This is the April 1st 1st, 2026 Seminal County Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. >> To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God,
indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay, this board is a seven member board appointed by the county board of county commissioners. A quorum has been established to hold tonight's meeting. Public hearing items acted upon by this board are referred to the board of
county commissioners for further consideration. Board members present tonight are uh myself, Chairman Carissa Lawan, Vice Chairman Brandy Ayapollo, Commissioner Dan Lopez, Commissioner Lordes Aguary,
Commissioner Richard German, and Commissioner Mike Loren. Staff present tonight are Dagmarie Cigara, deputy development services director, Nissa Borker, Deputy County Attorney, Jim Potter, development review engineering
manager, Joy Giles, Planning and Development Manager, Maya Athonis, principal planner, Annie Silhouay, principal planner. Caitlyn Abgar, senior planner, Hillary Peyton, planner. Tammy
Brushwood, PNZ board clerk, and Alexis uh Pelletier, assistant clerk. Tonight's meeting will go as follows. Staff will introduce each item. The applicant will then present their item. Audience members wishing to speak will
then be heard. Audience participation requires that each speaker complete a comment card and give it to the clerk. Comment cards are located out in the lobby. Please check the box if you'd like to make oral comments. Written comments are also welcome. Speakers
should restrict their comments to information directly related to the item being heard. When called, speakers should approach the microphone and clearly state their name and address for the record. The board may ask questions of the speaker. After all speakers have been heard, public comment will be
closed. The applicant will be given a chance for rebuttal. Any items shown, such as videos, presentations, pictures, or maps, must be left with the clerk for the public record. Items shown from electronic devices should be emailed to the clerk. A motion will be made and
then seconded. Board discussion may occur and conclude with a vote. I will request a roll call vote for any split votes. Now, we'll start with our agenda items. Um, we'll start initially with the
acceptance and approval of the proof of publication. Do I have a motion? >> Motion. >> Second. >> Okay. All in favor? I >> opposed. >> Okay. The proof of publication is approved. Next, we'll move on to the minutes from our March 4th, 2026 PNV
meeting. Does the board have any changes or do I have a motion? >> I'll make a motion. >> A second. Okay. All in favor? >> I opposed. The minutes are approved. Um, next we'll move to our public hearing items and begin with item number one,
which was continued from the last meeting. Sandy Lane Homes reszone. Caitlyn Abgar presenting. >> Good evening. Caitlyn Abgar, Planning and Development Services. The applicant is requesting the approval from for a reszone from A1 agriculture
and R1A single family dwelling to MM missing middle for a proposed single family residential development of 24 lots on approximately 7.54 acres located on the west side of Sandy Lane south of Sand
Lake Road. The property currently has a zoning designation of A1 agriculture and R1A single family dwelling district. The subject property has a future land use of lowdensity residential. The future land use supports the proposed missing
middle zoning district. The low density future land use allows for a maximum density of four 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 24 single family lots. The applicant is proposing a minimum lot width of 57 ft and a minimum lot size of 6,500 square
ft. The site is located in Semino County sewer utility service area and Sunshine Waters 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 sew 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 Sand Lake Road which is classified as an urban major collector. Sand Lake Road is currently operated operating at a level of service C to F depending on the direction of travel and time of day. Additional improvements to Sand Lake Road 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 zoning district requires a minimum of 8% net buildable
acreage to be 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. Seminal 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 at this time. Potential constraints and obstacles of the development such as grading, site
elevation, and level of service of Sand Lake Road may present challenges. However, and staff's analysis consider these considerations do not preclude the site's compatibility with the overall intent of the missing middle zoning district. The development plan is subject to change and further review of
required criteria during the subdivision process. The development will be required to meet standards per the land development code as outlined in the following slides. As a summary, the applicant is providing one typology in a residential tract no
bigger than five acres. The project is not gated. The provided conceptual development plan proposes a minimum of 8% of net buildable acre as open acres as open space and will provide pedestrian connectivity to open spaces and existing sidewalks. The internal
right ofway 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 stubouts were not provided to the two 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 and Sandy Lane. The overall development still meets the intent of the missing middle zoning district via the 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. For reference, I've included the specific criteria from the code on the slides above. The applicant has demonstrated compliance with the open space requirements and has made a note on the conceptual plan that references the provision of street trees. Specific site details will be evaluated
during final engineering inclusive of min minimum parking requirements and building frontage. Consistency with the comprehensive plan is achieved through the comprehensive plan policies projected on the slides above. 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 street tree requirements and providing for a complimentary 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 ft as the crow flies from the nearest boundary of the urban
centers and corridor overlay. The proposed reszone supports encouraging a wider range of housing choices in and around the centers and corridor overlay which meets the intent of polic sorry policy flu 4.2.1. 2.1A.
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 lowdensity 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% in compliance with flu policy 2.3.12b.
Staff finds the proposed missing middle zoning classification to be consistent with the comprehensive plan in compliance with seminal county land development code section 30.49 49 community meeting procedure. The applicant conducted a community meeting
on September 23rd, 2025. Details of the community meeting have been provided in the agenda package. Staff requests the planning and zoning commission recommend the board of county commissioners adopt the ordinance enacting a reszone from A1 agriculture and R1A
single family dwelling to MM missing middle as per the following motion. Based on staff's finding findings and the testimony and evidence received at the hearing, the planning and zoning commission finds the request consistent with the comprehensive plan and meets applicable portion of land development code and recommends the board of county
commissioners adopt the ordinance enacting a reszone from A1 agriculture and R1A single family dwelling to MM missing middle on approximately 7.54 acres located on the west side of Sandy Lane south of Sand Lake Road. That concludes my presentation. I'll stand by for any questions.
>> Thank you. Questions of staff? I do. I I I just want to see if I'm being misled here. Okay. You state in your staff report that it's for a residential development of 24 lots. >> Yes, sir. >> And you further state down there that
it's 3.88 dwelling units per acre, but it's it's in LDR, so it's allowed to go four, which would be 30 units. Now, what we're approving is just the resoning. We're not approving that site plan that's in part of this package. So,
we're really not getting 20. We could get any we could get the full 30 units if he chooses to come back because we're not approving this site plan. Is that not true? >> Um, so we calculate our density based on net buildable acreage. Um, there is a transmission line easement running through the property which is not included in net buildable acreage.
That's why he couldn't achieve the 30 dwelling units. >> Okay, that was a good Thank you. >> Of course. >> Any other questions of staff? >> I do. Um, Caitlyn, why would if if all that is going to be built here are single family
homes, why would one of the other residential zoning categories not have been appropriate? >> The missing middle. Um, so it may be better for the applicant to answer why they chose the zoning district that they
did. Um I will say that the missing middle zoning district doesn't have specific lot size or width dimensions when um choosing the single family um lot u typology. >> Missing middle is a relatively newer
designation. Is that correct? >> That's correct. >> Okay. And it also allows maybe some flexibility in the future with regard to the type of housing that can be built within it as whereas maybe another residential zoning category wouldn't. Is
that correct? >> That's correct. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> All right. Is the applicant present? Good evening, chair, fellow commissioners. Brent Spain, Theak in Spain, 1809 Edgewater Drive, Orlando, Florida, 32804
on behalf of the applicant, Jordan Holmes. And we obviously support the staff's recommendation of approval that the proposed resoning is consistent with the county's uh land use plan. As some of you may know, I've come to hearings
out here many, many times, and I had complimented Miss Abcar prior to the hearing on the thoroughess of her staff report. Um, typically when you're in my position as a land use attorney, whether you're for or against a project, you review the staff report and I'm my job
is to go through the land development code and the comp plan and look for policies or provisions that may have been missed. And frankly, this is the first time in a in a long time that I can remember where I did not see a single thing that was in my notes that
actually was not in Miss Apar's staff report. So, I uh applaud that and you all as a planning board should be proud of the level of detail staff is doing. Again, I'm happy to answer any questions. I uh madam chair request an opportunity for
rebuttal after public comment. I know there's a fair number of people here this evening to speak on this project. >> I have a question. >> Uh Brett, do you concur that what staff made the statement that you're limited at 3.88 dwelling units per acre and you
can only get 24 units on this site? Do you concur with that? >> I do, Mr. Turman. Um, in fact, when I was initially hired on this project, probably over a year ago, that was one of the issues that was evaluated with
the staff and whether it was 30 units, 27, or had to be 24. And the the end result was it had to be 24. And that's what the development plan is that has been submitted. Uh, reflects 24 single
family detached lots. I have a question. Is the intent to rent or to sell these properties, these houses, the 24 houses? >> Yeah, the intents to sell them. That was indicated at the community meeting. In fact, there was the from the minutes of
the community meeting. You'll see that the developer, my client, had indicated what they thought the estimated price point would be for these houses during that community meeting. But yes, there's single family, detached, fe simple ownership. >> Mr. Spain, can you address the question
that I asked of staff why a different residential zoning category wasn't chosen for this? >> Yeah, I I would say well, as a land use attorney of 25 plus years, I'll provide this response is that the as you staff
indicated, the future land use is LDR, so a maximum of four dwelling units per acre. And my assumption when the application went in is that the other zoning districts will not allow you to even remotely get closer to that four dwelling units per acre as was just
confirmed with uh Commissioner German even missing middle can't get to four dwelling units per acre and meet the code requirements. So given its location and an intersection and the staff report touched upon it from a planning perspective you want to step down and
transition your uses. So on one side you have 75 foot lots, on the south side you have over 100 foot lots and then you have this where if you actually look at the plan, I know Miss Abcar indicated a minimum of 57 foot wide lots, but actually all but five lots on the
development plan are 60 foot wide lots. And I can tell you in my experience, placing a 60 foot wide lot next to a 75 foot lot next to an 80 or 100 foot lot does not present any compatibility issues from a land use perspective. In fact, it's a good transition down to the
intersection of Sand Lake and Sandy Lane. >> Are there other questions of the applicant? >> Uh, I have one more. Uh, Brandon, reading through the public comments, um, obviously lot size was a big deal. Everybody wants 75s, 90s, whatever it
may be. Um, you could still change the lot size here downward even though you may be held to a density. Well, we're not approving this. That's what I always hate about these zoning. We're not approving this master plan or this site plan. So, you
could do a lot of things with it. Will you stipulate to that to the 60oot and the 57 foot lots designed on here that you won't be less than that? >> Yeah, I'm authorized to stipulate with respect to the site data that's on that development plan. One of which is that
the lots are 60 feet wide except for the five lots that are slightly over 57 feet wide. >> Okay. And that so that won't change. >> No sir. >> All right. Thank you. >> And would you stipulate to that it would only be single family homes requested
here in the future and it would and the typography of the housing wouldn't change. >> Yeah. I mean I think when you look at the missing middle even the chart and the uses some of the concerns that came up at the community meeting those those would not be allowed in the low density
residential feature lane use category with missing middle zoning. I know when you look at missing middle you think uh there there can be town homes and this and that and once you go to the actual use chart in missing middle for example town homes and the like have uh
limitations on them but our submitt is for 24 single family detached homes so we would stipulate to that >> any other questions of the applicant. Okay, seeing none we'll move to public comment. Um,
>> thank you. >> I do have some comment cards here. I'm also passing around um comments from those who have indicated they don't wish to speak tonight. Um, Nick Mscato,
please come up and uh state your name and address for the record. >> Okay. Um, my name is Nick Mscato. Live at 364 Park Circle, which is right across the proposed uh subdivision there. Um, we've lived in Forest Park
estates for over 35 years now, and I'm I'm here to respectfully say to vote no on the proposed missing middle zoning change. If this is approved, it opens the door for the developer to build multiple things. Duplexes, triplexes, cottage style cluster. I mean, we heard
what he just said, but it doesn't preclude us to knowing that he's going to build single family homes. um they could sell it and if they get the missing middle tag then then it's open for anything. Um while it may sound like increased flexibility comes with real
consequences for the surrounding neighborhoods, the biggest concern is property values. Many homeowners in this areas have made long-term investments based on the current character and density of the neighborhood and introducing higher density housing in the form of multiple units on single
lots can change the character significantly. In many cases, this type of development can lead to downward pressure on nearby home values, especially when it creates overcrowding, increased parking demand, and a mismatch in neighborhood design. And as you know, that road is in questions a two-lane
roadway that is already operating at near capacity during peak hours. We have four schools, two two churches on Sand Lake Road, and and adding higher d higher density housing will significantly increase the number of vehicles using this road every day.
