the record thank you so much janet lorton i reside at 11 353 knights griffin road at the notice as of florida 33592 and i am the adjacent property owner um this individual came before uh the lujo before in doing the exact same thing in 2022 um i'd like to put i'm just going to put up this application and i'm going to hand you all of these documents mr luce but let's just put this on the elmo so we get an idea here you go sir okay for the record um this is my property i think to believe that people will be speaking will be these individuals and this individual here um they're showing this is their property i don't believe it's that wide as a matter of fact i actually think that this shed was actually put on the neighbor's property it is a non-conforming lot they knew that when they bought it um mrs the woman who sold them the mobile home very nice lady called me and said they wanted to be good neighbors when they purchased the property the first thing they did was put in an illegal dock it fell in the water the next day they took the boards threw it in the water they received a warning notice then the next thing they did was remove all the aquatic vegetation again warning notice after the fact permitting the next thing they did was uh demolish a house that was very nice house there that had been existed for a long time and they brought in a legal fill they were told to cease and desist multiple times the illegal fill is still there i'll deal with that in the engineered site plans that were supposed to be for this original home that they never constructed because the lujo officer uh pamela joe hatley a very respected attorney very respected lujo officer uh denied them for the same same setback issues that they're coming forward today asking for okay so um then what they did was they denuded all of the trees on the property in two phases they were told to cease and desist they continued to do that i think it was a 33 000 fine i think they paid 11 000 and said that they would um come back and plant more trees that was in 2022 to date there are no trees i'll be turning in this for the record it is um basically the findings of fact and the hearing and they could foreclose because they haven't done what they were supposed to do all of these things or put a lien on the property not foreclose okay with that i'm going to go through the hearing off i'm going to give you this hearing officer packet it's 15 pages um but what i'm going to get to and this was variance 22 0296 it was heard on march 21st 2022 and miss hat hatley gave her ruling on 4 11 of 2022. um and so it's just going to get to my highlighted pages and by the way this is a mobile home i understand house bill 399 and house bill 803 state that as of january 1st 2027 you can put a mobile home in anywhere there's no hoa however today's date is november 9th 2026. um moving along here it talks about the engineered site plan that they said they would uh do development services on page 11 of the 15 talks about all the things that they did removing of the trees illegal filling and how they were going to correct that and in there it talks about them uh having a signed sealed engineering site plan to address the film haven't seen that to date don't think they'll do it they want to put a swale next to my wall after they brought dump truck dump dump truck through okay let's get to the meat of the thing 13 of 15 findings of variance criteria number one question are the alleged hardships and this is the exact same application same as setbacks same everything difficulties unique and singular to the subject property and not those suffered in common with other properties similarly located no the applicant's variance criteria response states the hardships or practical difficulty is related to the width of the subject property however the property appraiser record shows several properties similarly located to properties at 11 337 knights griffin road which is 70 feet wide and the next property to the west at 11 331 knights griffin road is 90 feet wide moreover the applicant purchased the subject property with knowledge of its dimensions the applicant's representative testified it would be possible to redesign the home to comply with the necessary required setbacks and the variance would not be necessary and it would same today you just emanate the mobile home differently okay number two would the literal requirements of the ldc deprive the property owner of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district and area under the terms of the ldc no the literal requirements of the ldc would permit the property owner to construct on the subject property a single family home that complies with setback required in ar zoning districts number three would the variance if allowed substantially interfere with or inure the rights of others whose properties would be affected by the allowance of this variance yes the ldc requires 25 foot side yard setbacks in the air zoning district surrounding property owners myself and my neighbors acquired their property subject to and reliance on the ar zoning district setback requirements my husband my late husband purchased the property in the 90s he spoke at the last hearing number four is the variance in harmony with and does the variance serve the general intent and purpose of the ldc and the comprehensive plan number four is no just read one sentence the evidence does not support a finding that the variance is in harmony with our sir or serves the purpose of the ldc and comprehensive plan number five does the situation sought to be relieved by the variance result from an illegal act or result from actions by the applicant or property owner resulting in a self-imposed hardship yes it is a self-imposed hardship the record shows the applicant property owner acquired the subject property with knowledge of its dimensions the record shows that despite this knowledge the property owner designed a single family home of a size and orientation that would not fit the buildable area of the subject property given the width of the property with the ldc requirements and finally then that last question will allowing the variance result in substantial justice being done considering both the public benefits intended to be secured by the ldc and the individual hardships that will be suffered by a failure to grant the variance no the applicant has designed and proposed to construct the subject property a single family of a size and orientation that will not fit the given the ldc setback and requirements of the zoning districts the literal requirements of the ldc would permit the property owner to construct on the subject property would permit the uh a single family home that complies with setback requirements from the air zoning district so with that and that's a conclusion of law based on the evidence and testimony it's the same questions and basically what this applicant has said well i bought it and i want it and so i should get it but that doesn't meet the law or the criteria said based on the evidence and you can see there's a there's a history here of not complying with permits rules laws regulations based on the evidence and testimony submitted in the record and the hearing including the development services staff report and applicants testimony and documents there are substantial competent evidence demonstrating the requested variance does not meet each of the six criteria in section 11.0402 of the hillsborough county land code so mr loose i would ask that you deny this i would ask that you read all the evidence i put in especially the findings from miss pamela joe hatley it will lower our property values and it will affect my direct adjacent property and others on the lake thank you so much all right thank you ma'am um is there anyone else in the audience that we should speak in opposition you're gonna speak up yes yes can you hear me yeah we can hear you okay my name is les thompson i live at 11363 nice griffith road i'm two properties east of this i live next to janet pardon me uh thank you very much for the last time he tried to get this variance you didn't give it to him because of all the rain we just went through in those french drains he wanted to put in there probably water all all through janet's home and possibly mine um it's funny that he finds a mobile home that's exactly the same width for the same variances he wanted the first time this is like hiding the pee he doesn't deserve this he could have bought a mobile home that would fit in the setback rules of the neighborhood and we could all live peaceably he constantly wants to screw with the neighborhood and bring our values down by setback rules and i'm i'm quite tired of him uh if he doesn't like the property put it up for sale quit trying to put something on it that doesn't fit uh other than that i think that uh you guys have done a wonderful job and and i trust what your findings will be and of course janet most elegantly presented everything to you and thank you for your time all right very good thank you sir is there anyone else on the audience or online that wishes to speak in opposition i see no one else responding staff anything further nothing further okay any applicant an opportunity for rebuttal my name is gus claudia i'm for robert real my family will be living in the home so i just wanted to talk about it my kids will be living there um we're just we're just a single family home roba real the owner is a general dentist in tampa um we're not contractors we're not epc directors we're not trying to use our official capacity for anything i'm not sure the clerk got your your name could you repeat that sure it's gus calati and your address 2366 lancashire street devonport florida 33896 um dr real