Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Innovation Park topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press for contamination testing as Hillsborough County considers Energy Innovation Park modification
Summary
At a June 16 Zoning Hearing Master meeting, developers and county staff sought approval of a major modification to the Energy Innovation Park (EIP) plan while multiple nearby residents raised long-running concerns about radioactive contamination, radon and traffic; FDOT submitted conditions and no agency issued a blanket objection.
The Hillsborough County Zoning Hearing Master heard a major modification request for PD 106.92 — the Energy Innovation Park (EIP) — on June 16, with applicants asking to reallocate energy and industrial entitlements between two owners and to allow commercial uses in an approximately 17-acre sub-pocket east of Turkey Creek.
The request matters because the EIP covers nearly 3,000 acres south of State Road 60 and east of Dover Road, and speakers said the park’s history as phosphate-mining property and nearby disposal ponds raise unresolved public-health and traffic questions that should be addressed before new rezoning takes effect.
Applicant attorney Cammie Corbett and engineer Chris McNeil explained the modification would not add square footage or new uses but would reallocate already-approved energy and non‑energy entitlements between Turkey Creek Preserve and University Energy Park and create new sub‑pockets (including C1, G and H1) where industrial, research, manufacturing, warehousing/distribution, and commercial/office uses could locate. Corbett said the teams agreed with revised staff conditions that were handed to the hearing master in advance.
Why it matters: multiple residents urged the hearing master to require comprehensive contamination testing before development proceeds. Renee Madison, a local resident, told the hearing master she and other Fix Hillsborough coalition members have experienced cancer and high radon readings and urged the county to “hit pause on the rezoning of the EIP.” Doug Madison said the former phosphate-mining site is “riddled with discarded radioactive waste” and warned that disturbed tailings can create airborne radioactive dust and radon exposure.
County staff and agencies: Tim Lamkin of Hillsborough County Development Services summarized the request and noted a recent comprehensive plan text amendment (identified in the hearing as Comprehensive Plan amendment 20315 and related privately initiated amendments HCCPA 2315 and HCCPA 2406) had changed the Energy Innovation Park element and now allows allocation of energy land area among multiple owners. Lamkin said staff supports the major modification subject to the revised conditions provided to the clerk and the hearing master. Planning Commission staff likewise recommended consistency with the comprehensive plan, subject to conditions including additional screening adjacent to residential areas.
Transportation and FDOT: James Rallo of County Transportation Development Services described edits to transportation condition language to reflect a feasibility approach for cross‑connectivity and other access matters. Donald Marco, the Florida Department of Transportation district access engineer, testified that FDOT’s earlier objection (in a June 5 memorandum) was removed after the district reviewed a traffic study dated Aug. 2, 2024. Marco said FDOT’s new position is “no objection, but subject to conditions,” including that signalization proposals must meet FDOT signal warrant analysis and an intersection control evaluation and that remaining information on the Turkey Creek Road and State Road 60 intersection must be resolved to address near‑critical volume/capacity ratios.
Applicant response and site contamination: Corbett told the hearing master that the confirmed contamination and EPA‑monitored plume shown on maps presented at the hearing apply principally to the University Energy Park side (the Superfund area) and that Turkey Creek Preserve’s property ownership has no documented evidence of contamination. She said comprehensive‑plan conditions already adopted by the Board of County Commissioners contain site‑specific testing requirements for the University Energy Park side and that site‑specific conditions will be addressed in later phases for that owner.
Public record and next steps: Development Services provided a revised staff report and a transportation agency comment sheet that were entered into the record. No final action was taken by the hearing master at the meeting; the hearing master will file written recommendations with the clerk within 15 working days and those recommendations, plus the record of tonight’s hearing, will be considered by the Board of County Commissioners at a publicly noticed meeting (staff indicated the board’s land‑use meeting is scheduled for Aug. 12, 2025). FDOT’s memorandum and the revised staff conditions were entered into the EIP file at the hearing.
Ending: The hearing master closed the item after oral presentations and public comment. The primary outstanding issues from the hearing that the board will review in its final decision are: (1) whether the proposed reallocation and sub‑pocket map comply with the amended comprehensive plan policies for EIP, (2) FDOT’s conditions related to access and signalization, and (3) whether the record and recommended conditions sufficiently address residents’ concerns about historical contamination and testing requirements.