This isn't just a minor uptick. This is a substantial change that will lead to congestion, longer commute times, and increased frustration for the residents. More importantly, this is a public safety issue. The road was not designed to handle the the volume or complexity
of traffic that this zoning change would bring. There are limited safeguards for pedestrians and cyclists, and increased traffic will only make conditions more dangerous. families, children, and individuals who walk or bike in this area and will be put at and will be put
at greater risk. Emergency response times could also be impacted and and uh congestion worsens. I'm just saying we should we should not move forward with development that outpaces the capacity of the infrastructure. I urge the board to take a step back, fully evaluate the traffic
and safety implications, and prioritize the well-being of current and future residents. I thank you for your time and consideration. >> Thank you, Ashley Diaz. >> Chairman Chairman Lahan. >> Yes. Um, if you like, if we have a
number of public comment, you can call a couple in advance and they can come over and wait if you that you have that option. >> Yes, we can go ahead and queue up a little bit. Um, next will be Steve Lit. >> Good evening. My name is Ashley Diaz. I
live in Valuchia County. So that's 740 Saxon Boulevard in Deltona, Florida. Um, I am a parent who drives from Valuchia County to Simino County every single day so my son can attend Pace Brantley Preparatory School. The commute is
intentional because we chose this school because it provides something truly important for our child and we are willing to go out of our way for it. But that also means I experience the traffic conditions on Sand Lake Road and Sandy Lane multiple times a day. This is not
an underused roadway. It already serves multiple schools, multiple neighborhoods, school buses, and families during the most sensitive times of the day, including arrival and dismissal. During those hours, traffic is not just heavy. It is complex and
it's unpredictable with children walking, crossing, and cars constantly entering and exiting. Adding 24 give or take homes, new homes at that exact corner will introduce more vehicles, more congestion, and just more
risk right where our children are most vulnerable. This is not simply a question of growth. It is a question of safety and responsible planning. I am respectfully asking the board to require a comprehensive traffic impact study
that specifically evaluates school hour conditions, not just general traffic flow. I also ask that any consideration of this project include concrete safety measures such as traffic control, pedestrian projections, and infrastructure improvements before any
development begins. We all understand that growth is inevitable, but where and how it happens matters, especially when it directly affects the children. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. After Mr. Litz comes, we will
have Pam uh Tapley. >> I'm Steve Lit, 385 Forest Park Circle, Longwood, uh right across Sand Lake from the property in question. Uh, Madame Chairman, zoning commissioners, and neighbors.
Um, five points in three minutes. Point one, section seven of the developers Sandy Lake homes resoning committee meetings minutes says no binding commitments were made regarding final density or site layout, final
architectures. Making any assurances he gives us meaningless. It's what's on paper that counts. Same with stipulations unless they're on paper now and forever. Uh point two, meeting concluded without consensus. That's just not true. About a hundred of us were
against it and two, the homeowner and the builder were for it. At least I didn't hear anybody speak uh for it except those two. Uh.3 section 8 said the signup sheet was provided and circulated but was taken
and not returned to the applicant. If that's true, it's a lucky break for the developer because I and many other people wrote no or opposed next to our names. And if it wasn't turned in, what is the list of people following section
8 represent? Point four. Today's average Seminal County household has more than two cars. So he's even if the builder sticks to 24 single dwellings and he said that nothing is concrete,
that's 48 more cars to further clog up Sand Lake and use Forest Park estates as overflow parking. Missing Middle can, under certain circumstances allow up to five plexes, potentially boosting that number to 240. I know it won't get
there, but uh as commissioner as as the chairman said, you know, things could change afterward. Five, I ask my let that my letter of opposition request regarding impact on our neighborhood's children be
read aloud at this meeting. Please reject the missing middle zoning for this property now and in the future. Thank you for listening to our viewpoint. >> After Mrs. Tapley, we'll have Donnie Anderson.
>> Good evening. Pam Tapley. I'm the head of school at Pace Brantley Preparatory School, 3221 Sand Lake Road, Longwood, Florida 32779. I'm here on behalf of the Pace Brantley Preparatory School as a concerned member
of the Sand Lake Corridor community to formally express our objection to the proposed resoning of the property located at Sandy Lane and Sand Lake Road to the missing middle designation. While we understand and respect the need
for thoughtful residential development in our growing community, we believe this particular resoning request raises serious concerns that warrant careful considerations before any approval is granted. Neighborhood and character president.
Many residents in the surrounding area are deeply concerned that approving this reszoning would permanently alter their established character of neighborhood. Perhaps more significantly, approval of this request could set a precedent that invites nearby property owners to
propose similar reasonzoning along the same corridor. Based on properties currently listed for sale between Sandy Lane and Hunt Club Boulevard, conservative projections suggest that a ripple effect of similar reszoning
all so rely solely on Sand Lake Road for access. Should currently vacant or agriculturally zoned properties in the area follow suit, the number could climb as high as 90 new dwellings. There's concern regarding this
becomes so urgent. Sand Lake Road currently serves as a primary access for schools. Traffic congestion during the school arrival and dis dismissal hours is already well documented challenges for families. You heard staff, emergency
vehicles and alike. The addition of dozens potentially near nearly 100 new resident units each generating daily vehicle travels would place an unacceptable burden and infrastructure that is simply not designed to absorb that volume.
Beyond congestion, we must speak plainly about our safety. Our students travel Sand Lake Road daily on foot, by bicycle, and those motorized bikes. In the past year alone, two of our students were struck by vehicles pulling out of
side streets on this road. Two students. That's not a statistic. Those are our children who were injured in our community. We cannot in good conscience remain silent about the real and present danger that a significant increase in traffic would pose to our young children
who walk and ride along this road every day. We request and urge the planning and zoning department to deny the current resoning request or to defer approval pending a comprehensive traffic impact study of San Lake Road corridor.
We also encourage you to engage school administration and neighborhood residents in future discussions regarding development along this corridor and consider the cumulative impact of potential followon resoning requests, not just by the immediate
applications before you. We are committed to working collaboratively with the city and neighboring stakeholders on solutions. and we do support responsible growth while protecting the safety of our students and our community members. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Aley. Um, following Mr.
Anderson, we'll have Michael Hydeman. >> Chairman, yes. >> May I just make a quick clarification maybe for the benefit of the public. Um, so this applicant is not asking for a comprehensive plan amendment. Whatever
they do on the property, they're limit limited to four dwelling units per acre. The type of development doesn't matter what the the limit is four dwelling units per acre. They will not be able to go above that. So the maximum here and that's not including the site
constraints with the power line easements which you can't build houses under power line easements obviously. um you know is the 24 units based on site constraints. So I just want to point that out. They're they're not asking for
a comp plan amendment. Whatever they put there could not go above 30 units an acre because that's what the comp plan limits them to for dwelling units an acre. I just want to make sure that you know everyone's clear on that. >> Thank you. Um Mr. Anderson
come up. State your name and address for the record. One moment while I uh set up for my presentation, please >> if it may be allowed, I um have some booklets that I've made uh that >> follow along with what I got and has all
my research. >> Thank you. Just try. go. Thank you. Good evening, chairman, board members, and staff. My name is Donnie Anderson. I live in Forest Park Estates across the street
from Sandy Lane. Serve on the Forest Park Estates community board. Thank you for your time tonight. I'd like to brief you briefly show you something before I begin. Sorry, technology. What you're seeing seeing here is uh
school traffic uh congestion at Forest Lake Education Center on Sand Lake Road. This footage was taken about 3:27 on March 12, 2026. This is not theoretical. It's not projected. These are the current conditions. This happens twice a day, five days a week. This type of
traffic congestion repeats itself twice a day at every one of the four schools that are located within the Sand Lake corridor. Both proposed developments, the proposed Sandy Lake development and the other project nearby will funnel its
traffic directly into the same corridor. What resident what many resident residents and possibly the board may not be aware of is another proposed development directly across the street from the proposed Sandy Lake development main entrance and exit to Sand Lake
Road. The next one for me right there. Fire Creek at Lake Brantley 9.65 65 acres, 32 homes, 70 foot wide lots, all using existing zoning rules. This parcel is landlocked, so the only way in and the only way out from the subdivision is from Sand Lake Road. This will certainly
increase traffic with this uh in this constrained corridor. Now, let's just look at the bigger picture. Okay, go ahead and do that. That's the site right there where they're saying they're going to build. And this here
here we have Fire Creek to the north, Sandy Lane to the south, both both exiting directly on Sand Lake Road right next to Pace Brantley uh Preparatory School with heavy traffic just as you've seen in the video at the beginning of
the presentation. This is no longer a single development decision. This becomes a corridor level decision. And that's where Missing Middle becomes important. Let me explain. If missing middle zoning is approved in Sandy Lane, it does more
than affect than 24 homes. It sets a precedent. Under Florida's live local act and missing middle policies, density increases become easier. Administrative approvals become faster. Parking requirements can be reduced and public
involvement can be limited. the future. This means future developments including nearby parcels like uh Fire Creek could pursue higher density and less uh of a local review. Uh and the and once the
door is opened, it is very difficult to close. This is not just about Sandy Lake, it's about protecting the Sand Lake corridor. that preserving thoughtful community-based planning decisions, approving Missile Middle tonight will
unintentionally reduce both community involvement and this board's ability to carefully guide future truth. For these reasons, I respectfully ask that the board deny missing middle zoning. Thank you for your time and your service. Okay,
following Mr. Hydeman, we'll have Andrew Zto. Good evening, chairman and commissioners. My name is Michael Hidman. I reside at 405 Forest Park Circle, Longwood, Florida. Uh the access for my community is directly across from
Sandy Lane. Um, I'd like to start with a quote this morning from the applicant uh that we all heard during the last uh planning and zoning meeting regarding the request to continue the meeting. Quote, "We've still got got some things
I'm working on to present to the county and would rather be with with all the items I've got to present on it on this project." The board then granted the continuence. The only items I've seen between the
March 4th and April 1st packet are 90 letters of opposition. I now that understand that those letters of opposition are over 120 letters of opposition re uh received by the county. Um we heard the applicant's attorney a
few minutes ago mention that this project serves as a great transition to surrounding neighborhoods. If approved, this would allow 60 foot lots landlocked with to the north you've
got a 100 foot lots that would be twice the size minimum of this project. To the south you have minimum 100 foot lots that are three times larger than what this project proposes. And to the east
you have agriculture property with minimum lot size of 43,560 ft that's 6 and 12 times larger than what this project proposes. I don't understand how that this project serves as a transition.
I've also heard repeatedly that this project does not increase the density. While I understand that the land use is for four dwelling units per acre, in actuality, changing from R1A to missing middle will in fact increase the density.