is my ex-wife the kids my kids will be living in the home um the original issue this variance is a brand new application everything that happened in the past was in 2022 we're not dealing with that um unfortunately we had the contractor issues at the time that created all this issues that we had to deal with and unfortunately still dealing with so we cancel those plans and the idea here is for us to just find something beautiful and simple for our kids to have um i'd like to answer janet's questions if you don't mind um like i said 1542 this variance here is specifically a brand new application we're not looking for anything from the past all the stuff that was happening with the trees these are all like we paid for it and we will obviously do all the required um remediation when it comes to like replanting and whatnot all we're asking for is the minimum we're going to be getting all the permitting we're going to be getting all the the requirements this home has been purchased and unfortunately again dr real is a dentist she's not someone that knows construction you know she bought it because we have five people that are going to be living in the home our kids they're all teenagers and after she bought it we went back and said oh no this is not conforming and we're all we're asking for is just a basic minimum um the only way to put the house has been purchased the only way to put this house right now is facing janet's lot and i don't think she wants that and i don't think we want that either we're not bad neighbors we give back to the community we're very good people um the whole idea here is unfortunately in the past there were contractor issues that were not something we controlled we're not contractors we're not people that are involved in this um and and that's basically what's been going on sorry i have to read my notes the house sits about 175 feet from the shore we have going to have a landscape buffer on both sides uh single family um and we're going to be meeting all the all the requirements um the code enforcement and permitting issues are all um that were raised by by janet were all completely separate and in my opinion we're we've dealt with them when we're dealing with them and making forward um to reply back to janet about state law hb 399 did take effect march 27 2026 hb 803 took effect july 1st 2026 um and only some sections start in january but both both the ones that took effect require that a manufacturer home not be treated any strictly than a safe site built one um we're looking to propose whatever is needed engineering fill uh drainage plans the tree replacements we already have plans for that we're looking to do this uh just so that my kids can have a home and um their lease expires in like three months and our goal is just to get this behind us and move in and be great neighbors and gracious neighbors to our neighbors we're not looking to uh do anything here that will uh we're not we're not we actually are looking to invest a lot of money in the property so we're not looking to devalue anything um and we're not looking to flip this this is our home and basically that's that's our intention and that's that's all i have for now okay very good thank you sir you can please sign in thank you so much okay with that that concludes this application is marshall ready for next case next item is item h8 variance 26 1547 applicant is peninsula pipeline company incorporated the request is a variance to buffer and screening requirements and i'll present staff findings the applicants requesting variances to buffer and screening standards in the required west side buffer a 20-foot reduction to the required buffer is requested to allow a zero foot wide buffer area a variance is also requested to reduce the required type b screening to type a screening answer any questions no questions thank you the applicant please hi good morning my name is cameron vanazic lead engineer with peninsula pipeline company address 2524 northwest 23rd avenue ocala florida so today we'll be discussing the second variance request we have on the docket today peninsula pipeline company will owner operate these facilities that we're discussing i'm also accompanied again by ali meyer engineer with kimley horn who pins the pipeline has retained for engineering and permitting services on the project so the request today is of similar intent to the first one that was presented we've been advised to repeat information of the record for each specific variance the request is associated with the peninsula pipeline company's plant city critical infrastructure expansion project and involves a district regulator station that is necessary to provide safe and reliable natural gas service to the surrounding area this request seeks uh limited relief from the 20-foot buffer requirements of section 6.06.06 of the hillsborough county land development code for facilities classified as public service facilities and to reduce type b screening to type a screening the subject property is located at 3701 north wilder road in plant city and consists of approximately 1.79 acres zoned as one the proposed district regulator station is located within a dedicated and recorded 30 foot by 40 foot utility easement in the southwest corner of the property adjacent to south wilder loop the variance request is specifically related to the required 20 foot buffer adjacent to the residential property located south of the site peninsula pipeline is requesting relief to allow a portion of the gravel access driveway and screening fence within the buffer area and type a screening only with a six foot high PVC fence the primary difference of this variance request from previous variance request is that the site requires the buffer area to accommodate not only the gravel driveway and underground utilities but also a portion of the screening fence associated with the facility similar to the first request no above ground natural gas operating equipment is located within the buffer area the request has been minimized to the greatest extent practicable all above ground natural gas facilities have been condensed to the smallest feasible operational footprint and remain outside of the required buffer area no above ground pipeline facilities are proposed within the buffer except for a portion of the screening fence the driveway encroachment allows maintenance vehicles to safely access the facility and pull completely clear of the public right-of-way the request to reduce the type b screening requirements is driven by site constraints including the minimum driveway width and no green space available to accommodate and maintain healthy viable landscaping to adhere to screening type a a pvc fence is proposed installation of a pvc fence is outside of the typical design for station projects however the engineering and operations teams at peninsula pipeline has had discussions and determined it is feasible for this application specifically to meet hillsborough county standards the proposed facility is unmanned and expected to generate fewer than 10 maintenance or service visits per month it will not create significant traffic lighting odor or noise impacts in addition the facility remains more than 20 feet from any existing residential structure the hardship is unique to this property because of the location of the proposed regulator station it is constrained by utility easement requirements the location of existing infrastructure and the ability to relocate or reconfigure the facility on the site acquiring additional private property to accommodate the facility would unnecessarily expand the overall station footprint place a greater burden on the affected property owners and increase impacts to the surrounding area the requested variance therefore allows the necessary utility infrastructure to be accommodated within the existing utility easement while maintaining or minimizing impacts beyond the area already dedicated for utility purposes for these reasons we believe the request satisfies the variance criteria and represents the minimum relief necessary to allow construction of the permitted public service facility that provides an essential public benefit to the community in closing this request represents a narrow and reasonable variance needed to accommodate access critical public utility infrastructure the station has been designed to minimize impacts on adjacent properties and the variance is limited primarily to the driveway necessary to safely access and operate the site for these reasons peninsula pipeline respectfully requests approval of the variance thank you and we'd be happy to answer any questions i do have an updated address uh that to put on the record here uh for references 3201 north wilder road located in plant city that is a facility that is of uh similar type uh it the size of it is a little bit larger than what we are proposing but uh to give you an idea of generally what they look like yeah very good thank you appreciate that yeah go ahead there's also a sound wall located on that facility that he just referenced that it will not be on these facilities so it's just i'm sorry can you repeat that there's also a sound wall that's on the reference let's back up set your name and address for the record okay my name is ally meyer um address for the record is for i'm speaking on behalf of 3701 north wilder road in plant city i didn't i didn't catch that could you state your address again for the record sure 3701 north wilder road in plant city that's your or we're referencing oh i'm the property that i'm representing no your business address business address is 19823 hibiscus drive into cuesta florida 33469 there you go all right now you had a comment yes to add to the the parcel site 3201 