Planning and Zoning Commission

Wednesday, April 1, 2026 6:00 PM SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA COUNTY SERVICES BUILDING 1101 EAST FIRST STREET SANFORD, FLORIDA 32771 1468 BCC Chambers Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes April 1, 2026 Page 1 of 1 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes April 1, 2026 CALL TO ORDER Richard Jerman, Carissa Lawhun, Dan Lopez, Mike Lorenz, Brandy Ioppolo, and Lourdes Aguirre Present Tim SmithAbsent Opening Statement The meeting convened at 6:00 PM with Chairman Carissa Lawhun leading the Pledge of Allegiance. The Chairman then introduced each Board and Staff member present and read the procedure for conducting the meeting and voting. Staff Present Dagmarie Segarra, Deputy Development Services Director; Neysa Borkert, Deputy County Attorney; Jim Potter, P.E., Development Review Engineering Manager; Joy Giles, Planning Manager; Maya Athanas, Principal Planner; Annie Sillaway, Principal Planner; Kaitlyn Apgar, Senior Planner; Hilary Padin, Planner; Tammy Brushwood, P&Z Board Clerk, and Alexis Pelletier, Assistant Clerk. Accept Proof of Publication A motion was made by Vice Chairman Brandy Ioppolo, seconded by Commissioner Mike Lorenz, to approve the Proof of Publication. The motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Commissioner Jerman, Commissioner Lawhun, Commissioner Lopez, Commissioner Lorenz, Commissioner Ioppolo, and Commissioner Aguirre Aye: Commissioner SmithAbsent: Approval of Minutes A motion was made by Vice Chairman Brandy Ioppolo, seconded by Commissioner Lourdes Aguirre, to approve the March 4, 2026 P&Z Minutes, as submitted. The motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Commissioner Jerman, Commissioner Lawhun, Commissioner Lopez, Commissioner Lorenz, Commissioner Ioppolo, and Commissioner Aguirre Aye: Commissioner SmithAbsent: NEW BUSINESS Public Hearing Items: 1. Continued from the March 4, 2026 P&Z meeting Sandy Lane Homes Rezone - Consider a Rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) and R-1AA (Single-Family Dwelling) to MM (Missing Middle) for a proposed single family residential development of twenty-four (24) lots on approximately 7.54 acres located on the west side of Sandy Ln, south of Sand Lake Rd; (Z2025-014) (Giovanni Jordan, Jordan Homes, Applicant) District 3 - Constantine (Kaitlyn Apgar, Senior Planner) Kaitlyn Apgar, Senior Planner, presented this item as stated in the Staff report. She further stated that the property currently has a zoning designation of A-1 (Agriculture), Page 1 of 13 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes April 1, 2026 and R-1AA (Single Family Dwelling). The subject property has a Future Land Use of Low Density Residential. This future land use supports the proposed Missing Middle zoning district. The Low Density Residential Future Land Use allows for a maximum density of four (4) dwelling units per net buildable acre. The applicant is proposing an overall density of 3.88 dwelling units per net buildable acre. The property is currently developed as a single-family home. The applicant proposes to develop the site as a single-family residential subdivision having a maximum of twenty-four (24) single family lots. The applicant is proposing a minimum lot width of fifty-seven (57) feet with a minimum lot size of 6,500 square feet. The site is located in Seminole County’s sewer utility service area and Sunshine Water’s water utility service area. The site will be required to connect to public utilities. An agreement for billing of sewer will be required between the County and Sunshine Water Services during the Final Engineering Plan review and prior to approval of the Utility Agreement for sewer service. The development will have a primary access onto Sandy Lane, which is classified as a local road. A secondary right-in/right-out only access is proposed onto Sandy Lake Road, which is classified as an Urban Major Collector. Sand Lake Road is currently operating at a level-of-service “C to F” depending on the direction of travel and the time of day. Additional improvements to Sand Lake Rd may be required during the Subdivision process. There is an existing sidewalk along the adjacent portions of Sand Lake Road and Sandy Lane, therefore, the Developer will be required to connect to the sidewalk along both property frontages. The Missing Middle (MM) zoning district requires a minimum of eight (8) percent of net buildable acreage to be provided as open space. Landscape buffers are not required based on the intensity of the development . Open space and buffer criteria will be evaluated further during the Final Engineering stage . Seminole County Public Schools provided a School Impact Analysis for the proposed project. The analysis