Planning Commission finds Energy Industrial Park text amendment consistent, forwards to county commission amid public health concerns

Melissa Linehard, planning commission staff, presented HCCPA 23‑15, a privately initiated text amendment proposing changes to the Energy Industrial Park future land use text for roughly 3,000 acres south of State Road 60. Linehard told commissioners the change would replace the word “northwest” with “north,” delete a limiting phrase referencing “along State Road 60,” and allow some commercial uses to extend east of Turkey Creek out to “beyond 1/2 mile of Turkey Creek.”

The amendment would not change the types of uses already allowed in the Energy Industrial Park category but would shift the boundary where higher‑intensity commercial and industrial uses could locate. Linehard summarized agency review comments, saying the Environmental Protection Commission called out the Sydney Mine sludge ponds Superfund site within the area and that the Hillsborough County Environmental Services Division noted a restrictive covenant and surface‑water and floodplain review requirements. Linehard recommended a finding of consistency with the comprehensive plan.

The applicant’s attorney, Cammy Corbett of Hill Ward Henderson, and project engineer Chris McNeil explained they revised the request to use a fixed half‑mile distance rather than a folio boundary for predictability, and added language allocating required energy production obligations between two property owners. Corbett said the applicants removed an earlier request that would have allowed up to 30% of development to proceed without the energy uses and stated, “We will have energy uses concurrent with [development].”

Public comment focused on safety and cleanup of the former Sydney phosphate mine and its sludge ponds, and on whether the Energy Industrial Park will actually deliver the alternative energy infrastructure originally contemplated. Speakers cited groundwater and radiological concerns, petition campaigns, and requests for additional testing and federal involvement:

- George Niemann (Fix Hillsborough) said citizens found “over 30 inconsistencies” and argued the amendment “is skipping” the energy requirement as originally promised.

- Yvette Niemann said the amendment “still doesn't satisfy the energy plant creation” and warned of traffic, pollution and low‑paying jobs.

- Renee Madison and Josie Gentry referenced communications with EPA and FDEP, and urged additional soil, groundwater and radiological studies; Madison noted an expert letter citing 1,4‑dioxane detections and data gaps beyond the 325‑acre institutional control area.

- Penny Martin and other residents cited petitions, local testing results they said showed elevated lead and arsenic, and argued that the public health and cleanup questions must be resolved before allowing expanded commercial/industrial uses.

Applicant counsel reiterated the Superfund site is 58 acres (less than 2% of the 3,000 acres) and that zoning and PD review would address the site‑specific implements and public review of any proposed facilities.

After discussion, Commissioner Buza moved, Commissioner Kona seconded, and the commission found HCCPA 23‑15 consistent with the Hillsborough County comprehensive plan and forwarded it to the Board of County Commissioners. The motion carried 5–1; the recording states “Commissioner Crest votes nay; the other five voted yes.”

The county commission will consider the amendment next. The transcript and agency comments indicate additional federal and state regulatory approvals and environmental site controls will apply if development proceeds; residents urged more comprehensive testing and federal engagement before any rezoning or site work takes place.