north wilder road in plant city we just wanted to note that there is also a large sound wall on that site that will not be part of this um these new ones they're going to be much smaller in scope and scale all right very good thank you all right that conclude your presentation yes sir all right very good thank you please sign in this point in time is there anyone in the audience i wish to speak in support of the application you know on responding anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application there's no one responding staff anything further nothing further okay and the applicant opportunity for rebuttal any further comments i'm sorry all right no need for rebuttal that concludes this application and it's marshall we're ready for the next case next item is item h9 variance 26 1550 the applicant is samuel l wheaton the request of the variance to lot development standards and staff findings will be presented by logan mckay good morning logan mckay development services variance 26 1550 we do have a minor error in the staff report that we want to address the locational address of the property is incorrect it should be 16 038 foster grove drive as correctly listed in the land use hearing officer agenda all their information folio and zoning are correct the applicant is requesting a variance to lot setback standards per ldc section 60101 side yard setbacks for primary structures in the as uh point for zoning district shall be 25 feet applicants requesting a 20 a 12.5 foot variance resulting in a 12 foot 5 foot 12.5 foot setback excuse me property was certified as a legal non-conforming lot uh via 260904 we hope you have both any questions um no questions thank you all right the applicant please good morning good morning my name is samuel whedon i reside at 17819 morning high drive in lutes florida 33549 i'm every every procedure has a natural flow and i'm sure to booger it up so i'm going to try to do it as quickly as possible that's fine take your time i'd like to thank you for the opportunity to be here today and present our request for a side yard variance 26-1550 to a property we own and wish to build our new home in place of the existing residence the request is for a 12 and a half foot variance for a remaining side yard setback of twelve and a half feet i'm going to place something right here so this is this is our property this is this is a lake and we are very far set back from the road we're about 1700 feet set back from the road um so we're very secluded our property is technically 1.74 acres 70 of that acreage is completely submerged within lake church combined with an irregularly shaped uplands at the entry of the property on the south and a mandatory 30-foot wetlands setback on the east a septic system to the north and a regulatory 25-foot side yard setback on the west create serious and practical difficulties that are unique to this property i was told that the applied as 0.4 zoning district is equal to that of a two and a half acre parcel literal enforcement of a 25-foot side yard setback to our parcel that can never conform to the applied zoning district severely restricts a fundamental building envelope a common right enjoyed by other property owners in the same district this variance request should not cause interference or injury to the rights of others i only have one neighbor that shares the westwardly property line he has stated in a signed letter that he supports our variance request other neighbors have also written letters of support as well also this variance request ensures that there will be no need for us to seek a variance into the wetland setback for our home project thereby protecting the rights of other neighbors who should share the who share the lake with us the application to come here today ask if this variance is in harmony and serves the general intent and purpose of the ldc and comprehensive plan based on my understanding research and preliminary conversations with county officials i understand the mechanism to achieve balance with both the ldc and the comprehensive plan is to utilize the variance request process for which i am currently undergoing i do know that our request for the side yard variance actively protects the environmental goals by steering clear of the wetlands additionally there is no real change or impact to the neighborhood as we wish to replace an old residential home with a new one rather than defeating the code our variance request balances natural resource protection with basic residential and use rights thus allowing a practical home design on a highly unique legal non-conforming parcel our request for this variance is due to pre-existing and natural regulatory and natural and regulatory conditions we purchased this residence in 2018 we as the new owners did end up replacing the old original septic system that was installed over 35 years ago the entirely new septic and drain field system was permitted by the state and local authorities it also requires us to remove it also required us to remove half of the porch that was attached to the house to gain the needed space for the placement of the system the hardship stems strictly from natural geographic features intersecting with modern zoning codes and not a self-imposed act granting this variance delivered substantial justice by balancing public benefit with individual equality public interest is secured because the 12 and a half foot setback allows allows the proposed home to stay clear of the 30-foot wetlands buffer protecting lake church a denial would cause individual hardship by forcing an impractical home layout justice is served by allowing a practical building space for a livable home for our family i do have a couple other things i would like to just show here if you if we go back to this we have the lake here this is the driveway coming to the property the main entrance road is 1700 feet away from this corner so we're very secluded this is going to be a topographic survey that was recently done on the property it shows the lake it shows the dep wetlands delineation and this line here represents the 30-foot buffer zone that we have to stay away from this line this right here is the septic tank this line right here shows the five foot setback from the septic system and this line here shows the requested um five and a half foot setback that we are seeking for today as we come in on the property oops sorry as we enter the property right here we can see that it's very narrow you have your setback for the side yard you have your set lack for the sort of for the wetlands and so we we basically need to bring the new home back a little bit this way and this is where our squeeze is so the 25 foot um as 0.4 setback would be basically right in this area here which as you can see would drastically uh narrow our our buildable footprint so in speaking um and just in point of reference if we go around the lake in the boat there are many other properties that have um very narrow setbacks and i'm sure that they are zoned differently um you can see these on google earth and do some simple math calculations uh with using their distance tool um a lot of those homes reside on gator hole drive lake church drive mclamory road and lake williams um and uh so i think that pretty that concludes my presentation if you have any questions i'll be happy to do my best uh no questions at this time thank you okay oh one last thing i do have two letters of support that i don't know that made it give them to the clerk in to the uh file so i'm going to present this now okay thank you very much for your time sure thank you sir at this point in time is there anyone in the audience that wish to speak in support of the application there's no one responding anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application there's no one responding marshal just for the record uh it is as dash 0.4 zoning on the property because i see ar in certain places and as 0.4 in other places or if you're just double check real quick ar it's like there was a typo in the application or in the staff report um the correct is ar okay the the setbacks um the side yard setbacks don't change so the request would stay the same of the same variance and results it should be ar not as.4 all right with that applicant is an opportunity for rebuttal i'm sorry i didn't understand what no we're just checking to see what the underlying zoning is oh okay yeah it's either ar or as.4 yeah the 0.4 that i referenced was what was uh uh was given to me in the legal non-conforming lot review okay and so that's that's what i was referencing that yeah so i mean if it makes no difference between the that and the ar well what staff is saying the setback at side yard setback is still 25 feet either way yeah so the side yard um the neighbor who is also directly affected um by who shares our property line his house is roughly 12 feet from the property line give or take a few inches um and uh he's written a letter of supports as well all right very good thank you it's marshall again can clear the where the as.4 is coming from is that is um that applicant reference the ncl letter um it references the when you're you're not conforming lot size the closest you're allowed the closest district setbacks based on the lot sizes as.4 in this case for the side yard it doesn't change the requirement okay all right with that that concludes this application it's marshall ray for next case next item is item h10 variance 26 1552 the applicant is rue project management group llc the request of the variance to lot development standards and accessory structure requirements staff findings will be presented by logan mckay logan mckay development service variance 26 1552 applicants requesting a variance