SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA  
COUNTY SERVICES BUILDING  
1101 EAST FIRST STREET  
SANFORD, FLORIDA  
32771­1468  
Meeting Minutes  
Wednesday, April 1, 2026  
6:00 PM  
BCC Chambers  
Planning and Zoning Commission  
CALL TO ORDER  
Richard Jerman, Carissa Lawhun, Dan Lopez, Mike Lorenz, Brandy  
Present  
Ioppolo, and Lourdes Aguirre  
Tim Smith  
Absent  
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 Smith  
Absent:  
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 Smith  
Absent:  
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),  
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  
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  
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  
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.  
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 hes  
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.  
Commissioner Jerman, Commissioner Lawhun, Commissioner  
Lopez, Commissioner Ioppolo, and Commissioner Aguirre  
Aye:  
Commissioner Lorenz  
Commissioner Smith  
Nay:  
Absent:  
2.  
Land Development Code Amendment - 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  
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  
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 Smith  
Absent:  
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.  
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  
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 Smith  
Absent:  
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  
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 Smith  
Absent:  
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.