Currently, at 90 ft lots, which is allowed on the property, you can fit approximately 16 ft lots on 7 1/2 acres. This applicant has requested 24 lots. That's an increase in density of 50%. does not meet the comprehensive land
use. I'd also like to touch on the community meeting that was held in September. Uh the applicant scheduled the meeting from 6:00 to 8, walked into the meeting at 6:16, had a visual representation that was a little bit larger than a sheet of paper,
and spoke to about an hour and a half to 122 residents in the neighborhood. Promises were made. I've not seen any of those promises in any of the packets presented. Um the minutes do not meet the minimum criteria for the county. Uh
if you saw those minutes, you would see that the applicant promised a traffic study. Traffic was a major concern from the community and the applicant promised a traffic study which I have not seen. I ask you to vote no. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Um Joy. Uh Mr. Zto is representing an
HOA and should get six minutes. After he speaks, we'll go to Lori Bartlett. >> I wasn't ready for six minutes. I thought I had three. I didn't realize I got extra time, but that's okay. If you're officially representing an organization or an HOA, you can have up to you don't have to speak the whole time.
>> Uh Andrew Zto um here on behalf of the Sandy Lane Homeowners Association. I live at 3287 Sunset Valley Court. Um the Sandy Lane Homeowners Association is directly to the south of the pro proposed development. Um we are three culde-sacs bordered on the south by a
cemetery and some forest land. Um we do not have through traffic through our neighborhood. So, we have one way in and one way out, and that is the much discussed Sandy uh Sandy Lane. What we are proposing here is going to dramatically alter how our residents and how our homeowners get into and out of
our neighborhood, and potentially the value of our homes. On those three culde-sacs, we have 23 single family homes, uh quarter to halfacre lots, million-dollar plus homes, um five of which would share a contiguous border with the proposed development. I I've
tried to take a pragmat pragmatic approach to this entire process. Um, and I think that for anybody who bought a home and invested a million dollars plus into our neighborhood, we all did so with the understanding that at some point houses would be built on this land. And I don't think we're taking an anti-development stance. I don't think
given the zoning that was in place when we purchased our homes that we could have ever anticipated that we'd be talking about putting 24 homes uh onto this this piece of land. Um to to be clear, there would be potentially eight or nine homes that line up with our five. So the the argument that there's
potentially um a step down or a transition, I'm not sure uh is consistent. In addition, on Sandy Lane, um I think I understood that the primary entrance and exit to this neighborhood uh would be on Sandy Lane. that would effectively be doubling uh the traffic
that is currently on Sandy Lane, which is barely wide enough uh for the two vehicles or for two vehicles to pass one another. And in addition, the border on the other side across Sandy Lane from this is is the Pace Brantley School where there are always children around. Um the density of what we're talking
about here is is really difficult to understand. Um I think I've had the opportunity to speak uh to the applicant. I have positive things to say about him. This is not a personal thing or you know an anti-development thing. It simply has to do with the density and
uh the issues associated with the actual missing middle uh zoning designation. I've had the opportunity to learn more about Seminal County zoning laws than I ever wanted to or will ever again. I will shout out Caitlyn who has an absolute rockstar and deserves a raise just for dealing with me. Um and you
know what I've come to understand throughout this process, boiling it down to the three final things for you. Number one, the missing middle designation. I understand its purpose. I understand its intent and I listen to everything. Um the the simple fact and the major flaw in it is that it's not
only the density issue associated with missing middle, but it's the type of unit that can be built there. My understanding is that while the applicant is proposing single family dwellings, they would have the opportunity to build other types of development. Once this zoning takes place, there's no going back on that. The applicant doesn't own the property
at this point in time. So, lots of things can happen between when you vote tonight and when the the shovel hits the dirt. If that piece of land gets into the hands or it becomes owned by another developer, they would then have the opportunity to build anything, town houses, triplex, duplexes, all that sort
of thing. So, I think we need to think through that before we go any further. Um, density is also a problem. We're talking about building 24 homes um in the same in in the same area that takes up about 2/3 of our neighborhood, which will be behind it, and Sand Lake Road.
So, we're dramatically increasing the density. Um, that's another consideration. I think one of the uh presenters discussed the tract of land that's across Sand Lake Road. It isn't just about this piece of land. It's about the entire corridor there um on Sand Lake Road. So, I'd ask that you take that into consideration as you as
you open the door to Missing Middle, which I think, as I understand, it hasn't really been deployed yet in Semino County in great numbers um and probably needs a little bit more study before we do. So, I don't think that right next to a school um and uh an already overpop populated road, which I'll get to in a second, um is the is
the place to experiment with this. The last bit for us is of course Sand Lake Road. You've heard it and I'm sure you'll hear it more tonight. Sand Lake Road and the traffic. I'm glad the person showed the video. It's a nightmare between Sandy Lane and uh 434, which is our major ingress into I4. It's
about 2 miles. It can take you sometimes 13, 18 minutes to get there at the wrong time of day. I've personally almost been hit there. I've seen kids almost get hit there. This stretch of road is not tolerant for any more congestion or development in that area. I I wish that it were because I'm progrowth and I
think we all are. Um but we are asking for a problem on Sand Lake Road. It is something that I think external to this conversation needs to be discussed. Um but definitely in context of this increase in the density in this area is going to lead to an accident uh on Sand Lake Road. for all of these reasons. Uh
about a month or two ago, the association at Sandy Lane, which I represent, voted to oppose the reszoning, and I'm here tonight on behalf of them to ask you to vote no and decline uh the zoning application. Thank you.
>> Following Miss Bartlett, we'll have um Jeff Pearlman. Um my name is Lori Bartlett. I live at 816 Real Alammano Drive, Mount Altmont Springs. Um, that is across on the other
side of 434. I use Sander Lake often to ashamedly avoid the intersection of 434 and 436 because I cannot make a left turn easily
out of my subdivision. I have in fact made a left turn once. My car was hit by an ebike. I called the police and I got a ticket and no one was hurt. So that I understand Pace School
being concerned about their safety of their students. You also need to be concerned about the safety of your cars. No one is against as everybody I think generally has said building houses. We are the consensus seems to be against
building more houses than what the area is already zoned as. At the community meeting, yes, he came late. And to be quite honest, um he seemed to have the attitude, and this is a seem to have.
Sooner or later, somebody's going to build houses there, so you might as well pick me. He wants to build as many houses as he can to make money. And being a good capitalist, I agree with that. You want to make money. You're a
builder. These are not standalone homes. I looked at the website. There are no pictures of standalone homes that I could find. They might be there hiding on some page. There were town houses. There were things that I would describe
as either condos or apartments. It would be nice to see what size and facts they have about these standalone homes. I would um encourage you to think about
these things and to deny the zoning varants. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good evening. Uh my name is Jeff Pearlman. I live at uh 3571 Terara Oaks Court, Longwood, Florida. Uh Terara Oaks subdivision
like Lake like Lake like Lake like Lake like Lake like Lake like Lake like Lake like Lake like Lake like Forest the Forest Lake projects. Um I'm faced with having to get out of my subdivision at 8 in the morning and it's it's exactly what you saw on that video.
People having to drive through the yellow crosshatch lines in the middle of the road to get around. people going into the Forest Lake Academy and and this is this is a daily occurrence. It's it's twice a day. You have to have a schedule on your refrigerator to know
when you can leave your house because you can't make a left turn there to get out and and you don't know what time of day it's going to be because Forest Lake Academy has different times on on different days where they release students. So, you can come in at noon
and find the same traffic jam. Um, by the way, I'm not here representing my community, but I was asked by a board member to come up because because of the holiday tonight, they he couldn't be here. So, maybe I
get a minute or two extra community meeting. Oh, I want to preface this all by saying 40 years in the land and residential development business in Orlando area of Florida. So, I I have
some previous experience and knowledge in this area. And I've dealt with hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of people, developers, lawyers, commissioners, everybody. Mr. Jordan
showed up, as has been noted, 15 minutes late. Um, he probably hoped that some of that crowd would have left by then. Um, I I think that's, you know, to me, I was trained if you're 10 if you're not 10 minutes early, you're late. And you come
to a meeting that's important. I think that was intentional. He started out touting the wonderful high-end single family homes he's built. kept referencing Winter Park, although it's not where you would picture because if you I said I build
homes in Winter Park, you're going to think, you know, Park Avenue down there, million-dollar homes. That's not it. He he's got a townhouse project on Lake Kani. That's basically uh b almost bordering I4 on the west end
of Lake Kanney. Um as to his projects that he talked about and he kept telling us, "Look at my site. Look at my site for single f the single family homes I build. There are 11 projects on that website. 10 of
them are town houses, condos, and apartments. One of them is a single family project down in CM. That's a three to $400,000 project. Sorry. So he came in telling us about
his 800,000 to a million dollar homes. Um, my experience says that's ridiculous. Um, and and if it were that missing middle supposed to be an affordability concept
and $800,000 to a million, does that sound affordable to anybody here? I don't I don't think so. >> Please try to wrap it up, Mr. Pearlman. >> All right. I appreciate that. Um, here's what I've seen. It came in
originally asking for over 50 units. That was the first submitt, which had to be multif family. And then by the time we had this community meeting, it was 27. And then he said, I'm moving it down to 24, and I'm doing
this, and I'm doing that, and I'm here, and I'm there. And and all I could think of when I was back there is the concept of the smoking mirrors. used to describe used to describe deception that creates confusion to what? Hide the truth.
>> Okay. Thank you, Mr. President. >> I I believe that what the intention here is is to get the zoning and then come back later and ask for one of the many uses that can be done under missing middle. I don't believe missing middle
is like PD. >> Thank you, Mr. Proman. I would appreciate another minute since I am here on the request of the HOA. >> I'm sorry. You have to be an official representative of the HOA.
I I think that I think that we heard you though and we understand your point. >> Well, I I have some pretty good points. Um PD would be a way and it would be a zoning that would allow him to do the units that he wants, but it would lock him in. >> Okay. >> All right. Thank you very And the other
thing is this the four units the acre is not a maximum because the comp plan allows up to seven if you have an affordability component. >> Thank you Mr. P. >> I don't know. >> Uh next the only remaining speaking cards that I have actually don't um
opposition cards that I have actually don't indicate whether or not uh the um person wants to speak. So I'll go through and ask Debbie Chrysler. Are you here? Would you like to speak or no?
>> Thank you. Um, Vatal Patel. >> Thank you. >> Um, Nick Ben Patel and I've got Pandora Baram. >> I'm Pandora Baram's husband. >> Okay. Will you be speaking?
>> I'd like to. >> Okay. Okay. >> Okay. I didn't I didn't actually prepare for this, but uh I can summarize that I I concur with everyone up here. >> Will you just state your name over here?
>> Yeah. I'm live at 337 Forest Park Circle, >> Longwood. And that's right across from this Brier Patch we're talking about. Anyway, um I I concur with everyone that's spoken so far. it's traffic, infrastructure, all the other problems
that that we've talked about. Um, I don't know that it's been fully put into perspective the financial impact it's going to have on the people living on either side in which it's going to be divided by this potentially
uh bait and switch situation where we could have anything there that would dramatically impact the value of our homes. And you're talking about neighborhoods that have customs homes and million-dollar properties. And I've
I've lived here since 1957. And uh I saw the life cycle of Pine Hills and what happened there. I've lived in in the Wakiva area since uh um 19
80. And uh you know the the place that's already built has done well. The place that got extra things built next to it didn't do well. We're talking about potentially seven to$21 million of
losses by the people that already have homes built there. And I know how appraisers work. I've I built my house, the last one there in W in Forest Park Estates. And I also was involved in building the house that I lived in in
Waka. And I know how the real estate agents uh work and the real estate appraisers work. And uh we could stand to lose a great deal of money in that neighborhood by having a downward uh middle
right in the middle of us, you know, and it uh it's not a good good idea and it's not a transition unless it's a transition downward. So, uh, thank you very much for your time and I really appreciate being able to speak even though I hadn't signed up to.
>> Thank you, sir. Are there any other members of the audience that would like to speak in favor or opposition to this item? >> Okay, go ahead and come up. State your name and address for the record. >> Good evening. My name is Kilo Chimovich.