to lots setbacks and accessory structure requirements the applicant is requesting uh per section lec section 60101 uh minimum of 20 foot rear yard setbacks required in the rsc9 zoning district the applicant is requesting a 12 foot variance resulting in eight foot setback um per section 60101 a minimum of a five foot side yard setback is required in the same district applicants requesting a 4.6 foot variance resulting in a 0.4 foot setback on the south uh per the same requirement uh the applicant is requesting a 4.6 foot uh variant setback on the north as well resulting in a 4.4 foot setback on the north and per lec section 61104 c3 accessory structures may occupy rear yards provided that such structures are no closer than three feet from any to any rear lot line the applicant is requesting a three foot variance resulting in a zero foot setback the property has an approved ncl 26-1190 on the property uh per lec section 6110303 property shall meet the rc9 zoning districts uh the property is also cited for compliance uh by the hillsborough county code enforcement offices available for any questions um do you know what the code enforcement issue is i do not have that available currently okay all right nothing further yeah at this point in time the applicant good morning good morning ru london from r u project management group 1502 west bush boulevard tampa florida i'm representing the owner of this property located on 67 16 north clear view avenue this is located north north of uh lambo avenue south of minnehaha west of heim avenue and east of net del uh northern mavery this property is a result uh the zoning is the current zoning is rc9 the requirements for land development code the minimum load size is 5 000 square feet uh the minimum width is 50 feet the size the size the size for this lat is less than the minimum requirements that is like 4 143 square footers and 37.5 width we request a legal non-conforming lag back we received the approval in august 10 the number for the lat legal legal non-conforming lag is ncl 26 dash 1190 the current owners are mario fuentes and maricelli branch they got this property on may 2017. okay we are requesting four variances one for the rear yard setback requirement for the principal dwelling uh the setbacks for the site at north and side at south and the rear setback for the accessory structure the house uh before the owners buy this one they have a front porch already there uh like you see on the picture the first variance request is the rear setback for the rear setback for the principal dwelling to reduce 12 feet uh to the requirements for the rear yard the result got to be eight foot the second variance that we required was uh deleted and the variance number three is the reduction to the required south side yard for attached carport and side porch the setback requirement is five foot and the result got to be 0.4 the variance number four is the reduce 4.6 foot from the requirement five foot um setback result 0.4 and the last variance that we are requesting is for the storage or uh that is located on the rear yard we are we want to reduce three foot and result for zero setback um if you have any question no questions at this time thank you not okay thank you so much please sign in thanks yeah this point time is there anyone in the audience that wish to speak in support of the application see no one responding anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application see no one responding staff anything further um just for the record the for the notice of violation um it was for failure to obtain a residential new construction and additions permit um for the addition to the rear of the home uh entry door that was added to the side of the home the in the the car part the carport type structure um and roof over porches in the front and side of the home okay is it fair to say that those improvements didn't just happen within the last couple days it happened over the last since they purchased the property in 2017 it could have yeah the um typically um code compliance and code enforcement work um complaint driven um thank you all right um at this point in time the applicant has an opportunity for rebuttal um according with what you was uh asking to them is uh uh this is you need to have in consideration this is a little narrow uh the code um lat the the code request 50 feet this one half 37.5 from the platter subdivision that is the reason we get the um the no comfort the legal non-conforming lat all right thank you yeah thank you so much that concludes this application it's much already for the next case uh we do have quite a few more cases how do you normally handle um if we have to go through lunch hour do we just keep going or normal typically up to you um we can take a a lunch break typically if it's going to go through lunch we take a lunch break um and then reconvene okay well let's see where we are we still have another half an hour let's make that decision right around noonish okay all right um the next item is item h11 variance 26 1555 the applicant is is now rollins the request is a variance to lot development standards and staff findings represented by sierra james good morning sierra james of development services the applicant is requesting a variance to the required rear yard setbacks to accommodate in addition to the home that was added in the rsc6 zoning district a 25 foot rear yard setback is required the applicant is requesting a variance of 12 feet resulting in a 13 foot rear yard setback this site is currently under code compliance violation for failure to provide residential new construction and addition permit for a new roof over the entrance accessory structure new linea extension and new roof we can also note that this property had been heard on may 1st 2026 and they were denied for a zero foot rear yard setback so they did come back requesting less yeah all right i'm familiar with the case thank you all right thank you all right the applicant please morning my name is nether rollins my address 7910 north sign vincent street tampa florida 33614 this is my wife my name is same thing address i uh i tried to uh resolve for the case for the last variants you got it uh so many people have tried to try to teach me but my first time the um the process is recommending 25 feet and the setback of you know but uh i don't understand last time now it's very more clear what is the problem i've got to explain my case so for the case i got it the people say 12 feet i removed my increase uh the little uh the little house in the back side um i tried by yourself i got a 13 feet it's better one more fee for the across for the uh for the period for the and the back side i got it the my case for this show you what is the idea what is that try to uh remove for uh this case for the people existing on the behind the property this approach on the 15 feet why um for my neighbor is no damage nobody got it uh increase you see the process the back side and the back side to the for the other um row um i think is the correct on the um the law for the um what i said uh my property you got a solution so the best way for the for this show you that one and here this is on the the the red line this is the removed a long times ago last year so you see that one over here on the the pool for the bike for the warmer i gotta remove everything now if it increase the 13 feet it's even for the bike size right i think you know how the problem nobody know how the problem for the the government the you know right this is my case for solution that problem i i i see what you're proposing yeah all right um it's clear all right thank you okay all right please sign in okay thank you sir at this point time is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak in support of the application i see no one responding anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application no one responding staff anything further nothing okay all right um to be clear there was an associated side yard setback that was accompanying this application it's no longer part of the application correct they um because that part was um from the original structure they decided to seek a non-conforming structure review to bring that into compliance all right all right all right sir anything else on rebuttal that's it very good all right with that that concludes this application and we're ready for the next case next item is item h12 variance 26 1556 the applicant is anthony marcello the request is a variance to fence and wall requirements and variance to landscape and buffering requirements staff findings will be presented by carolyn peddle morning carolyn peddle development services again this is variance 26 1556 the applicants requesting variance this defense and wall requirements as well as the landscape and buffering requirements for an existing wall per ldc is section 60702 c1a walls over four feet in height shall not be located within the required front yards except under certain circumstances which do not apply to this case the variance is for four feet resulting in an eight foot tall wall per ld section 60603 i2a rural scenic roadways and rural areas in the rsc or rs1 comprehensive land use plan class classification there shall be a 30 foot scenic easement provided which shall be left in a natural state they're requesting a variance for 20 feet resulting in a wall setback of 10 feet within the scenic easement area um there is a current land uh code enforcement complaint for the wall height i'm available for any questions straightforward thank you thank you all right the applicant please hello sir anthony marcello 18011 patterson road that's that okay anything to add no basically i have an olive orchard there with over 200 olive trees