The Hillsborough County Planning Commission on July 14 voted 5-2 to find HCCPA 25-10 — a privately initiated comprehensive plan map amendment for 15.64 acres at 6544 County Road 579 — inconsistent with the county comprehensive plan, and will forward the matter to the Board of County Commissioners for final action.

Planning commission staff told commissioners the request would change the site’s future land use from residential 1 and residential 4 to Light Industrial Planned (LIP) and said the amendment is “inconsistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the unincorporated Hillsborough County comprehensive plan.” Willa Mickey, Planning Commission staff, said the LIP category “would not provide a gradual transition of use between the site and the surrounding lower intensity land use categories such as residential 1 and residential 4.”

The staff presentation said the site is about 15.64 acres in the rural area and within the TenotaSassa community plan. Under the existing residential designations the site could be considered for up to 47 dwelling units; the proposed LIP designation would eliminate residential potential but would allow higher nonresidential intensity — staff cited a potential of roughly 510,958 square feet of nonresidential uses under LIP. Staff also noted the county community and infrastructure planning division found the applicant’s traffic study insufficient.

Representing the applicant, attorney Gina Grimes of Bradley, Errant, Bolt & Cummings said the applicant disagrees with staff’s analysis and stressed recent development trends along County Road 579. “We disagree with their finding,” Grimes told commissioners, arguing that existing industrial and commercial development nearby and a required companion planned development (PD) for the site would provide buffers and limit intensity.

Commission discussion touched on both the accuracy of existing maps and whether a PD could address compatibility. Commissioner Steven moved to find the amendment consistent; that motion failed on a 2-5 voice and roll-call vote. Commissioner Buza then moved to find the proposal inconsistent; the motion passed 5-2. Commissioners Kona and Steven voted no.

The planning commission’s recommendation is advisory; the case now goes to the Hillsborough County Board of County Commissioners for a final decision. The staff report and agency review materials referenced traffic‑analysis comments and community plan policies cited in the commission’s inconsistency finding.