Neighbors clash with developers over Lazy Days PD: warehouses or preserve RV resort

The Hillsborough County land‑use hearing opened a heated debate over MM26‑0340, a major modification and companion comprehensive plan amendments for the Lazy Days RV site near the I‑4/Mango Road interchange. Applicant representatives told the hearing the site could remain an RV resort or be redeveloped for light‑industrial/warehouse uses under an amended land‑use map; Planning Commission staff had unanimously recommended the comprehensive plan amendments, while county staff flagged compatibility questions that would be mitigated by conditions.

Neighbors who live north of Sligh Avenue pressed for more protective buffers and raised concerns about daily truck traffic, lighting, noise and property impacts. Cynthia Godwell, who lives on Buster Bean Drive, told the hearing she had experienced noise, lights and behavior from existing RV guests and said the record of past buffering raised trust issues: “Without that block wall and barrier trees, I have been extremely affected by the decision to install chain‑link fence and slats instead of block wall and barrier trees,” Godwell said, adding, "I'm fighting for my livelihood and my sanity." Residents said an industrial alternative — including buildings in the hundreds of thousands of square feet — would worsen noise, truck movements and night‑time lighting.

Applicant witnesses described changes intended to reduce impacts: higher masonry walls and an eight‑foot masonry screen in some locations, 15‑foot evergreen trees at planting, and site design changes to limit access and truck circulation. Transportation consultants and county engineers described planned turn‑movement controls and medians on Sligh Avenue and Mango Road to manage truck entries and to distribute trips between access points. The project team also emphasized preservation of wetlands and larger on‑site retention ponds as part of the mitigation package.

Planning staff noted two development options on the record: maintaining the RV resort or allowing light‑industrial uses with specific constraints. The Planning Commission had supported the land‑use amendments; Development Services recommended approval subject to conditions that included enhanced masonry walls, tree plantings at specified heights at planting, and restrictions on certain high‑impact uses. Several residents pressed staff and the applicant for guarantees the conceptual screening would be enforced at site development review. County staff said those measures would be enforced at site development and that required screening and planting heights would be a condition of approval.

The Hearing Master closed public testimony on the item; a written recommendation will be filed and the Board of County Commissioners will make the final decision. That review will include whether the proposed conditions sufficiently limit truck circulation, lighting and noise and whether the comp plan amendments should proceed.