and i'm on a major intersection where the cars back up i live on patterson myself 11 houses down and it backs up all the way to my house okay and they're all different directions they shoot lights all over and it just messes the trees up all through the night that's it okay all right appreciate it and i'm allowed to put like 10 foot storage containers across and i don't think that would look as nice as the wall and i never built the wall i thought because i'm bona fide agricultural so that's why i put it up i never thought i had to go for a variance first i wouldn't thank you sir at this point time is there anyone in the audience i wish to speak in support of the application i see no one responding anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application still morning good morning that white keystone odessa this applicant is asking for forgiveness not permission with this application did i hear your name and address maybe i missed it uh 17905 burrell road odessa and your name beth white very good thank you applicant is asking for forgiveness not permission with this application please deny this variance the applicant purchased this property in 2021 the same year he created a florida profit corporation marcello farms incorporated applicants homestead residence which he purchased in 2016 is located a few miles away on patterson road in keystone odessa residents noticed building on the property in september 2023 with the erection of a giant unpermitted stone arch the wall was erected the following spring applicant has had ample opportunity to apply for a variance plant bushes to eliminate the light source from car headlights and has not we do not have street lights in keystone instead this applicant has shown egregious disregard for required building permits and stop work orders for this property for two and a half years any and all hardships this applicant claims are self-imposed a construction code compliance unpermitted construction case was initiated in may of 2024 this resulted in a residential building cape code compliance case for failure to provide residential new construction and permits for a residence a large metal three bay barn and this eight foot concrete wall a code enforcement complaint for this wall has accrued daily fines of a thousand dollars since september 2025 applicant has ignored stop work orders county board of adjustment hearings and fines applicant ignores citations issued for unpermitted structures written correspondence and site visits visits from hillsborough county please deny this variance thank you thank you ma'am so anyone else in the audience wishes to speak in opposition my name is jane whitehurst i'm here to represent the keystone civic association in which i'm the president of i'm not going to repeat what the mrs white just went through but i'm going to add a few more things yes this does go against our our comprehensive our community plan and we are thrilled that somebody is on this road that is actually planting trees farming however you can't use that as an excuse to build an opaque wall on a scenic highway or scenic road i should say it's a um it's a beautiful road and we don't need that's that's not what we have in keystone we don't have people hiding behind big concrete walls he said that the olive trees he's built this so that the olive trees aren't interrupted by the cars the traffic it is true that olive trees need to have the rest at night like most plants however it does not the traffic doesn't affect these olive trees what does affect the olive trees are his many lights security lights that are on his buildings that you can see at night and therefore i would think if that was the issue that he needed the wall then he would not have those security lights going the whole time everybody that i've talked to in keystone opposes this again it goes against our comprehensive plan community plan sorry and i hope that you deny this variance thank you very much all right thank you man all right sir hello good morning melissa nordbeck keystone odessa tarpa springs road is a scenic roadway um the eight we only allow a four foot wall with the keystone comprehensive i'm sorry keystone odessa community plan um so the wall is unpermitted it violates the keystone odessa community plan the hillsborough county code only allows for a six foot wall and this is an eight foot wall so he's violating two different plans and again after countless site visits by county officials to try to work with him and to try to bring him in compliance he's not interested in that so again scenic scenic roadway this wall definitely needs to come down thank you all right thank you ma'am all right is there anyone else in the audience that wishes to speak in opposition there's no one responding staff anything further nothing further the applicant an opportunity for rebuttal just so it's clear that the second that i was informed that i was able not able to put that wall up which it was finished already there was nothing i completely stopped if you look there's no lights on it wise over there i completely stopped immediately i was told i was bona fide agriculture i'm allowed to put it up i put it up that's what i threw my neighbors my neighbor next door has got the storage containers right next to me they look horrible i have a beautiful wall with palm trees in front of it that is a major intersection the lights turn all different ways whenever the cars pop the lights go through my property all night she's right about the lights on the building i was aware of it they're completely shut down now there's no lights on my property so that's all i have to say that's it thank you all right thank you sir all right with that that concludes this application and miss marshall let's take one more and we'll see where we are this brings us to section i special uses item i1 special use 26 1549 the applicant is vg21 online llc the request is a special use to cop alcoholic beverage permit with distance separation waivers staff findings will be presented by jared fallen after presentation by the applicant for the special uses the applicant goes first you know it's um i just bookkeeping let me just read in their procedures for special uses give me a minute no worries all right regarding the special uses and we have one two three four of them um first the applicant presents and development services will have five minutes to present their case and the planning commission staff if necessary will have five minutes to present their position and those people who want to speak in support have 15 minutes and those people who want to speak in opposition have 15 minutes and then development services will have five minutes to address any issues make any comments and then finally the applicant will have five minutes for rebuttal so those are the procedures for special uses and and sir go ahead we're ready for your application thank you sir uh good morning uh to you sir ladies and gentlemen good morning uh michael karaskia i'm at 1717 south 50th street um the property owner and business owner before for uh start sir i do have a folder full of letters and support of us i'll give to the clerk at the conclusion all right uh everyone chose to write the letters to save the time of the hearing today for for your ease the simple point of this is we uh i say we my wife and i have been operating in this uh area for almost five years we've been operating as a wholesale distribution company several years ago we were asked by the community to start doing retail and i'm going to continue to say community because the community has had a lot of involvement with us and they've asked us to change our licensing so that we could present to them so the community can come into the area and actually enjoy a beverage of their choice what's been happening in this time my wife is uh who's the owner of our original company so i retired from the marine corps after 20 years of service and then i actually came to work for my wife and so we are a woman-owned veteran operated company we're very proud of that we've actually enhanced through the community we've reached out we have a lot of other veterans that come in through our area we've started a lot of organizations my wife started a women's only networking group it's free to the community people have a safe place to come and it it fosters the growth of women in business and women socially throughout the community since that has taken off and there's about 300 members of her organization the gentleman came to me and then i started a men's organization where it's a safe space for a gentleman to come in and we foster the growth we've done some combined stuff uh we've worked with a lot of uh minority groups in the area myself i being minority uh first generation colombian american we pride ourselves on enhancing with the community we've worked with the latin chamber of commerce the the black heritage uh chamber of commerce i think i'm saying that one right uh west hamper chamber of commerce and a lot of other organizations throughout through our our tenure of being there we've worked a lot of other charities a lot of communities some churches uh we have organizations like voices against sexual assault that do a lot of outreach there what we've done different than other organizations is we open our space up free of charge for small businesses to come because we have this big space and we have a place where people can use it for events and we've done that and it's allowed the growth of a lot of small businesses when the community the additional thing with us in the community is that we've brought in a lot of economy into the community because of our uniqueness uh we are a first of its kind not a first of a kind to be allowed we're