I live at 215 Duncan Trail. I live in Wakiva Springs. Well, Wakiva neighborhood that is. I'm opposed to this. Uh I went to that meeting that we had, I guess it was a couple months ago, if everyone recalls. I'm sorry I came here late. And we were told we were going to have single family homes put in
there. It sounds like this is going to be not single family homes. So, this is a single family home community. Kids, would you like it to stay a single family home community? Don't mean to put you on the spot, but let's be real here. That's what I signed up for. Changing the dynamic of our neighborhood is not
what we want. >> I don't know if I speak for everyone here, but that's where I stand. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you, sir. >> Okay. Very good. At this time, we will close public comment. Um, and let's go ahead and have the applicant come up if
you'd like to rebut. Thank you, Madam Chairman, fellow commissioners. I just want to run through some of the things you heard. Uh, one was a fairly consistent theme or suggestion that we're changing density. And I think the assistant county
attorney alluded to the fact that the future land use map is what establishes density for property. The zoning doesn't establish density on property. We're not asking to increase the allowable density on the property under the county's
comprehensive plan. So, I just want to clarify that issue because it came up several times. uh the issue about pedestrian safety and the like. The staff report indicates we're going to be required to connect this project to the existing sidewalk
network in the area. So, the pedestrian issues will be addressed through this project. >> There were comments regarding Sand Lake Road and traffic conditions on the like. If you read the staff report again, it
indicates our primary entrance and exit for this project is on Shady Lane. In fact, the uh entrance off of Sand Lake is limited to a right in right out. And you'll also notice in the staff report, there's an indication that additional
traffic improvements may be required at subdivision uh subdivision process. One of those that has been discussed is the installation of a median on Sand Lake Road that would prohibit a left turn into our client's subdivision. So, the
traffic concerns, I think, on Sand Lake Road have been addressed just through the design of the project. You also heard a a buzzphrase these days, the Live Local Act. There's nothing about this project. This project is not a live local act project. live local act is
affordable multif family housing which is not proposed again there was a suggestion about the underlying character of the area and I would just as I indicated in my direct submit that this is single family next to single
family homes we're not proposing and we've stipulated on the record which is essentially all we can do at this point and I would submit that it is binding on an applicant a stipulation uh at the approval hearing that it is
going to be single family detached units limited to 24 which is driven by the density which is again is four units to the net buildable acre. So it's even ratcheted down from four growing units per gross acre. There was a suggestion that somehow
missing middle will allow us to go above and beyond the density. Again, if you read the county's code provision on missing middle as well as the uh provision about missing middle on the county's comprehensive plan, you'll see that missing middle is specifically tied to the density allowed in the underlying
land use future land use district. So again, we're LDR here. LDR is limited to four dwelling units per acre. There were some suggestions regarding my client uh including regarding the community meeting. I was not at the
community meeting, but I've reviewed the minutes to that community meeting. There was a suggestion about a website for this project. My client does not have a website for this project. My client has a website for its development business. And there was suggestion that a
statement was made regarding a traffic study. What my client indicated was that if the county were to require a traffic study, if one was required by the county's requirements, we would do one. And the fact is that a traffic study for a project of this size is not required
under the county's requirements because the trip generation at peak hour is not high enough. So that's the reason a traffic study has not been done is because one's not required on this size of project.
And I know you heard from a lot of people. Uh some of the folks in Simol County, the staff know that many times I come here representing folks just like the individuals you heard from this evening. So I'm not I don't rep represent just the developer head on the
land use monster. I represent local governments. I represent homeowners. And at the end of the day, I mean, you all are a volunteer board and I don't envy you at times in public hearings, but the issue before you from an
applicant's perspective is whether the proposed resoning is consistent with the county's comprehensive plan and whether the resoning complies with the requirements, the published requirements of the county's land development code.
And while you heard folks mention very legitimate concerns to them, what you did not hear was a single person site a single provision in the county's comprehensive plan or a single provision in the county's land
development code with which this proposed resoning does not comply. You heard a lot of people say, and I'm it comes from the heart and they're allowed to say that they don't want this. They like the status quo. They would prefer something else on the property. But
again, that's not the standard for a recommending body like yourselves. The standard for you is did the applicant demonstrate and present competent substantial evidence that the reasonzoning one is consistent with the comp plan and two complies with the land
development code. And I would submit that we have. Miss Abgcar's staff report in and of itself is competent, substantial evidence that we've met those standards. And I, as I indicated as well as one of the speakers, uh, both sides have actually complimented Miss
Abgar on her thoroughess and due diligence in this case. And again, staff has recommended approval, saying that we've met our burden. And I would respectfully submit that the folks you heard from this evening have not met their burden to demonstrate that we have
not met and are not consistent with the comp plan in the land development code. So I would respectfully ask this board to recommend approval. And again, as I stipulated with in response to Commissioner German's question, I don't
mind that motion being made and the recommendation being made subject to or contingent on the stipulations made by council on record this evening during this hearing that the project is 24 single family dwelling units, detached
dwelling units. So, I'm happy to answer any questions and I appreciate your attention and patience this evening. Thank you. Um, are there any further questions of the applicant? >> No. Okay. Thank you very much, Mr. Spain. >> Thank you. >> Um, board questions, discussion, or a
motion? >> I do have a question of staff that I'd like to address. Uh, can Caitlyn, can you uh speak as to what the chances of this residual sort of chain reaction um in the area in the surrounding area
of additional requests for missing middle if that is approved tonight? Are there how many other properties or or um I guess properties specifically off of Sand Lake Road or in that area would could possibly then request missing
middle. We don't have um we don't have any active applications for missing middle off of Sand Lake Road to my knowledge um submitted formally as of this time. I don't I can't speak to like the trend.
>> Okay. Thank you. Madame chair, if I may. Um, it's hard to answer that question because it's all dependent services deputy direct director. It's hard to answer that question because it all depends on what types of applications we get. Um, as someone
mentioned, you know, we have a PUD process, we have a stray zoning processes. Um, so it's hard to answer that question that the proposed reason is appropriate for the size of this of
the location. It is um that is exactly what miss was created for for infield purposes that they can pursue a different type of zoning. Absolutely. they can go with wider lots um such as
R1A R you know or they can um request um a an increase in in density um but based on the existing character of the area um we would not support anything higher than four four units per acre in regards
to the law sizes um it is it is smaller than the average size of the community surrounding communities But it is it it meets the policies. Um the the analysis that we do is based on compatibility based on policy.
Okay. >> All right. Thank you. Any other board discussion, questions? Motion. Um I just have a few things to say. Um I have a couple concerns. One of them is the traffic and the safety. While I
appreciate all of the the research, Caitlyn, especially that you've done and the work that you've done on this project, I'm not sure that there's been enough uh investigation done on the traffic and the safety. Um especially when you're putting kids at risk. Um so that is something that that bothers me.
Um and my my concern too is you know just just like Madame Chair was asking as far as um starting a precedence um for that area. that is a concern that that I'm not quite sure that this is the
right location for this project. Um I am I'm prodevelopment but I'm I think that um ultimately what's going to happen is that this is going to reduce property tax values for the neighboring communities and um and then the county
ultimately will will see that in the budget. That's not why I have concerns, but that is one of them. Um, my main concern is the is the traffic and the in the safety. Um, and obviously this starting a precedence for something in
the future. Um, the property values. I'm not too happy with that. I think I I'm a proponent of missing middle, but I'm just not sure that this is the right location for this project. So for that reason, I am recommending that the board of county commissioners deny the
ordinance enacting a reszone from A1 agriculture and R1A single family dwelling to missile to mm missing middle on approximately 7.54 acres located on the west side of Sandy Lane south of Sand Lake Road.
>> Okay. Um board discussion or a second discussion or a second or the motion dies. Madam chair, I agree with the sentiment and with the concerns. However, I have a problem denying it because they
have met everything that has to do with the master plans of the county. So, that's where I stand. It's difficult for me to vote against it since they have not um really come with a plan that is against what we have as a
master plan for the county. While I appreciate that, I still think that the county needs to do a little more homework, especially when it comes to traffic in the future. I don't think that they've thought about traffic. They thought about utilities and school overcrowding. Maybe right now it's good,
but in the future, let's talk about in the next five years, what's the snapshot going to look like? So, for that reason, I just I there's no way that I can I can be I can approve this. I'm not necessarily speaking in favor or against this, but I just want to comment
on the traffic. Sand Lake Road is the county's fault. This is the 7 acre project. It's the last one in the door and you're going to beat that 7 acre project up for the traffic when you know they have a property right too and it's
not their fault that Sand Lake's a mess, >> right? >> So that I mean that I it is a mess, but it's not their fault. So, I don't know that we can hold a 24 lot subdivision responsible. >> I just don't want to make matters worse. I mean, it's like adding fuel to the
fire. So, we just need we need to back the train up and and kind of reconsider. Yes, Missing Middle is is I I like the designation, but I just don't necessarily think it's in the right area. >> I'm going to go ahead and second the motion. Um mainly because um I'm not
sure if the if the the argument was made why this uh the zoning needs to be changed to missing middle. I almost feel like a a similar project can be can be built there under different residential zoning for so for the purpose of either further conversation or at least for
there to be a vote. I'll second it. >> We have a motion and a second. All in favor? >> I I >> opposed. >> Opposed. Very good. Um, in that case, we will recommend denial to the board of county commissioners.
We'll go ahead and move on to item number two on the agenda tonight, which is the land development code. >> Um, Madam Chair, just real quick, Tammy, can I get the vote on that? >> 51. Thanks. >> Thank you.
I get you. I I I wouldn't. Yeah. >> If everyone who's exiting could do so quietly and quickly, please. We have more items on the agenda. Feel free to stay or be quiet, please.
Hi, good evening. >> Maya, I think you can go ahead. >> Okay. Um, for the record, Maya Aanis, principal planner for the planning and development division. Um, the item I'm presenting right now is a request to consider an ordinance amending chapter 2, chapter 5, chapter 20, chapter 30,
chapter 35, chapter 70, and chapter 90 of the Semino County Land Development Code. Could could I just make a statement before she starts? >> Sure. >> Um, you know, I don't I'm not sure how much respect you as a planning department have for
this board, but you know, I got this just a slightly maybe eight days ago. Okay. And that's it. And I'm supposed to then digest that, have make some decent sense out of
it, make some decent recommendations in that period of time. When your development advisory board, they've been working on it for a month. The county se the county commission's seen a lot of your changes three or four times. We've
seen once. Okay. And I mean, I probably I'll listen to your presentation, but I'll probably just vote no because I didn't I don't know what I'm voting on. I didn't I can't digest this. I needed more time, period. And I don't know
about the rest of the board, but I you you're forcing something on us and I think you're actually abusing us, but that's okay if that's what you guys want to do. you just want to pass it to through get it through us so you can get on to the commission and be done with us. But I don't like it and I don't
think you gave us a fair opportunity to respond to this and try to deal with this 200 and some pages of and I know you guys put a lot of work in on it and I appreciate that. But I I' I'd like to table it actually and and have another
month to really digest it and then have see if we have a serious discussion next month and be done with it. I but I'm I'm not going to get in the way of the board to maybe that's not the consensus of the board, but that's my feeling. >> Is this a recommendation to continue to
the next scheduled meeting or a motion? >> I'll make that motion to continue to the next meeting and I'll see if I get a second. >> I'll second that. Can I can I just jump in real quick, chair, real quickly? So, you have two options here. Okay. You can continue it
to the next meeting and not hear Maya's presentation now. Okay. Or you can hear Maya's presentation, allow for any public comment that maybe it may have come out, you know, and then table the matter
or continue it and further your discussion at the next meeting. Or we could do it in reverse. We could table it now and let her make her presentation >> and let the public >> Well, if you're tableabling it, you're you're putting it aside. So, I'm just suggesting that maybe before you you the
board may want to consider how they want to >> I'm okay with her making your presentation if I I'll withdraw my motion for the moment. >> Okay. >> Then will you withdraw your second, Brandon? >> Who Who second it? You second order. >> Thank you. >> Okay.