concluded that the students generated by the project would be able to be accommodated without exceeding the adopted level of service (LOS) at this time. Potential constraints and obstacles of development such as grading, site elevation, and level of service of Sand Lake Road may present challenges; however, in Staff’s analysis these considerations do not preclude the site’s compatibility with the overall intent of the MM zoning district. The Development Plan is subject to change and further review of required criteria will be during the Subdivision process. The development will be required to meet standards per the Land Development Code . As a summary, the applicant is providing one typology in a residential tract to be no larger than five (5) acres. The project will not be gated. The provided Conceptual Development Plan proposes a minimum of eight (8) percent of net buildable acres as open space, and will provide pedestrian connectivity to open spaces and existing sidewalks. The internal right of way is designed to establish connectivity from Sand Lake Road to Sandy Lane. The overall design of the development is consistent with the intent of promoting connectivity and accessibility to adjacent streets and roadways. While stub outs were not provided for the two (2) vacant lots to the northeast, access to those parcels are not inhibited by this development. One vacant lot retains frontage on Sand Lake Road, while the other retains frontage on both Sand Lake Road and Sandy Lane. The overall development still meets the intent of the MM zoning district via implementation of the “block” design through connectivity to Sand Lake Road and Sandy Lane. The applicant is aware of the two-story limitation and is only proposing one typology in this development. Additional site and building requirements will be evaluated during the Final Engineering stage. The applicant has demonstrated Page 2 of 13 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes April 1, 2026 compliance with the open space requirements and has made a note on the Conceptual Plan that references the provisions for street trees. Specific site details will be evaluated during the Final Engineering stage, inclusive of minimum parking requirements and building frontage. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan is achieved through the Comprehensive Plan policies. The proposed MM zoning is consistent with Policy FLU 4.2.1 by reducing lot sizes to allow for more compact site plans while adhering to the overall density in the area, adhering to the street tree requirements, and providing for a complementary Missing Middle typology with the existing neighborhoods. The request meets the trend of single family dwelling unit development in the surrounding neighborhoods while maximizing usable density within the allowable limit. The subject site is approximately 1,900 feet as the crow flies from the nearest boundary of the Urban Centers and Corridors Overlay. The proposed rezone supports encouraging a wider range of housing choices in and around the Centers and Corridors Overlay, which meets the intent of Policy FLU 4.2.1.(A). The proposed MM zoning classification acts as a transition in zoning for the surrounding trend of development in the area by staying consistent with both the permitted uses and density provisions of the Low Density Residential Future Land Use. This also allows for more dwelling units to be achieved through flexible site standards. The proposed development is located within the Aquifer Recharge Overlay and a note has been made on the Development Plan stating compliance with the maximum impervious surface ratio of 60 percent in compliance with FLU Policy 2.3.12 (b) (3). Staff finds the proposed MM zoning classification to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In compliance with SCLDC Sec. 30.49 - Community Meeting Procedure, the Applicant conducted a community meeting on September 23, 2025 with details of the community meeting provided in the agenda package. Staff requests the Planning and Zoning Commission approve and refer the Sandy Lane Rezone to the Board of County Commissioners. Commissioner Richard Jerman stated that based on Staff’s report, the residential development proposed is for 24 lots and it is 3.88 dwelling units per acre, but the property is in Low Density Residential, which provides up to 4.0, which would be 30 units. He further stated that what is before the Board is just the Rezoning, and not the Site Plan, which is part of the agenda package. The applicant could request the full 30 units if they choose to come back, because we’re not approving the Site Plan, and asked if that is true. Kaitlyn Apgar, Senior Planner, responded that we calculate our density based on net buildable acreage and