a first of a kind to bring in wine from the country of georgia and eastern europe my wife is the first one in world history to bring this into and to the country and brought it into our great state of florida and to the community so not only are we enhancing the community we're actually connecting two different nations together through our company uh what we're simply asking is to allow us to operate further why we had to have this waiver there was one building uh it's an rsc6 you'll see in the application sir it's 186 feet away vice of 250 that's required we've had no uh issues or challenges through all the time we've been there in fact it's quite the opposite we have worked in conjunction with our neighbors we've actually done a lot of business with our other neighbors they've done social things with us and back and forth so we continue to improve that we've improved the land we've improved the the atmosphere of the area we've painted we've keep cleaning up and so we just want to continue to growth on that uh as we'll state in these letters that i'll give to the clerk as well but other than that sir uh i'm staying here any questions for you all right i'm good thank you thank you very much sir thank you yes sir all right and staff please hello uh jared fawn with development services uh so this is a request for a distance separation waiver for a two cop alcoholic beverage development permit for the sale of beer and wine on the permitted premises uh this application is sought for a wine lounge in retail space with 2967 square feet of indoor space and 783 square feet of outdoor space the property is currently zoned cg uh in that uh zoning district does permit the proposed use so they are asking for a distance separation waiver for uh residentially zoned property within 250 feet uh they do meet distance separation requirements for cert for certain community uses um and are not within uh three other approved alcoholic beverage permits uh the residential property they are within 250 feet of uh is located to the west it is zoned rsc6 uh it is 186 feet away uh however if you look at the map the actual home is located uh further to the south which is about 400 feet away um so we have no compatibility issues there there's also vegetation and a creek that kind of gives a buffer uh to that property um and then another property that has residential there is residential to the north um the property is owned cg um it has a multitude of units it's sort of multi-family it has mobile home rvs i think there's a single family home on the property as well it doesn't count towards the distance separation um but there is also uh separation and screening from the creek and vegetation uh between the uses so we have no compatibility concerns with this uh ab uh there is an existing two aps wet zoning on the property and that will be rescinded if this is approved okay all right good thank you yeah thank you at this point in time is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak in support of the application is no one responding anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application there's no one responding staff anything further nothing further sir any final comments all right thank you with that that concludes this application um let's take another one not quite noon and then we'll decide next item item i2 special use 26 1553 the applicant is nyb enterprises llc the request is a two cop alcoholic beverage permit with distance separation waivers staff findings will be presented by chris granlenard after presentation by the applicant hi there uh good morning my for the record my name is patricia ortiz my address is 2810 north central avenue tampa 33602 i am the agent of the applicant we are proposing a special use for alcohol beverage sales uh with a waiver to reduce the 250 foot distance of separation between establishments serving alcohol and residentially zoned property we're proposing an 86 foot distance of separation the subject property is located at 10070 fern hill drive in riverview it's zoned commercial general and it's in the smu6 land use designation um here i have a map of the location of the site um to the north we have commercial plan developments um a commercial plan development to the southwest and west we have commercial development um immediately to the south and to the east there is residentially zoned property um we are seeking a two cop excuse me two cop state license and um this slide here just kind of gives you the specifics on what we're requesting the existing building on site will be uh redeveloped as a restaurant and tap room um it's a two-story building um and we will have some outdoor we're proposing to have some outdoor seating area on the north south and west sides of the building there are some unique circumstances which mitigate for that 250 foot distance of separation here in green kind of a backwards l shape i'm showing you the required 20 foot type b buffer fencing is already installed along the project perimeter but we are required to ensure that there is a 20 foot wide type b buffer which would include um in this case it would include a fence or wall um excuse me along the does it require any landscaping yeah the 20 type b does require landscaping i know it's a combination of shrubs and trees but i don't know all the specifics off the top of my head okay um but is your testimony that they will comply with the type b requirements absolutely yeah and um as you can see that that type b buffer is only required along a portion of the south boundary there is a plan development right here which has a 30 foot wide um buffer and there's a pond um there as well um and then we're proposing like our site configuration shows a pond over here on on the west so these features really do prevent direct access a reasonable person would travel from this most affected site here home site about 850 feet to get to the entrance of the restaurant tap room and the properties to the south would have to travel much further because the subdivision is a cul-de-sac subdivision so they'd have to travel about four tenths of a mile um and i can stop here and answer questions that you might have uh just just one question what's the status of the existing fence is it in good shape um it's in partially good shape there are um if you were standing here at the cul-de-sac and looking to the north you'll see that there are some fence panels that are missing don't know how that happened i'm assuming that they got blown out during the hurricane and were just never replaced um so that existing fence will be used with that 20 foot buffer but it would have to you know that we have to comply with the 20 foot wide type b buffer in its entirety okay and and you'd have to make those repairs prior to opening up your tap room yes okay yes um and i had one oh and we're also pro offering um hours of operation so uh sunday through thursday the hours of operation would be from 2 p.m until 10 p.m and on friday and saturday from 2 p.m until midnight all right is that part of the conditions it is okay okay any other questions no okay thank you all right and uh uh development services staff good morning chris groundman are planner with development services presenting a special use application 26-1553 it's for a restaurant uh slash tap room uh located uh 10070 fern hill drive in riverview the request is for a two cop classification which allows beer and wine sales for on and off premises consumption the property zone commercial general which supports the use uh the proposed use the applicant is requesting a waiver from the required 250 foot separation from residentially zoned property reducing the distance to approximately 86 feet staff reviewed the request and finds that the existing fencing required landscape buffer and stormwater pond provide substantial separation from nearby residences in addition the applicant has proposed limited hours of operation which further reduces potential impacts of surrounding residents uh our recommendation is uh staff recommends approval of the two cop permit the requested waiver subject to the conditions uh of the uh that the alcohol sales be limited to 2 p.m to 10 p.m sunday through thursday and 2 p.m to 12 a.m friday and saturday uh for a total width zoned area of 9 562 square feet but i'd answer any questions you might have yeah if you could look at the proposed condition for one okay in the very first sentence it's is that a are you referring i'm not quite sure what you're doing here upon approval of special use ab 25-0305 it's a typo sir i'm sorry so that should be the current one yes sir i'm sorry that's all right that's a typo and then i don't know i didn't catch that somehow we need to rescind if this one is approved to rescind the old one is that sort of typical oh i recall this one had a michelle did this one well maybe it doesn't have one maybe it was a different one i'm thinking of calling i don't believe this one this one does not all right i think it's a prior one the prior one so that was the only issue then yes all right very good thanks thank you at this point in time is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak in support of the application no one responding anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application this morning my name is christopher jordan i live at 10021 ken lake drive my home is right here at the very bottom south corner of the property okay um so that fencing that she's talking about right here was blown down by the hurricane same with the fencing behind our our house is right there um we've got a list of uh the fellow residents in our neighborhood we went through talked to everybody we got a big signature that one of my neighbors should have emailed in but i