>> Very good. Continue, please. Here we go. >> Okay. Well, I do apologize for the the short notice. I know that that is not a long time. So, I I will also preface that we included a summary of changes and that is a really really helpful document. So, as you continue to, you
know, if you do decide to evaluate this more over the next uh month, um you know, definitely take advantage of that document. We worked really hard on it to try to um clearly demonstrate what those changes are. So, um, with that, I'm going to go over
the background just quickly and then as I I figured I would structure this that I can pause after each slide if you'd like to discuss any of the contents on the slide or we can wait till the end and you can um go ahead and give me questions or feedback at that point. So,
it's totally up to you, but feel free to jump in at any point and interrupt me. That's okay. >> Please go ahead with the presentation and we'll ask questions following. >> Okay. Um so the last major update to land development code was adopted in January of 2024. Um as you probably remember that was a significant
reorganization to the zoning chapter. This amendment updates the chapters I just described on the last slide. There are several categories within this amendment which are general updates to references and clarifications. Uh updates related to housing needs,
application and variance trends, updates required by the comprehensive plan, streamlining of processes and compliance with state regulations. Um as you know majority of these topics have been presented at three different work sessions with the board of county
commissioners. Um, but I will highlight a lot of the major topics and I'll go into some detail just to help explain them. So, in chapter 30, we are in the general updates category. We're going to correct Scriber's errors, add a section to
address non-conformities due to government takings, remove the development plan requirement for R3, R3A, and R4 reszoning processes, update the permitted uses table to be consistent with state requirements for community residential homes and homebased businesses.
Compile our sign standards into one section. Add standards for alternative sign types countywide, such as wayfinding, awning, and canopy signs. Um, we're modernizing terminology and creating a map delineating the two sub areas of the urban centers and corridors
overlay which is consistent with the comprehensive plan. I do want to make a note that that is really just a graphic. We're just adding a graphic. Those sub areas are existing in the comprehensive plan and there are no proposed changes to the overall densities and intensities allowed there. So, just keep that in
mind. Maya, can I just interrupt you for a minute because when we were talking about the tableabling discussion, I forgot to say what I was going to say at the beginning to you all. So, I would like to do it now if you don't mind. Um, Madam Chair. Um, so just and I believe
we've we've talked about this before when Senate Bill 180 passed and it added a restriction to local governments that lasts until 2027 and it says that local governments who have been affected by a hurricane which that that shook out to
be everybody in the state cannot adopt more restrictive or burdensome land development code requirements, comprehensive plan requirements, or administrative processes. So that happened last legislative session. Um that affected our ability to
do some of the updates that we may have previously discussed. I know we had a meeting. Um you guys have heard some of these changes one time already. Um but we have looked at everything that we're doing here and and made a determination
that it's not more restrictive or burdensome um to applicants coming in. Um everything is either as Maya said like up updating things, clarifying things, adding definitions, updating ba based on statutory requirements or
aligning our requirements more with what statutory provisions say. So I just want to get that on the record. So nobody's concerned about that because I know, you know, the board's very concerned about that. Um obviously we don't want to adopt something that may and our county attorney's office is concerned about it
where it may open us up to potential liability. So, we have been very cognizant as we're going through all these changes. Please know that it's our opinion that we're not going to be violating um the provisions of Senate Bill 180. So, there you go. You have my CYA.
>> Okay. Thank you. Um, additional updates to chapter 30 include reorganization of the landscape buffering and open space sections, clarifying that live work units may operate those uses in the underlying zoning district, clarifying which uses are prohibited within those
live work units. And then in chapter 35, the changes there are really to address allowing administrative approval of plat. Um, and then in chapter 90, we're just making some updates as to what types of characters can be used in an address and and updating with some of
the existing practices that the addressing division is using now. So, the updates included with our definitions are to add architecturally compatible. That is a term that is used in the code now. So, we do need a definition for it. and it'll also come
up again when I go over the changes to the accessory structure standards. We're adding an illustrative example to the cluster subdivision definition removing community res residential homes due to redundancy that is listed in the section for community residential homes and that
is defined by the state. We are revising the dwelling unit accessory definition, adding Florida water star, revising live work unit, revising lot double frontage, revising multif family to remove dormitories that does have its own definition. So this is just a cleanup
item. And revising the nominal roof overhang definition, which the change to that is really just to allow the nominal roof overhang to encroach into the setback by 24 in rather than 18. The next category is the housing needs
category. So I will go over the affordable housing density bonus. Uh the density bonus for affordable housing is existing. So the comprehensive plan allows up to seven units an acre for LDR um 12 for MDR and
so on so forth. The program for affordable housing density bonuses is already in the land development code. However, it is really strict in the sense it requires certain types of lot sizes and those are not
always consistent with some of the other development patterns in the area. And so we've not seen any um we haven't seen anybody interested in using that program. But we do realize that we need some other housing options. So we worked with a consultant to do a market study
and then addressed the density bonus program based on the results of that and based on the feedback that we got during the um CC work sessions which one of the goals is really to influence more homeownership opportunities.
So that's really what this is targeted towards. So you'll see in this table which outlines the density bonus only for LDR and MDR. There is also one in the agenda packet for HDR and MXD, the other two future land use designations, but for the purpose of the size of the
slide, I only included these two. Um, and again, this is where it's really targeted. So, they have the biggest bonus, but like I said, that is in the comp plan, so we are not proposing a change to the allowable density at all. So, I will go over the example for the
under low density residential for very lowincome units. The column all the way to the right is an example project using really simple math, 10 acres of buildable area. So in a perfect world,
you would get 40 units per um that 10 acres with standard density. Um the affordable housing density bonus allows up to 70 units. That's again existing. So this program outlines how you get there and how many units that you would
achieve. So, in this hypothetical scenario with a 10 acre site at seven units an acre, um if a developer were to max this out, they could get they would have to provide 10 affordable units and
they would in exchange get 20 extra units at whatever rate they would like to sell it at. Um again, this density bonus is is existing. So, this is the math on how they would work that out. We did also work with our community
development um department to go over implementation for this and the types of affordability agreement that we would hold for these projects. Um and we do feel pretty confident that we've worked those things out. Um and like you know we did meet with our developer advisory
board really to go over this topic because we wanted to make sure that it was something that would actually get used. We don't want to just do something that just sits on the shelf forever like the last one may have. Um, so we did get some good feedback from them. I'm sure you've seen the memo that's in the
agenda packet. That is the affordable housing density bonus. Next in housing needs. Uh, we are proposing alternative design standards. You are probably aware of this, but
historically it is challenging to meet four units an acre, to even get close to four units an acre in LDR with the minimum lot size and widths of the standard zoning districts that we have. So, a lot of times we've seen that these projects have gone to PD simply to be
able to get to their four units an acre. So, we're trying to streamline that process and have an alternative option for people to to get that uh maximum density without going through PD. This is a really straightforward approach. It
simply just allows decreased lot widths in exchange for a 20% open space component in the community or well within the development project. Um, and this would only apply to R1B, R1, R1A, and R1A.
And you can see in this table here what the existing lot width is versus what the alternative would be in exchange for that 20% open space. Because of the decrease in the lot width, we do have concerns of these projects meeting their setback
requirements for the individual lots for the homes that they build on them. So we are recommending that we reduce the setbacks in these zoning districts across the board. So this would be anybody that has R1A would now have slightly smaller um building setbacks,
but we're not talking a lot. We're going from like 7 and 1/2 ft to 5t or 10 feet on the side to 7 and 1/2 ft. So visually we don't expect it to really look much different. And um this would also decrease the amount of variances that we
get for setbacks. This is an example. I probably should have had this up for you to look at while I was explaining that, but on the left is a conventional project using 70 foot wide lots. You can see that they in this project were only able to get to
2.46 dwelling units per acre, but what we're proposing with the alternative design standards, they would get slightly closer. you know, not all the way because there's always going to be constraints, wetlands, flood plane, utility easements.
Um, so this one was able to get to 3.12 and in exchange there are open space components which we have heard feedback from the board of county commissioners saying that they would like higher quality projects, people having amenities in the community. So that was
part of the goal. Next, in housing needs, we did look at missing middle. So that's the topic of the night. We are replacing or we are proposing to replace the requirement for the final development plan with a conceptual plan when reszoning to
missing middle. Really it's just a change in terminology because the final development plan is typically associated with a plan development. This is not a plan development zoning district. So we're just trying to keep it really consistent. So, it's mostly a change in terminology there and would be used to
demonstrate that they can meet the the standards um just as an example, but as as of right now, they would not be tied to either of those plans. We are also adding language that connections to adjacent public streets
and stubouts to vacant lots would be based on feasibility and that feasibility is based on the presence of wetlands, water bodies, infrastructure, corridors, and other features that may limit or prohibit connectivity. And I do want to mention that this was one of the
first topics that we were trying to address with this update. Pretty much as soon as the missing middle zoning district was approved in 2024, we started to look at this and and notice, okay, we might want to make some changes. This was a really early um recognition that we had. So this was not
based on any in particular project at all. The next category is application and variance trends. and we looked at accessory structures. We are proposing to allow accessory structures to exceed the height of the home. So, you may
remember that when we did that big update in 2024, we changed the allowance that accessory structures cannot be taller than the height of the home. Well, we have a lot of older homes in our communities that maybe are not even close to the 35 ft,
which is the tallest height you can have in in most of our residential zoning districts. So, we've had um a handful of variance requests to exceed that height, and all of them, to my knowledge, have been approved. So, we're proposing to just go back to what it was before to
allow people to have their accessory structures up to the the maximum building height in the zoning district. The compromise that we found for this would be that they would need to be architecturally compatible if they're going to be taller than the home. So, we're looking for similar material
types. obviously the same structure type um if it's going to be taller than the home. And then another update that we are proposing uh really only applies to A1 properties. So right now A3, A5, and A10, their
accessory structures are not limited by size. Um, and we're recommending that A1 properties that are at least three acres be treated the same way since they're really functioning as one of those larger agricultural or rural properties.
Next, in application and variance trends, we looked at the accessory dwelling unit regulations. Right now, accessory dwelling units shall not exceed 35% of the gross floor area of the principal dwelling unit or 1,000 square feet, whichever is less. And we have an administrative adjustment
option to allow that up to 45% of the gross floor area or,00 square ft. What we're proposing is to remove that administrative adjustment option since typically they they get approved. They ask for the 45% and they they do
typically get it. So instead of making people go through this process, um we're proposing to allow it up to 50% or the,00 square ft and then offering 1,600 square ft for A3, A5 and A10 and then
that same exemption for the A1 properties that exceed 3 acres. Um this was workshopped at the BCC work session and it seemed like we were on the right path. Um, and then like I said, we would be removing that administrative adjustment option. It just wouldn't be
necessary anymore. The next category is streamlining processes. So, we took a look at our boat dock regulations. The goal was to allow more projects to be approved administratively and to streamline the process. So, right now, if a boat dock is more than a thousand square feet, it
needs to go to the board of county commissioners for approval or denial. Um, there has been a request to make this, like I said, more administrative and more streamlined. So, what we've seen typically these boat docks or boat houses that are going that are more than
1,000 square ft, it's usually because they're on shallow water, so they have a really long walkway and that just jumps up the calculation for the total square footage. So we workshopped a few different ways to tackle this and we realized that because the walkway is the
issue that the compromise would be to exclude the walkway from the calculation. So the calculation would only be including the actual boat dock or boat house um when that walkway is less than 4t wide. So if they're doing like a a really wide deck and they're going all
the way out, then that would not count to be excluded. It would only be when it's just a standard 4 foot or less walkway. And then the other change that you will probably have some feedback on is that when they do exceed that 1,00 square
feet that those would actually come to this board instead for approval or denial instead of the BCC. Okay. So the next topic in streamlining processes is fences. We took a look at our fence requirements and are proposing
to remove fence permit requirements for single family or duplex properties that do not exceed 6 ft in height with commonly available materials. Um there are some caveats to that such as it has to be it cannot be adjacent to wetlands, water bodies, other required buffers or
conservation easements. Um can't impede any existing functions of any existing easements. um have it has to be commercially available fencing materials such as wood, vinyl, PVC or aluminum, so on and so forth.