there is a transmission line easement running through the property, which is not included in the net buildable acreage. She stated that is why the applicant cannot achieve the 30 dwelling units. Chairman Carissa Lawhun asked if only single family homes will be built on the property, and why wouldn’t one of the other residential zoning categories be more appropriate. Ms. Apgar deferred to the applicant to answer why they chose this particular zoning district. Chairman Lawhun asked if it is correct that the Missing Middle is a newer zoning designation and it could allow flexibility with the type of housing, whereas another Page 3 of 13 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes April 1, 2026 zoning category would not, which Ms. Apgar responded that was correct. Brent Spain, with Theriaque and Spain, for the applicant, Jordan Homes, stated that they support Staff’s recommendation for approval. Commissioner Richard Jerman asked Mr. Spain if they concur with Staff that they are limited to 3.88 dwelling units per acre with only getting 24 units on this site. Mr. Spain responded that he does concur and the submitted Development Plan reflects 24 single family detached lots. Vice Chairman Brandy Ioppolo asked Mr. Spain if the intent is to rent or to sell the proposed 24 houses that are single family, detached, and fee simple ownership. Mr. Spain responded that the intent is to sell them, which was indicated at the community meeting. Commissioner Lawhun asked why a different residential zoning category wasn’t chosen for this proposed development. Mr. Spain responded that the Future Land Use is LDR, with a maximum of 4.0 dwelling units per acre and when the application was submitted the other zoning districts would not allow them to get close to the 4.0 dwelling units per acre, and even Missing Middle can’t get to 4.0 dwelling units per acre to meet the Code requirements. He further stated that given its location at an intersection, from a Planning perspective you want to step-down and transition uses, and with the surrounding sites, it is a good transition. Commissioner Jerman stated that lot size is a big deal according to the audience comments as everybody wants 75-90’ lots. He said you can still change the lot size downward, even though compliance to the density is required, they can still do a lot of things with the site units. He further stated that this is what he doesn’t like with this zoning phase, because the Board isn’t approving the Master Plan or the Site Plan. He asked Mr. Spain if he would stipulate to the 60’ and the 57’ lots as designed and that they will not be less than that. Mr. Spain responded yes, he is authorized to stipulate with respect to the site data on the Development Plan, one of which is that the lots are 60’ wide, except for the five (5) lots that are slightly over 57’ wide as reflected, and that will not change. Chairman Lawhun asked if he would also stipulate that it would only be single family homes. Mr. Spain stated that their submittal is for 24 single family detached residential homes. Public Comment in Opposition to this request: 1. Nick Muscato, of Longwood, FL 2. Ashley Diaz, of Deltona, FL 3. Steve Litt, of Longwood, FL 4. Pam Tapley, of Longwood, FL 5. Donnie Anderson, Longwood, FL Page 4 of 13 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes April 1, 2026 6. Michael Heidmann, Longwood, FL Neysa Borkert, Deputy County Attorney, interjected that this applicant is not asking for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Whatever they do on the property is limited to 4.0 dwelling units per acre, and they will not be able to go above it with a maximum number of 24 units, not including the site constraints with the power line easements. They cannot go above 30 units, because that is what the Comp Plan limits, which is 4.0 dwelling units per acre. Public Comment in Opposition to this request continued: 7. Andrew Zito, President of the Sandy Lane Homeowner’s Association of Longwood 8. Laurie Bartlett, of Altamonte Springs, FL 9. Jeff Perlman, of Longwood, FL 10. Lee Wooldridge, of Longwood, FL 11. Kiel Ecimovic, of Longwood, FL Forty-one (41) written comments in Opposition to this request were also received. Mr. Spain, in his rebuttal, stated the following: · They are not changing the density, as the Deputy County Attorney stated. · They will be required to connect this project to the existing sidewalk network in the area, so safety is being planned for pedestrians. · The primary entrance and exit for this project is on Shady Lane. The entrance off of Sand Lake Road is limited to a right-in/right-out, with additional traffic improvements, which may be required at the Subdivision process; such as the installation of a median on Sand Lake Road prohibiting a