had to go out of the state for a couple days i haven't been able to talk to her okay um pretty much everybody in our neighborhood is against this at the very top of our street right here and although your hours or operation may stop people do drink and drive they stop on the side roads and they're pulling neighborhoods to kind of take a break um y'all have already done the city has done a bunch of traffic mitigation here or at least tried to construction wise um and we have nothing but standstill traffic pretty much beginning half of the day on the whole way of fern hill so we already have traffic problems they come through our neighborhood and they fly through me personally i am expecting a child and uh i bought my house after getting out of the military to outside of an h8 neighborhood so that we can have a little more peace and quiet a little more uh yardage to us but now we're going to have looks like a tap room in our backyard with outside seating and more or less there's going to be music playing outside as well they're talking about staying up until 10 10 p.m this is a residential neighborhood same with just south of it you can see the cul-de-sac circle that's a huge residential neighborhood there's a there's a school right at the end of the street not too far from where we're at now kids take that sidewalk they go to the gas station get drinks and snacks all the time they're always walking up and down the sidewalk and we're going to add something that sells alcohol literally right in a neighborhood there's nowhere on that side of the road anywhere near there to support that nothing's ever really survived there even when it was a fruit stand i'm from mulberry myself one of my friends actually bought into that years ago it was a fruit stand where they sell vegetables and stuff in neighborhoods it didn't really last we don't i don't see any same with the neighbors we've all talked there's no way there's going to get enough people there to keep that going aside from just having a business that's going to be open late 10 p.m till thursday until midnight friday saturday it looks like and again that's right in our backyard um my neighbor that took the uh that i got the signatures with with she lives right here she has a child as well same with this house this house and this house um the last house i point out actually has a uh learning disabled child that lives there that you know they have some complications so there's a lot to go in the factor with this it's a very random spot for them to put in their use to get to sell alcohol i mean it's it's in our neighborhoods um that was supposed to it's owned by a clinical group it was supposed to be clinics everybody in our neighborhood even said that i thought it was supposed to be like pharmacies type stuff so that's what everybody was expecting not to have i mean essentially a bar a tap room is a bar um right there in our backyard and that little fence that they're going to put up isn't going to stop any of the noise i mean you've got the building there blocking the road and we still get all the semi traffic from the highway because 75 runs yeah right here yeah um as well as ring power is right here i don't know if you are familiar with that on the caterpillar dealerships so they were there well before i moved there so i we've already got their real tall parking lot lights we have blackout curtains on every window of our house because you could stand out there at midnight like this and it'll cash a shadow through the home i actually have photos of it same with the i call it the strawberry hut the building they're wanting to build in it's got lights all around it and it it brightens up our whole neighborhood at all hours of the night i feel like becoming a bar a tap room escape room is just going to add even more light pollution to what we're already fighting against um it shows there's quite a bit of trees down in here but somebody comes through every once in a while cut them all down and our yards is flooded with traffic noise which is that's a nice problem but flooded with traffic noise and all that other it takes away from us going home and getting away from the hustle and bustle same with myself i'm 100 to say about the military i have really terrible sleeping problems i'll walk up and down the road sometimes i'll sit in the backyard and pace and it sounds like i'm just gonna be listening to music and people possibly hooting and hollering up in there because i mean at the end of the day you're talking about tap room at night you're not going to be bringing your family and kids at 10 p.m to 12 p.m to go hang out in escape room it's going to be people drinking it's gonna be younger 21 year olds or whoever hooting hollering and then when they leave out of there and they tear off down that road they'll come into our neighborhood to miss the light because the light lasts about five to ten minutes they'll come flying down here jumping the i mean if you i wish i had photos of our uh what's it called to slow people down when they drive speed bumps they're literally scratched up from the bottom of their car smoking just because they don't want it that light so we already have so much traffic from people trying to beat the light to get on the interstate to get to work and we're gonna add this into it and i i'm sorry i don't have the the thing of the writing i had to go out of state and i didn't get to see her before coming up here but we've got pretty much everybody all the way down the neighborhood into the back of our cattle cul-de-sac has signed it some said they emailed in as well so i'm hoping they did that so y'all could see that but i'm just here today to kind of put our grievances up there all right all right i appreciate y'all's time thank you so much all right thank you sir is there anyone else in the audience that wishes to speak in opposition on responding staff anything further nothing further the applicant has an opportunity for rebuttal yeah once again patricia ortiz uh 2810 north central avenue um our the the owner of the establishment has um also pro-offered a condition uh which has not been captured in conditions of approval to um restrict music to inside the establishment so they read my mind yeah it's inside um and the other thing i'd just like to say is that the site is in an area of established commercial development um the commercial development predates the subdivision to the south i'm not sure if it predates the development of um of the homes along ken lake street but i don't think it does um but anyway we will be um keeping the music inside there won't be any outdoor outdoor music um your outdoor seating area wraps around the front what's called the side and the rear yes does your client need to have seating in the rear of the building well outside yeah outside outside seating to the rear they really wanted it's part of the wet zoning um but i think your question is would we be willing to eliminate the outdoor seating on the south that's what i'm getting at sure yeah um i i think you know our intent is to be a good neighbor um i've talked with the petitioner or the applicant on this and i'm i'm comfortable with that yeah um have has staff seen the draft condition the draft you you said there's a we're not going to have outdoor music have you do you have a draft condition um well what happened is we received um an email from a resident of the subdivision to the south and who lived on i believe it's called golden wonder lane um so she lived very near the uh cul-de-sac on the south side of the property and she asked a series of questions which i answered and provided staff a copy of which i have right here if i can enter that into the record no maybe misunderstood my question is there a draft condition that says there'll be no music outside the the staff report that i've seen does not include a condition but you you now just offered that as a condition do you have that in writing no because i just offered it okay that's my question yeah all right um michelle how do you want to handle that we can either we could propose a condition um or we can um if the applicant wants to you know provide a condition we we would agree with that um and it could be further restricted in your decision and as a hearing master i can i have a concurrence should i after considering all the factors and make a recommendation of approval i'm not saying that's what i'm doing but if i go that direction i could draft condition as well yes right if you do one and put it in optics is that acceptable sure the question that the gentleman had about the lighting he says it's it's a two-story building and i'm not sure where the lights are around the entire building at the very top yeah talk to me do you want me to talk to you or him to talk i want you to talk to me okay if there's a string of lights are on the top the second floor roof line i i'm not sure about a string of lights um on the top floor roof okay so i'm not sure what the question is is the question to eliminate them as i understand the security lights are facing towards the north okay but i i uh i'm not sure what he's talking about so it's hard for me to answer your question would i eliminate them because i i haven't seen them i'm sure he'll have you know if he goes into business he's gonna have the parking lot all enhanced before he moves into business and he'll have way finding with low level lighting directing people to the parking lot directing people to the front door there'll be low level lighting on your front porch and side porch and probably be security lighting at least around around the first floor i just don't see the need for it is a two-story building and it has security lighting of some kind on the second floor and i don't