And that would really streamline the process for our building permit review, especially with the fences. I mean, we get calls all the time of people saying, "I just want to replace one panel, like, do I need a permit?" And the answer right now is yes. If you're replacing one panel, you need a fence permit. So, we think that this will really, really
help our residents. The next update to fences is to allow open picket or decorative metal such as raw iron for agricultural fencing because right now they have to do open split rail. It's like a wooden style and people would like more creative elements
in their on their property. So we're looking at expanding that. And then the last topic for fences is to allow A1 properties and platted subdivisions to follow the residential fencing standards. they are slightly different, but if they're a platted A1 community
and they're really not functioning as A1, then they can go ahead and use the residential standards. Further in streamlining processes, we took a look at our plan development regulations. Um, the first major thing is we need to clarify the permitted uses for PDS in
the HIP airport future land use designation. So, we worked with the city of Sanford and we worked with the Sanford airport to determine which uses would be most compatible um with this future land use designation. We took a look at our comprehensive plan and
together we came up with a list that we feel is is really appropriate and it is necessary. We need to be able to guide people as to what uses are allowed. We also are proposing a general reorganization of the section just to
make it more easy to read and digest. We're rem removing one of the unused greater benefit options and replacing it with other types of greater benefits, maybe more modernized options that the county would like to see such as undergrounding of utilities, water star
practices, dark skylighting, and substantial native plantings above the minimum requirement. And then I believe this is the last topic which is compliance with state regulations. So we are removing the separation requirement between alcoholic
beverage establishments and churches residential and like establishments. That is consistent with state statute. And then to be consistent with statute further when it comes to the separation between alcoholic beverage establishments and schools, we're
proposing for it to go down to 500 ft. And then a separate topic is removing the requirement for Semino County to track communication tower master plans. That is not one of our functions and we do not do that now. So we're just cleaning it up and taking it out of the
code. >> Maya, can I jump in here real quick? The the separation issue too was as you guys have probably noticed there's a lot of like strip malls that have churches coming in to like large or schools
coming into larger areas and you have existing establishments there that have you know restaurants or have alcoholic beverages sales. So we've seen a lot of that intermingling um more so that was another reason too
why that change was you know suggested kind of in the first place because we were seeing a lot of those instances. >> Yeah absolutely that's a good point. So with that that is the end of my presentation. staff requests the planning and zoning commission recommend
the board of county commissioners adopt the proposed ordinance amending the semino county land development code per the following motion >> thank you are there questions of staff or would you like to revive your motion to continue >> the public I think there's a couple people in the public want
>> okay I do have some comment cards but if we're going to continue we're going to hear some presentation >> oh they're here so let them >> okay um the only comment card that I have on this is um well before that were there any other questions of staff any
board member wanted to address? >> I I have a question actually. Sorry about that. Um why why are you proposing that the accessory uh dwelling units um that the removal of the owner occupied uh requirements be there. So now you're
going to be able to have accessory dwelling units at in a nonowner occupied um uh residence. So why is that requirement being removed? >> So that requirement is not being proposed to be removed. So I'm not sure if maybe by chance that was included in
the agenda packet, but that is not in the ordinance. We're not Yeah, we're not making any change to the owner occupation for the ADUs. Okay, >> that was a discussion with the board and the board did that came up in discussion
in one of our workshops and they the consensus was not to remove it. So, >> so it's staying the same. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> I have a question. Um on the missing middle, there's a couple spots where it says no portion of the projects may be gated. >> Um
>> like is that um what's the reason behind that? Is it just for traffic flow or >> So maybe a bit of clarification that is existing language. We are not proposing to change that. That has not been discussed at any of our work sessions to my knowledge. Um I believe that the
purpose for that is because missing middle is supposed to be infill and provide um walkable communities integrated into into the rest of the community. So you know typically we we don't see gated communities in that circumstance. But we are not proposing
to make any changes to that part of the language. >> Okay. Thank you. >> And I'll note too if you know as you know like you all are the ones that are reviewing this for comp plan consistency or any issues that you may see with it.
Um, so if you have comments on things or things that you'd like to see or something different, um, you can always, you know, put those on the record and we can relay them to the board of county commissioners when it goes to them and, you know, we can tell them the planning and zoning board had these comments or,
you know, in addition to whatever your motion was, we can update them. >> Any other questions of staff? Okay, then we'll I did get another public comment card as well, but we'll begin um the public comment portion with
those in support. I have um Bob Turnage. >> Evening commissioners. Uh Robert Turnage, 7 Trillby branch, Longwood, Florida. I'm representing two organizations. I'm chairman of the board for Central Florida Home for Good. We build market quality apartments and we rent them out for about half the market
rate. If you Second Street, we have 20 apartments, two-bedroom, one bath apartments just two blocks from here on Second Street. I'm also on the uh Simone County Board um advisory board. We meet with Dagmarie and her staff on a monthly basis. We've had the chance to go
through all this in detail. We've made a lot of comments. Some of our comments were incorporated um with the idea of not eliminating requirements but finding ways to make the process more simple, easier, quicker because if the process
is quicker then the developer spends less money, less time on mortgages and hopefully we can uh deliver projects to people at a at a lower cost. I'd like to suggest that um we support both organizations. The proposed update
to the affordable housing density bonus um for a couple of reasons. Uh if I can remember the example, if a developer asks for 10 very low income apartments or houses, then he gets 20 market rate
houses. Now, if we're developing a piece of property, everything we do will probably be very low income, though we hate we're not going to call it that. That's just not that doesn't have a good connotation with the public who were here earlier.
Uh just for example, our 20 units over here. Uh one's been there three years, one's been there one year. Uh Sheriff Lima did a survey. We've never had a emergency 911 call ever. That's with 20
units, mainly families, probably 40, 50 people. The other really interesting thing, and we've talked to some of the not for the for-profit developers, if a for-profit developer wants to develop the example, ask for 10 very lowincome units. He gets
20 marketplace units, could be houses, apartments. So, we've already talked to them about they'll develop the 20 plus the original plan, the market value houses, give us the land, we'll develop the 10 very lowincome houses. It' be the
same architecture, the same units. It would not look any different. That would give us uh the opportunity to have the land for free, build the units, and rent those out or sell those at below market rate. So, I know we haven't had a lot of time
to review this. We do think it's a very good way to uh improve the housing affordability process in Simino County without asking for Simol County tax dollars or any other kind of of support. I know you've been here a long time. I'm
trying to be succinct and that's what I like to offer tonight. Unless you have any questions, I will sit down. >> Thank you very much. Um, those in opposition. Allison Yurko. >> Thank you.
>> I just have a hand out that I'll put in for the record um and for each of your members and make its way to the county attorney, deputy county attorney. And um I'm like the gentleman there. This kind of blindsided me. I just came became aware of it yesterday. Um the thing that
I wanted to bring to your attention >> your your address, please. >> Oh yes. PO uh 1911 Summerland Avenue, Winter Park 32789. I'm the successor co-rustee of the Albert Euro Trust, which is an 8 and a half acre commercially zone parcel with a commercial future land use. It's at a
highly urban area at the signalized intersection there right by um the expressway, the Wakiva Expressway. There's gas stations there. U my dad um got commercial entitlements under the Wakiva River Protection Act back in the
90s. Uh we have been trying to use our commercial entitlements for the last six years. Every time we try to use them, we get blocked. Um we're now in litigation. Na is familiar with that. The county has sued us. Um trying to say that we're not entitled to use the Live Local Act. And that's really not what I'm here to talk
about. That's got a 25 um acre density unit um entitlement. Um we feel very strongly as a family. We've we've had homeless people living there over the years. We're very committed to having an attainable housing project there. That said, I'm here today to just bring to your attention, I didn't hear any
reference to the proposed deletion of the R3 um language that's there at tab 1. It's 30.4.8.2. That sets forth a residential um density for R3 of 13 density units per acre. And
the reason why that's significant to us is because one of our projects that we've tried along the way um involved a um a multif family uh project that we were trying to get approved uh we had a staff recommendation for that that is in
um tab B. We actually had a determination by then director Rebecca Hammock that was vetted by then Deputy County Attorney Paul Chipok and that that we had a baseline vested rights determination of um and and I'll read it
into the record here. The subject property currently has a C1 zoning classification which permits residential development in accordance with the R3 zoning classification. This was the current adopted density of the subject property existing as at the time of the
enactment of the definition and the density and the vested density of the project. Otherwise, lands in the East Lake Silven transitional area are limited to 2.5 acres. So, you can see why we're concerned about the attempt to take out that R3 language. Again, I'm
heartened that NES told you that nothing in here is more restrictive. So maybe this is something we can work out and have resolved before the next hearing. But I did want to put that of record. Um and and we'll carry on from there. Um thank you very much. >> Thank you. Okay. Would any other member
of the audience like to speak in um favor or in opposition to this item? Okay. Come up. And um state your name and address for the record. And when you're done, go ahead and fill out a comment card with Tammy >> Ryan Waxburg, 1098 South Oleander
Street, Longwood, Florida, 32750. Uh, overall, I I think I agree with most of it. I really just more had a question that I'd like addressed. I have concerns when I hear about setbacks being reduced
simultaneously with permits for fences going away. Um, we have more and more pedestrians. We have more and more cyclists. We have more and more uh emoto users, scooter users, kids on streets getting hurt already. Uh, often they are
being blamed. Parents are being blamed. Whether you're for or against that is irrelevant. Uh, I just want to know that we are addressing how that will affect visibility on our sidewalks and streets for really both the pedestrians and the
motorists that will not be able to see them. I ride my bike every day to work and every day some car almost kills me. Uh, I see kids flying through stop signs every day coming to and from work. When I hear that you are reducing setbacks
and getting rid of permits for fences up to six feet, which is taller than than I am, taller certainly than all of those children are. Uh I just want to know that that's at least being addressed and taken into consideration. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Maya, would you like to address that?
>> Sure. So, I'll address his comments first. We are not proposing any changes to the setbacks for fences. So fences can still only be placed where they're allowed to be placed now. So that hopefully would
not come up. Um also we do have site uh site requirements for corner lots for any kind of fencing or any structures that are adjacent to a rightaway. So that is still going to be in place. Um but it is definitely a concern. safety is always a a major concern and we do
always think about that. Um I will also address the other >> let me first go we're going to we're going to close um close the public comment portion of the meeting and go ahead and proceed. >> So I understand the concerns about uh
removing the density language that's in the land development code for the R3 and R3A because when you look at that it does seem like we're removing it. that density is not regulated by the land development code. That density is regulated by the comprehensive plan
which we are not changing. So there will be no change to to the density that's allowed in R3 and R3A. It's just misplaced. It probably should not be in the code. >> So that's it. >> Thank you very much. >> You're welcome. >> Um we'll return to board discussion
questions or would you like to revive your motion to continue to the next scheduled meeting? Yeah, I'll still move to continue this tour the next regularly scheduled meeting. I I'll see if the rest of the board had was comfortable with what they heard or what we can do. >> Thank you. Commissioner Greer, are you going to revive your second?