left turn into the proposed subdivision. The traffic concerns have been addressed. · This project is not a Live Local Act project. Live Local Act is affordable, multi-family housing, which is not proposed for this site. · This is single family next to single family homes, and they have stipulated on the record, that these will be single family detached units limited to 24 units, driven by the density, which is 4.0 units to the net buildable acreage, so has been ratcheted down. · Missing Middle is specifically tied to the density allowed in the underlying Future Land Use district, so again this is an LDR site, which is limited to 4.0 dwelling units per acre. · He reviewed the community meeting minutes and there is no website for this site, only for his client’s development business. · If a traffic study is required by the County, they will do one. However, a project of this size is not required because the trip generation at peak hours are not high enough. · They have met the standards of the Land Development Code and Staff has recommended approval of this request. · He asks the Board approval of this request, subject to or contingent on the stipulations of the project being 24 units, single family detached dwelling units. Page 5 of 13 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes April 1, 2026 Chairman Carissa Lawhun asked Staff how many other properties off of Sand Lake Road could request a Missing Middle zoning. Ms. Apgar responded that we do not have any active applications for Missing Middle off of Sand Lake Road at this time, but she cannot speak to the trend. Dagmarie Segarra, Deputy Development Services Director, stated that it is hard to respond to that question, and stated that it depends on the type of application we receive. The proposed Rezone is appropriate for the size at this location and for which Missing Middle was created, for infill purposes. Vice Chairman Brandy Ioppolo stated that she has concerns with traffic and safety. She also has concerns about starting a precedence and not sure this is the right location for this project. She is pro-development, but she thinks this project will reduce neighboring property owner’s tax values, which will be reflected in the County’s budget. She is also a proponent of Missing Middle, but again not sure this is the right location for this project. A motion was made by Vice Chairman Brandy Ioppolo to deny and refer the Sandy Lane Homes Rezone to the Board of County Commissioners. No second was received. Board discussion continued. Commissioner Lourdes Aguirre stated that she agrees with the sentiment and concerns, however she has a problem denying the request, since it meets the requirements of the Code. Vice Chairman Ioppolo responded that she feels that the County needs to do a little more homework when it comes to traffic, utilities, and overcrowding schools. Maybe it’s good now, but in the future what will it look like. For that reason, she recommends denial of this request. Commissioner Richard Jerman stated that he is not in favor or in opposition to the request. However, he stated that Sand Lake Road is the County’s fault. This is a seven (7) acre project, the last one in the door, and the project gets “beat-up” for the existing traffic problem. The applicant also has a property right too, and it’s not their fault that Sand Lake Road is a mess. He doesn’t know if they can hold a 24 lot subdivision responsible. Vice Chairman Ioppolo stated that she doesn’t want to make matters worse for this area. Commissioner Dan Lopez stated that he will second the motion, mainly because he’s not sure the zoning needs to be changed to Missing Middle. He thinks a similar project can be built there under a different residential zoning. A motion was made by Vice Chairman Brandy Ioppolo, seconded by Commissioner Dan Lopez to deny and refer the Sandy Lane Homes Rezone to the Board of County Commissioners. The motion passed 5-1, with Commissioner Mike Lorenz in opposition. Page 6 of 13 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes April 1, 2026 Commissioner Jerman, Commissioner Lawhun, Commissioner Lopez, Commissioner Ioppolo, and Commissioner Aguirre Aye: Commissioner LorenzNay: Commissioner SmithAbsent: 2. Land Development Code Amendment - Continued from the April 1, 2026 P&Z Meeting - Consider an Ordinance amending Chapter 2- Definitions, Chapter 5- Administration, Chapter 20- Development Orders/Approvals and Denials of Application for Development Approvals, Chapter 30- Zoning Regulations, Chapter 35- Subdivision Regulations, Chapter 70- Dredge and Filling, and Chapter 90- Uniform Building Numbering System of the Seminole County Land Development Code; Countywide (Maya Athanas, Principal Planner) Maya Athanas, Principal Planner, began presenting