know if that's necessary or not what if we adhere to the lighting and photo metrics of the land development code i'll take that under consideration all right anything else um the the other thing i heard is uh there was some concerns about traffic and that there's a bus stop um again our hours of operation will be from 2 p.m until 10 p.m during the weekdays and until midnight on the weekends um i'm not sure how the traffic from this commercial establishment would affect the bus stop any more than the commercial business otherwise so i don't really know how to respond to that or how to respond to the fact that the applicant or the the opposition has children um i hear there's there's kids in the neighborhood there are kids in almost all neighborhoods um so we we see this type of commercial residential interface often um i'll leave it at that okay very good with that that concludes this application um what's the preference marshall how many more cases do we have two mr hearing officer yes um it would be the county attorney's office's preference to just continue with the next two applications because we have people in the audience who've been here for a long time waiting to go so if that pleases the hearing officer and miss marshall i was looking for input that's helpful thank you all right unless anybody has any objections we have two cases left on the agenda today let's just proceed and knock them out all right next item please next item is item i3 special use 26 1560 the applicant is saf esl south tampa operator llc the request is a special use for cop rx alcoholic beverage permit with distance separation waivers staff findings will be presented by chris grand leonard after presentation by the applicant hi good afternoon my name is amanda has seen address 119 south monroe street suite 202 tallahassee florida 32301 i am here representing the applicant for the subject property 5049 bell shoals road in order to obtain the force cop rx alcoholic beverage license this property will be an assisted living facility premises it is zoned residentially for the assisted living facility business operations this liquor license is being requested for the on-site restaurant that is part of the assisted living facility operations the reason that the residential waiver is being requested is because the property is zoned residential and it needs a waiver from its own property there are no other nearby residential properties that are within this distance separation requirement the force cop rx will adhere to the requirements that spot that follow a specialty restaurant alcoholic beverage license which is a corresponding sfs license a specialty food service license excuse me 51 of the gross revenue of the restaurant operations will be derived from the sale of food and non-alcoholic beverages for the residents and it's their guests of the facility uh only um i'm here for any uh questions you might have and thank you so much for your time all right thank you ma'am all right uh development services staff good morning chris grand leonard again development services i'm presenting uh ab uh 26 dash 1560. this is for uh the gallery tampa assisted living community it's located at 5049 bell shoals road their request is for a four cop rx classification allowing the sale of beer wine and liquor for on-premises consumption connection with the facility's dining hall uh the property zone pd which allows the assisted living facility in consideration of the proposed permit the applicant is requesting a waiver from the required 150 foot separation from residently zoned property as the wet zone areas are located within the same residentially zoned parent parcel staff reviewed the request finds that the proposed alcohol alcohol service is entirely internal to the facility limited to residents and their guests and will not create significant impacts on surrounding residential properties a recommendation is uh we recommend approval uh for the four cop rx with the uh with the requested waiver for a wet zoned area of 23 976 square feet let answer any questions you might have no questions thank you thank you at this point in time is there anyone in the audience that wish to speak in support of the application see no one responding anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application see no one responding staff anything further nothing further okay the applicant opportunity for rebuttal we're good all right with that that concludes this application and as it turns out let's hear the last item yes this item is item i4 special use 26 1581 the applicant in silsborough county water resources department quest is a special use for wastewater treatment facility and variance to lot development standards staff findings will be presented by tim lampkin after presentation by the applicant okay the applicant please good afternoon nicole lynn of ardura group 4921 memorial highway suite 300 tampa florida all right um thanks for the patience to get here i'll try to go through quickly all right on behalf of hillsborough county water resources department this is for the advanced wastewater treatment facility that is particularly involved with the one water campus well just keep in mind that this item i guess it has to be a new application but it was heard previously yes sir all right there's a lot of evidence out there right right so to avoid the redundancy of it no i kind of have to take that back a little bit okay because you you do have a clean slate here you're asking for a new approval right so i don't know how to frame this we're all aware of what was asked before what was approved before okay let me leave it at that okay all right so as part of uh this project and going through as a design build we were as you pointed out already went through an su process however during that design build we learned of the ability to make adjustments to design for some of the structural elements in order to save some money for the county so i'm going to skip forward for a lot of this it's already part of the presentation but this is in the south county area down in balm the project area is agricultural in nature around everything except for the solid waste facility that's just to the north and there were waivers that are included this site plan actually shows the pink line for which the um special use is required for that 500 foot for this type 3 wastewater facility and these are the waivers that are included they are for the setbacks exactly the same as the prior su application that was previously approved and then we have this requested variance for the height increase specifically from the 50 foot allowance up to 85 feet the other thing i wanted to point out with the prior su there were a couple of items that were delegated to site plan review and during that process specifically these two substandard roads and driveway access spacing we did go through those processes to get approval i just wanted to make mention of those so that they were wrapped in with this su and then this is basically uh just to show that there were no objections from the agencies reviewing and that concludes my presentation all right very good thank you all right um hello tim lambkin development services i'm going to keep this very uh brief as uh you know su gen uh 25-1135 was heard by the lujo on december 15 2025 and was approved for the type 3 wastewater facility and the applicant is really requesting the new special use approval to allow a maximum height of 85 feet for all structures associated with the facility applicant is requesting the same five waivers and one variance which uh they just have put up on the screen i can go over them but i didn't think so and um that concludes my presentation unless you had any questions i have no questions thank you thank you this point time is there anyone in the audience that we should speak in support of the application we have to hear from planning commission staff as well i apologize for that i imagine they've been waiting all meeting this should be on virtually planning commission staff yes alexis myers planning commission staff the subject site is in the agricultural role one to five future needs category the property is located in the rural area and within the limits of the bomb community plan as well as the south hillsborough county plan the proposed advanced wastewater treatment facility is consistent with the intent of rural area policies as it provides essential public infrastructure that will support surrounding area both four of the one sec on one water section of the unincorporated hillsborough county comprehensive plan emphasizes that the planning and construction of water resources infrastructure should promote fiscal sustainability and efficient use and redevelopment of land the proposed special use request for the advanced wastewater treatment facility supports this by facilitating that development of essential water resources infrastructure to accommodate existing and future services demands based upon the above considerations and the following goals objectives and policies planning commission staff find the proposed special use consistent with the unincorporated hillsborough county comprehensive plan subject to the restrictions proposed by the development services department all right thank you very much um thank you this point in time is there anyone in the audience they wish to speak in support of the application you know one responding anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application one responding staff anything further nothing further applicant has an opportunity for rebuttal yeah there's no need for rebuttal with that that concludes this application and we are done with today's land use hearing officer hearing we are adjourned