this item as stated in the Staff report. Commissioner Richard Jerman interjected by stating that he doesn’t know how much respect, as a Planning Department, they have for this Board, since he received the agenda approximately eight days ago, and he is supposed to make sense and recommendations in that period of time. He further stated that the Advisory Committee has been working on it for a month and the BCC has also seen the changes multiple times, but P&Z has only seen it once. He will listen to the presentation, but he’ll probably vote no, because he doesn’t know what he’s voting on. He needs more time to digest this and he thinks they are forcing something on this Board and also thinks they are abusing them, as they just want to pass it through, so they can move the item to the Board of County Commissioners. He doesn’t like it and he doesn’t think a fair opportunity was provided to this Board to respond to these 200+ pages. He would like to table the item, to have another month, and discuss it at that time. Neysa Borkert, Deputy County Attorney, commented that the Board can continue this to the next meeting, and not hear Staff’s presentation now, or the Board can hear Staff’s presentation, allow for any public comment, and then continue the item to the next meeting, where the Board can further this discussion at the next meeting. Commissioner Jerman stated that he is okay with hearing Staff’s presentation tonight, whereby he withheld his motion to Continue the item for now. Maya Athanas, Principal Planner, stated that the summary of changes was included in the agenda package, which is a really helpful document that the Board should take a look at since it is a good summary of the changes being proposed. Ms. Athanas continued with her presentation asking for the Board to feel free to jump in with questions. Neysa Borkert, Deputy County Attorney, stated that the passage of Senate Bill 180 added a restriction to local governments that lasts until 2027, which states that if local governments have been affected by a hurricane, which panned out to be everybody in the State, cannot adopt more restrictive or burdensome Land Development Code Page 7 of 13 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes April 1, 2026 requirements, Comprehensive Plan requirements, or Administrative Processes. That happened during the last legislative session, which affected the County’s ability to do some of the updates that we may have previously discussed. They made a determination that this request is not more restrictive or burdensome to applicants coming in. This request is mainly updating, clarifying, adding definitions, updating statutory requirements or aligning our requirements more with what the statutory provisions state. We have been very cognizant of the Bill and our opinion is that we will not be in violation of Senate Bill 180. Staff requests the proposed Land Development Code Amendments be approved and referred to the Board of County Commissioners for approval. Vice Chairman Brandy Ioppolo asked why accessory dwelling units has the removal of the owner occupied requirements, which would mean accessory dwelling units can now be in non-owner occupied residents. Ms. Athanas responded that requirement is not being proposed to be removed and not in the Ordinance. Ms. Borkert stated that was a discussion in one of their workshops, and the consensus was not to remove it. Commissioner Mike Lorenz stated that on the Middle Missing, there’s a couple of spots that says no portion of the projects can be gated and asked what the reason is behind that. Ms. Athanas responded that it is existing language and we are not proposing to change it. She believes the purpose of that is because Missing Middle is supposed to be infill and provide walkable communities integrated into the rest of the community. We typically don’t see gated communities in that circumstance. They are not proposing any changes to that part of the language. Ms. Borkert stated that this Board is reviewing for Comp Plan consistency or any issues they may see with it. Any comments or things you’d like to see different, you can put that on the record and we can relay them to the Board of County Commissioners when it goes before them. Public comment in Support of this request: 1) Bob Turnage, of Longwood, FL Public comment in Opposition to this request: 1) Allison Yurko, of Winter Park, FL 2) Ryan Wexburg, of Longwood, FL Written public comment received on this requesting: 1) Dave Axel, of Oviedo, FL, with concerns about no allowed gating in Missing Middle districts and Alternative Standards. Page 8 of 13 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes April 1, 2026 Ms. Athanas stated that we are not proposing any changes to setbacks for fences . Sight visibility restrictions for right-of-way intersections also remain in place. There will be no density changes to R-3 and R-3A, it is just misplaced and probably should not be in the Code. A motion was made by Commissioner Richard Jerman, seconded by Commissioner Lourdes Aguirre to Continue the Land Development Code Amendments to the May 6, 2026 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Commissioner Jerman, Commissioner Lawhun, Commissioner Lopez, Commissioner Lorenz, Commissioner Ioppolo, and Commissioner Aguirre Aye: Commissioner SmithAbsent: 3. LifePoint Christian Church Special Exception - Consider a Special Exception to allow an existing church to expand in the A-1 (Agriculture) zoning district on 2.44 acres, located on the northwest corner of EE Williamson Rd and Myrtle Lake Hills Rd; (BS2025-10); (Richard Dixon, Applicant); District4 - Lockhart; (Hilary Padin, Planner) Hilary Padin, Planner, presented this item as stated in the Staff report. She further stated that the Applicant is requesting approval of a Special Exception to expand their existing civic assembly use. The existing church structure is approximately 7,000 square feet in size with a seating capacity of 200 seats. The property also includes a 1,952 square-foot single family residence that’s utilized for church office use. The Applicant proposes to construct a new 6,400 square foot building with a seating capacity of 250 seats to utilize for worship service, and the original structure will be utilized for children’s ministry activities during the worship service. The facility operates primarily on Sundays from 8:00 am to 2:00 pm and the church’s office hours are Monday through Thursday from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. The parking requirement for this assembly use is 63 parking spaces. The improvements to the site will provide 65 parking spaces meeting that requirement under the Seminole County Land Development Code. The site must also meet all regulations under the Land Development Code, such as setbacks, buffering and site lighting. In compliance with Seminole County Land Development Code Sec. 30.3.5 - Community meeting procedures, the Applicant conducted a community meeting on February 9, 2026. Details of the community meeting have been provided in the agenda package. Section 30.3.1.5(a) of the Seminole County Land Development Code states that certain criteria must be met for the Board of County Commissioners to approve a Special Exception request. Staff finds that the request meets the criteria with the recommended conditions as stated in the Approval Development Order. In addition to the typical conditions of approval for special exceptions, staff is recommending that there be no outdoor sound amplification without a noise permit from the County. Staff has received 9 letters of opposition, one of which is a petition with 47 names listed, and three (3) letters of support, which have been provided to the Board for their consideration . We received letters from those who provided their addresses within close proximity to the church, which are reflected on the support and opposition map provided. Staff requests approval of the LifePoint Christian Church Special Exception. Page 9 of 13 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes April 1, 2026 Phil Ayres, the applicant, stated that he is the pastor at LifePoint Christian Church. They are requesting a modest expansion of their existing church facility. They believe this request is reasonable in scope, compatibility with the surrounding area, and consistent with their long standing presence in the community. Their proposal is to construct a 6,400 square foot sanctuary, which will be primarily used for Sunday worship services. The new space will provide seating for 250 people, which replaces their current worship space, which seats 200. The new sanctuary will include a foyer, restrooms, a small video room, a small storage room, and a room for nursing mothers. There are no classrooms included in this new structure. Their existing facility is just over 7,000 square feet. This is a practical step to accommodate their current congregation. This is not an expansion of a school, it’s a modest expansion of Sunday worship space. They do not operate a traditional private school. They have a home school program which offers classes for a few hours on Tuesday and Thursday to families who already home school their children. That program is not being expanded as part of this proposal. This project does not increase weekday intensity, which is why it was determined at the Pre-Application review that a traffic study was not required. They understand the concerns about increased traffic, considering the nearby elementary school and the challenges at the intersection of EE Williamson and Myrtle Lake Hills Road. That matters to them as well. As the pastor of LifePoint Church and a resident of the Shadow Hill neighborhood, he personally experiences the same concerns. The project does not introduce weekday demand beyond what already exists today. They’ve been around since 2002 and started at Altermese Bentley Elementary School in Sanford. They moved to a local theatre, the YMCA, and then in 2013 after a decade of ministry, they purchased their current property. Over the past few years, they’ve seen steady, healthy growth among young families, which led them to plan for additional Sunday worship space through a capital campaign they call Next. Their goal is to serve the next generation well. They are committed to being a good neighbor to the community around them. They regularly open their facility to serve others in the community and host additional church congregations on the weekend. They provide space for local HOA meetings in the evenings. They support groups like Scouts. They also have been a polling location since 2002. Their request is for a modest expansion for Sunday worship, with no increase to weekday intensity and no change to the character of the surrounding area. Commissioner Richard Jerman asked about the new sanctuary on the Site Plan of 6,000+ square feet and their existing building of 7,000 square feet, which is not a small expansion. He asked how the existing building will be used. Pastor Ayres responded that the existing building will be used for family and children’s ministries on Sunday. Public Comment in Support of this request: 1) Matt Clark, of Sanford, FL 2) Cheryl Barnes, of Longwood, FL 3) Brian Barnes, of Longwood, FL 4) James Graumlich, of Lake Mary, FL 5) Alan Thixton, of Lake Mary, FL 6) Jennifer Kroll, of Longwood, FL Page 10 of 13 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes April 1, 2026 Public Comment in Opposition of this request: 1) Ronald Stein, of Longwood, FL 2) Jeff Kissinger, of Longwood, FL 3) Amanda Kissinger, of Longwood, FL 4) Richard Hoffman, of Longwood, FL Rick Dixon, for the applicant, of New Smyrna Beach, Florida, and the Engineer for the project, stated that at this point no significant engineering activities have taken place . They’ve placed the components of the Site Plan on a Conceptual Site Plan just to see what would fit. There are many steps to go through including the storm water and to meet the St. Johns Water Management District’s requirements. The configuration of the site may change, due to the County’s comment that the pond may be better suited closer to EE Williamson. Those items will be taken care of and will meet all of the requirements of the County, the water management district, and they will not shed any water onto the adjacent properties. Phil Ayres, the applicant, stated that they held a meeting on February 9 for approximately a couple hundred people. Parking is planned to be crushed shell parking and not paved. There may be a misunderstanding about the school, as it says K-12, but it only goes to 12th grade for piano lessons and the golf program. The rest of the school is K-8 for core science on Tuesday and Thursday. They want to serve home schooled families with only a two day a week program. They don’t feel this creates an issue with traffic. Vice Chairman Brandy Ioppolo asked the applicant that if this is a home school type of education, then why are you having face to face meetings on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Mr. Ayres responded that it is home school direction with supplemental classes in certain core subjects, like science, social studies, and bible. Parents who are home schooling their kids can bring the kids for supplemental instruction for those particular subjects, but they don’t take attendance, don’t provide grades, all they do is help parents home school their children with a few additional courses. Commissioner Lourdes Aguirre commented that unless you understand ministry, this will be difficult to understand. If the church and ministry are growing, people will come to the church with or without this building. A motion was made by Commissioner Lourdes Aguirre, seconded by Vice Chairman Brandy Ioppolo to approve and refer LifePoint Christian Church Special Exception to the Board of County Commissioners. The motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Commissioner Jerman, Commissioner Lawhun, Commissioner Lopez, Commissioner Lorenz, Commissioner Ioppolo, and Commissioner Aguirre Aye: Commissioner SmithAbsent: 4. Rosenwald Community Center Rezone - Consider a Rezone from R-1 (Single-Family Dwelling) and R-2 (One-and Two- Family Dwelling) to PLI (Public Lands and Page 11 of 13 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes April 1, 2026 Institutions) for a Public Park and Community Center on approximately 12.96 acres, located on the north side of Merritt St, approximately 0.25 miles east of Ronald Reagan Blvd; (Z2025-024) (Seminole County & DRMP, Inc., Applicants) District4 - Lockhart (Annie Sillaway, Principal Planner) Annie Sillaway, Principal Planner, presented this item as stated in the Staff report. She further stated that this rezone is to allow for the development of a public park and community center. The subject property has a Public/Quasi-Public Future Land Use designation, which permits a maximum Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) of 0.65. This designation is intended to identify locations suitable for a range of public and quasi-public uses, including, but not limited to, public and private recreation facilities, educational institutions, and libraries. The subject site is approximately a little over 12 acres, which was previously occupied by the historic Rosenwald School in the East Altamonte community. Seminole County acquired the property in 2019 for the purpose of redeveloping the site into a functional community asset offering a public park with pavilions, a fishing pier, and a 6,000 square foot community center for cultural events, community services, and youth activities. The current residential zoning classifications do not support the proposed use, necessitating the rezone. The PLI Zoning is intended to include major public lands and quasi-public institutional uses. This classification may only be applied to lands that are owned or controlled by the public. Staff finds the requested PLI zoning classification to be consistent with the SCLDC, the existing Future Land Use of Public/Quasi-Public and permits the proposed use of a public park and community center, which will provide a direct benefit to the community by offering accessible services and programs. Staff received one email in favor of the rezone, which was provided to the Board. Staff requests approval of the Rosenwald Community Center Rezone. The applicant is Seminole County. Public Comment in Support of this request: 1) Anthony Wilson, of Altamonte Springs, FL 2) Irving Simpson, 2091 S. Ronald Reagan Boulevard, President of East Altamonte Community Association A motion was made by Vice Chairman Brandy Ioppolo, seconded by Commissioner Mike Lorenz to approve and refer the Rosenwald Community Center Rezone to the Board of County Commissioners. The motion carried unanimously, 6-0. A motion was made by Vice Chairman Brandy Ioppolo, seconded by Commissioner Mike Lorenz to approve and refer the Rosenwald Community Center Rezone to the Board of County Commissioners. The motion carried unanimously, 6-0. Commissioner Jerman, Commissioner Lawhun, Commissioner Lopez, Commissioner Lorenz, Commissioner Ioppolo, and Commissioner Aguirre Aye: Commissioner SmithAbsent: Page 12 of 13 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes April 1, 2026 CLOSING BUSINESS Development Services Director's Report Dagmarie Segarra, Deputy Development Services Director, stated that new legislation has been completed, which Neysa Borkert will provide more information on the potential impacts to our Code and processes. She asked the Board to reach out to her or Maya Athanas as they review the Land Development Code Amendments if any questions or concerns arise. She asked the Board if they would like another presentation of the one presented tonight or would they like a quick summary with discussion any questions. The Chairman, Carissa Lawhun, responded that a quick summary would allow them to present any questions they may have. Deputy County Manager Update Neysa Borkert, Deputy County Attorney, stated that although she doesn’t have a comprehensive update tonight, recent legislation passed, some did not, and some are still pending to see if the Governor signs it. She should have a synopsis at the next meeting of the Bills that passed which concern the County. If there are any Code changes needed, we will advise the Board. There will be some compatibility changes needed and how we are required to look at compatibility related to residential next to residential. House Bill 399 requires the County to do certain things related to compatibility for residential uses, and that Bill is in effect now, which she is working on for a full analysis of the impacts. She will bring back to the Board at the next meeting. She is available to answer questions the Board may have on the Land Development Code Amendments as well. We want to be prepared at the meeting to give you the answers that you need. The Board stated that there was no need to re-print the LDC materials for the next meeting. ADJOURNMENT Having no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:40 PM. Page 13 of 13