>> Second. >> Okay. Can we stop for just a second? So, um, so we don't have to renotice. We need to have a date for that meeting. So, can we just get a date from >> I said the next regular schedule meeting. So, whatever date that is. What is >> Yeah, we just need to put on the record.
That's why I'm going to have T. what the date is. Um, >> May the 6th. >> May the 6th. Yep. May the 6th. Thank you, Cam. >> Okay. We have a motion to continue this item till the next regularly scheduled meeting of the planning and zoning board, which is May 6th, 2026. We have a
second. All in favor? >> I >> I opposed. Okay. Very good. This item will be tabled until next meeting. >> Repeat that. I didn't get the motion. Oh, we have a motion to continue this item to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the PNZ board which is May
6th, 2026. >> Was that unanimous? >> That was unanimous. >> Yes. Thank you. >> Okay. Moving on to item number three, which is um Life Point Christian Church special exception.
Good evening. Hillary Peyton, Planning and Development. This item is a request for a special exception for the Life Point Christian Church to allow the existing church to expand in the A1 zoning district on 2.44 acres located on the northwest corner of E. Williamson
Road and Myrtle Lake Hills Road. 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 ft in size with a seating capacity of 200 seats. The property also includes a 1,952
ft single family residence that's utilized for church office use. The applicant proposes to construct a new 6,400 ft 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 a.m. to 2:00 pm. The church's office hours are Monday through Thursday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. 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 Semino County Land Development Code. The site must also meet all regulations under land development code such as setback, setbacks, buffering, and sight lighting. In accordance with the seminal county
Land Development Code section 30.3.5 community meeting procedures, the applicant conducted a community meeting on February 9th, 2026. Details of the community meeting have been provided in your agenda package. Section 30.3.1.5 subsection A of the Semino 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 of the recommended conditions as stated in the approval development order. In addition to the typical conditions of
approval for special exception, staff is recommending that there be no outdoor sound amplification without a noise permit from the county. Staff has received nine letters of opposition, one of which is a petition with 47 names listed and three letters of support which have been provided to
the board for your consideration. Those who we receive letters from who provided their addresses in close proximity to the church have been reflected on the support and opposition map on the PowerPoint. Staff requests that the planning and zoning commission recommend to the board of county commissioners approval of the special exception and associated
development order as per per the following motion. Based on staff's findings and the testimony and evidence received at the hearing, the planning and zoning commission finds the request meets the identified portions of the land development code and recommends that the board of county commissioners approve the special exception and associated development order to allow
with conditions the use of a community civic assembly church in the A1 agriculture zoning district on approximately 2.44 acres located on the northwest corner of E Williamson Road and Merl Lake Hills Road. This concludes my presentation for any questions. >> Thank you. Are there questions of the
applicant? I'm sorry. Questions of staff? Seeing none. Is the applicant present? Um, I'm Phil at 150 Sunset Drive, Longwood, Florida. Um, I'm the pastor at Life Point Christian Church. I've been the pastor there for 23 years. Um, thank
you for taking your time. Thank you for the diligence and careful consideration that you'll give to this matter. Um, we're grateful also to our neighbors and the community for participating in attendance tonight, for engaging this process. We take that very seriously. Uh we're here to uh request a special
exception to allow a modest expansion of our existing church facility, one that we believe is reasonable in scope, compatible with the surrounding area and consistent with our long-standing presence in the community. Our proposal is to construct, as was stated, a 6,400 square foot sanctuary that will be
primarily used for Sunday worship services. The new space will provide seating for 250 people, which replaces our 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. For context, our existing facility is just over 7,000 square ft. So, this is not a large-scale expansion, but a practical step to accommodate our current congregation. And before I go further, I
want to address a concern that's been raised in the community. There's been some confusion suggesting that this project is intended to expand into a private school or a higher intensity weekday operation. I want to state clearly, this is not an expansion of a
school. It's a modest expansion of Sunday worship space. We do not operate a traditional private school. We have a homeschool program that offers classes for a few hours on Tuesday and Thursday to families who already homeschool their children. And that program is not being
expanded as a part of this proposal. From a land use perspective, this project does not increase weekday intensity, which is why it was determined during the county's pre-application review that a traffic study was not required. We understand the traffic's concern, especially given the nearby elementary
school and the challenges at the intersection of E. Williamson and Myrtle Lake Hills Road. That matters to us as well. As both pastor of Life Point and resident of Shadow Hill neighborhood, which is right across the street, I personally experience the same traffic patterns and I share those concerns as
well. The project's designed to serve our congregation primarily on Sundays and does not introduce weekday demand beyond what already exists today. As a church, we've been around since 2002. We started at Alterme Bentley Elementary
School. um that's in Sanford. We moved to a local theater. We spent several years at the YMCA. And then in 2013, after a decade of ministry, we purchased our current property in order to establish a permanent presence, a permanent presence to better serve our community. Over the past few years,
we've seen steady, healthy growth, particularly among young families, which led us to begin planning for additional Sunday worship space through a capital campaign that we called Next. Essentially, our goal has simply been to continue serving the next generation well. Our vision for the past 15 years
as a church has been focused on Christ faithful in the community. And we take both parts of that very seriously. We're committed not only to worship and teaching, but also to being a good neighbor to the community around us. We regularly open our facility to serve others in the community. We host
additional church congregations on the weekend. We provide space for local HOA meetings in the evenings. We support groups like scouts and since 2002, we've been a polling location for Longwood. We also provide ongoing benevolent support for both church members and others in
the community helping with food, rent, and other needs. We've never turned away someone who's come to our property in need of food assistance. At its core, this request is simple. It's a modest expansion for Sunday worship with no increase to weekday intensity and no change to the character of the
surrounding area. We've been here for years. We live here and we care deeply about this community. We're simply asking for the opportunity to continue serving it well. Thank you for your consideration. >> Thank you. Are there questions of the um of the applicant?
>> I have one just um I I'm not clear. I I see on the on your site plan here the new sanctuary uh of 6,000 plus feet and your existing building which stays I guess of 7,000
ft. >> So really that's a that's not a small expansion. You're actually adding a full 6,000 ft. And what's the 7,000 ft going to do then? >> Well, that current building would be uh used for family ministry uh during Sunday. So this would turn into
children's programming for Sundays. Okay, >> thank you. >> Any other questions of the applicant? >> All right, thank you very much. I know that there are some members of the audience here that would like to speak on this item. We'll start with those in
support. I have um Philys, you just spoke as the applicant, right? Okay. Um Matt Clark. Good evening, Matt Clark. 200 Ramblewood Drive, Sanford, Florida 32773. Uh, good evening, chair and
commissioners. My name is Matt Clark and I am the family pastor at Life Point Christian Church. Thank you for the opportunity to share today. Healthy conversations are a cornerstone of our country's foundation. There seems to be a misunderstanding that you may hear this evening, and I'd like to clarify uh
just as Pastor Phil did respectfully with three points. First, our building project began before Freedom Christian Academy ever existed, which is the homeschool program. This project is about accommodating the growth of our church. We are currently
holding two services and need space for worship. Our entire original intent was to build uh for these specific reasons. One was the family family centered. Our family ministry is growing and our children's space is filling up. So, we
had to add a second service. We are committed to strengthening families by creating opport opportunities for parents and children, aunts, uncles, grandparents that they can learn and grow together in our facility. Intergenerational connection matters and
it's how values are passed on and how the next generation is supported. So the first one is family. The second one is foyer, our for foyer connection. Our current layout places our foyer between our children's ministry rooms which are
split on both sides. This creates congestion during uh kids ministry check-in with people gathering in the same area where families are trying to move through. We are seeking to improve that flow to create a safer, more functional environment by providing a
dedicated space for connection and movement while better supporting our children's ministry check-in process. family foyer and the last one is first impressions. Forgive the pastoral alliteration.
First impression, our building exterior does not reflect what is happening inside. We have had many people come in the building and say this is not what I expected. Unfortunately, human tendency is to judge a book by its cover. when we
want to improve how our facility represents itself within the community and improve the outside look of it. I say these things to help you understand the purpose is first and foremost and only for the church and for our worship. The second misunderstanding
that you may hear uh this evening is we are not a school. We are not registered or licensed as a at a school at any le at any level, city, county or state. Uh third, the plans submitted to the county reflect exactly what we are
building, a sanctuary, a a foyer, and a restroom. There are no plans for a school because we are not building one. Freedom Christian Academy is a homeschool supported program. Families who are are already legally homeschooling choose to participate as a
supplement. Parents remain faithfully responsible for their children's education. So when it comes uh comes to the concerns the concerns are raised about a future school or traffic related to a school or an infrastru infrastructure for a school those
concerns are based on something that is simply not part of our plans. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Um, Cheryl Barnes. >> Following Cheryl, I have Brian Barnes. If you'd like, >> you'd like to go ahead and come up. Sir, you'll be next.
The reason I'm here tonight, my my one son's in the hospital, but we've we know that this is very very important because in this particular neighborhood where the church is, we live >> Could you please state your name and address? >> Oh, I'm sorry. It's Cheryl Barnes, 991
Citruswood Court, Longwood, Florida, and we are caddy corner from the church. We're the second house down from the corner. So, in our backyard, we can see all the goings on in the church over there. And in 30 years since we've lived
there, we've never seen anything that was bad or negative. It's only a positive for the families in the area. So, we're very happy to have lived there and for the church. We're very pro-church. We have a church right
across the street from us, too. But, you know, they have to get along with the neighborhood. The HOA has never complained about any of the churches in that. And the church, Phil is the pastor there. He's wonderful. The church is
wonderful. It's all wonderful. There's, you know, nothing bad, nothing negative, zero negative about the church where they're building. They have already had that land for years. They're just expanding, you know, which they're going
to build a very nice sanctuary. We're very thrilled. We're very excited about that. And we do go to that church. >> So, I just wanted to come and give my two cents for whatever it's worth. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> All right. Thank you,
>> Mr. Barnes. Following Mr. Barnes, we'll have James Braml. >> Brian Barnes, 911 Citruswood Court, Longwood, Florida. Uh, yes. uh as to go along with what my wife was saying there is for 30 years we've lived right there
across the street from the church now being also Longwood residence for that amount of time yes we have seen exponential growth and stuff in area which is going to lead to a little more traffic uh most of our traffic though however comes from Woodland's elementary
school of course 5 days a week twice a day the traffic backs up some you know it's not to to the point of what we'd seen earlier on the video of just pure abstract craziness. But for a church to have a service on
Sundays, which is the lowest traffic time of the week, almost zero traffic in the area, for that to have a heavy impact on the traffic in the area and cause congestion and stuff is is just not the case at all. I mean, Sundays in
the area is like about the most peaceful time to go out and get your grocery shopping done and whatever running around that you need to get done and everything because it's a very low traffic time. So, we have u in essence we have a church that's a beacon of light in the community, hence the
growth. We have the request for an addition to the sanctuary, which that's exactly what it is, is a place of worship. So that's going to have no impact on congestion or traffic, especially on a Sunday, which is the lowest traffic time of the week. Now, I
can understand if it was during the week whenever there's already crazy traffic going on uh with the school and everything, which is right out on the same EE Williamson Road, but I've also living 30 years in the area that we have, we can witness and see Myrtle Lake
Hills Drive and E Williamson Road. And the only time that there is congestion or any type of traffic either entering or exiting that area is during these school periods of school coming in in the mornings and of course letting the
kids out in the afternoons or around the typical classic 5:00 rush hour 5 or 6:00, you know, but outside of that, in my opinion, there's no impact on on traffic or congestion for a church that is exiting Sunday after the service.
Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Gromlich. >> James Gromick, uh 382 West Wing Court, Lake Mary, Florida, 32746. Uh thank you for this opportunity. Um you're probably going to hear the same
thing from me that you've heard from from Phil and Matt. Um, I've been a partner at Lifepoint Christian Church since our first Sunday in 2002. In the past 24 years, I have served as an elder twice. Um, taught numerous classes, been
involved with something there, um, most nights of the week. Um, I am also on the oversight committee for our building project. Um, our church has recently experienced steady growth through CO. um not through COVID, since CO um much of our recent growth has come in
the form of families with babies and children of all ages. As part of our care ministry, I have personally delivered meals to three ch to three families with newborn babies in just the last six weeks to help out. Life Point needs more space for our growing family ministry and Sunday school classes.
Moving to multiple service has not helped our space issues. We really need to build a new auditorium to get out of our own way. Life Point has no alternate plan to build a private school. Anyone who says otherwise is probably just misinformed or uninformed. We don't have a license or a permit to run a private
school, and we don't want one. We do have a permitted homeschool resource program that helps about 10 families who homeschool their kids by offering supplemental instruction two days a week for a few hours, not during rush hour. I don't think Lifepoint has ever scheduled a sign an event that significantly
impacted rush hour traffic in our 12 years at this location. Some people may be worried about possible water drainage. While I don't believe we are currently causing any issues, this project will certainly bring us up to spec with Florida management water district requirements and further safeguard surrounding areas
from possible drainage issues by adding more on-site water retention. Our at Life Point, our motto is focused on Christ and faithful in the community. Lifepoint wants to be a good neighbor and positively impact our community. We have deep roots and partner with groups
such as Embrace Family Foster Care um for eight years at Christmas time. We've provided presents for foster kids who might not otherwise have Christmas. We support the Pregnancy Center of Sanford who offers counseling resources and help to expectant mothers and fathers. We also offer various local homeowners
associations uh regular use of our facilities for meetings. Seol County uses our facility as a polling place during elections. We even let Duke Energy and the guys paving the road a while back park their machines on our property to keep them out of traffic and out of local neighborhoods. There are
numerous other organizations and groups who benefit from our facilities. We try to be a good neighbor. We want to continue to be a good neighbor and we also want a new sanctuary to move our adults out of the way of our family ministry. These two things are not mutually exclusive. By moving our adults
to a new building separate uh from the youth, we can provide our youth, toddlers, and infants with a more secure and accommodating facility all their own. This has been our goal from the start and it's our only goal. Thank you very much for your time. >> Thank you, sir. >> Thank you. Uh moving now to those in
opposition, I have um Ronald Stein. >> Good evening. Um, Ronald Stein. I live at 1374 North Marcy Drive, Longwood, Florida. Um, thank you for the opportunity to speak on this subject. Uh, I'm a resident of the Bay Lagoon subdivision
and my property is adjacent to the northwest portion of the church property. It's important to note that my property sits approximately 25 ft lower in elevation as compared to the church property. I do have several concerns
regarding the proposed plan, specifically the parking lot paving and the proposed retention ponds. The new building is planned for the south side of the existing structure. The proposal includes a retention pond
and paved parking area. The retention pond is to be situated on the north side of the property between the existing church and my property. I strongly object to the placement of a retention pond in that proposed
location. During periods of heavy rain or storms, hundreds of gallons of water will potentially percolate down to my property and those of my neighbors given the elevation difference. Heavy rainfall will cause water from the pave parking area to flow north,
increasing runoff towards the retention pond. Currently, rainfall is distributed evenly over the entire church property. Water naturally percolates towards the path of least resistance. A retention
pond would more than likely direct percolation down to the adjoining properties, mine and my neighbors. I would strongly request that an alternative be considered, such as permeable parking pavers. I'd like to give the board an example of parking
papers that might resolve the pro the issue. During 2000, the during the year 2000, the Woodland School was expanded. The Woodlands retention pond was enlarged. At the same time, following these changes, a major hurricane struck
Central Florida in 2003, causing the retention pond to overflow and numerous properties on the west side of our subdivision were were flooded. Given this issue, I would like to request that some kind if a retention
pond is approved, I would like some type of guarantee from the church andor the county that we're not a we're not going to get flooded if the pond overflows and b that there is going to be no issues due to percolation.
Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh, next we have Amanda Kissinger and following Amanda we'll have Dr. Jeff Kissinger. >> Sure. Jeff Kissinger, 1630 Highland Drive,
Longwood, Florida. Good evening to the board members. My name is Dr. Jeff Kissinger and I'm here to advocate for the neighborhood neighbors of Myrtle Lake Hills, Northridge, Northridge Point, and Bowling Farms. Our communities are in a unique and dangerous position. We are a
funnel neighborhood. Over 400 households rely on one single point of ingress and egress at Myrtle Lake Hills Road in E Williamson. When this is blocked, we are trapped. This application represents a significant highintensity expansion at the very bottleneck of our only way out.
Did this board evaluate this applicant as a house of worship or also a growing education provider? What is the plan for Freedom Christian Academy for growth? This has not been transparent at the least. We are not against the house of worship at all, but neighbors are
shocked when they learn that it's also a growing education provider. The Freedom Christian Academy is by their own admission actively recruiting growing enrollments funded by state vouchers now serving all grades, not just K through six or K through 8. On their website, K
through 12 going from a 2 day a week to a three-day next year. Says it on their website. I didn't hear that tonight. There are no guardrails to stop it scaling full-time if this is approved. in congruency. This application is listed as a 6,400 square foot church
sanctuary, but the operational reality is it is also a regional private educational provider with a code- rated capacity for hundreds of more students. This is fundamentally in congruent with the Semino County future use plan, specifically 2.1 compatibility. The county plan mandates that new
developments be compatible with the existing neighborhood character. A high-intensity education operation in a quiet A1 and R1 neighborhood funnel is the literal definition of incompatibility. Policy 10.1 congruency. Approving this special exception degrades the level of
service for safety in our community by creating a weekday traffic cork at our only exit effectively violates the county's own congruency requirements. Additionally, additionally, the fire marshall can deny expansions that impair impair emergency access. If if an
ambulance can't breach a resident because of state traffic stacking, this special exception becomes a permanent danger in planning failure. These are at odds with our community and the seminal future use plan. I want to close with why this is also personal. My parents,
my and my family have lived in Myrtle Lake Hill since 1986. For decades, my mom and dad served this very community as Longwood mail carriers. They are here tonight. They know these roads better than any traffic engineer. They spent 40 years delivering mail to your homes, these very roads and intersections. My
mom was actually severely injured on her mail route and rushed to the hospital to save her life. They deserve to age and place safely. I respectfully ask this body to apply the seminal future use plan and please deny this special exception today. Thank you.
Thank you, sir. Mrs. Kissinger, please. I'm Amanda Kiss. I'm Amanda Kissinger. I live at 1630 Highland Drive, Longwood, Florida 32750. Um, so I had a whole speech written out, but I I just wanted to kind of the key
parts that I'm really concerned about is getting in and out of the neighborhood. And there's, like Jeff said, there's 400 different homes behind that church that all use Myrtle Lake Hills Road to get in
and out. I literally this morning went and took a dozen photos and you could see how backed up it gets if this uh uh establishment were to go ahead and expand and take advantage of some of the c uh the dollars that are available for
those voucher programs and they were to expand their educational offerings in the future which they say they don't have intention to do that now but who's to say that's not going to change in the future then we all pay the price. those of us who've actually invested in our community. I sit on the board at the uh
Myrtle Lake Hills Road uh comm um HOA board. So, I've I've spoken with so many of those people. Not one of them knew anything about this construction going on. I it was the first time I actually saw uh the community announcement, which
I would think if it's a community announcement that it would be dispersed in the community. I only saw it when I saw the agenda. I opened it up. I sent it along to a few of the board members and I asked, "Have you guys seen this? Did you hear about this? Did you go?" Nobody knew anything. The only time any
of us found out about this was when someone in our group chat uh for the board members communicated, "Does anyone seen the sign and know what it's about?" And that's what got all of us starting looking into this a lot more. So, it's not that they were actually actively
reaching out to our community. They didn't get buyback from any of us that I've heard of. And in fact, uh, one of the other board members, she said she spoke with the president of another of one of the other neighborhoods and they didn't know anything about it. So, this
is this is kind of a big surprise for a lot of us. My main concern is why haven't they proposed a direct entrance and exit onto EE Williamson to keep their re uh to keep their regional traffic out of our residential
community. Um that's that's the hard thing. I mean they own the property that butts up against EE Williamson. They could easily alleviate so much of this issue simply by building an access and entry point there. But as it exists today, it's over on Myrtle Lake Hills
Road. And when they're coming out, and I I heard what they said about it only impacting on Sunday. That's that's just not true. I've seen countless times where I've had to struggle getting in or even just making it to the to the stop sign at EE Williamson because there's so
much traffic coming in and out of that or coming out of that church. It's It's just I don't understand why they haven't proposed adding a road leaving their church directly onto the main road. That's it. Thank you. Richard Hoffman.
>> Hi, my name is Richard Hoffman. I live at 1372 North Marcy Drive in Longwood, uh Bay Lagoon subdivision, which wraps around the property. Uh we border the church
right here. Our property is here. That's the retention that is being proposed. Um the project is going to exacerbate water issues we have from the church property
already. There is, as Mr. Stein said, there's a incredible drop off between our yard and their property, 20 ft according to my GPS on my Apple Watch. Um, so the
rainwater percolates down and is going to seek the lowest level. Uh, after summer rains and especially when we are hit with hurricane related rain, our backyards pond up as others do nearby. Uh after hurricanes Irma and Ian, it
took six weeks for the water to recede in our lawn to be not soggy. Much of that can be attributed to constant percolation and water flow from the church property too. Uh this is if you could go back to the
initial slide, take a look at how big that retention pond is on that property. And again, Bay Lagoon wraps around that edge and we have a quite a large uh area where we border.
Uh Bay Lagoon is not foreign to retention pond planning miscalculations. The west side of our neighborhood uh is adjacent to woodlands. The retention pond was enlarged when the school was renovated. The new pond couldn't handle
the rain volume and it overflowed and it traveled to the lowest level. And I witnessed personally the water gushing through those house yards and there was damages and the county had to settle
with property owners there. In the uh staff review, it says that the zoning change will not impede the surrounding residents. Uh flooding neighborhood properties is a major impediment. The 6,400 ft building is
also uh going to impact residences with visual and loss of uh privacy impediment. We've had harmony with churches that have existed on this property. Uh we've been there since uh 1990. Um, but this project I'm really
concerned about with the neighbors experiencing flooding issues and I just recommend that um you deny the zoning otherwise history is going to repeat itself. We've had enough flooding issues and we just want to keep the
harmony and we do object to this project. >> Thank you, Mr. Hoffman. Is there any other member of the audience tonight that would like to speak in favor or in opposition this item? Okay, come up. Please state your name and address for the record. And then um after you're
finished with your comments, please stay and fill out a comment card. >> I didn't fill out a comment form, but I said no until I heard some comments. >> Oh, okay. >> My name is Alan Thickton. I live at 688 Bright View Drive, Lake Mary, Florida, 32746. Good evening to you all and thank you for spending this time with us. I
appreciate it. It's my first time. I would like you to understand, for example, sir, you asked about the why 6,500 versus 700 uh 7,000 square ft. The other building is older and contains a
large kitchen in areas to feed people. We're using that as a combination of the children and our ministry. That building will still be used for food and ministry purposes. And it will allow us to do
more in that fashion by separating the two types of duties, services versus worship. I understand the concerns about traffic. I'm going to deal with that first quickly.
I use Google Maps quite a bit. I see more than one way in and out of that neighborhood. I've bicycled through that neighborhood. And there is more than one way in or out. You have to go through a neighborhood and you have to go slow,
but there's another way through and I've used it. Now, the next one is >> we're not going to have cross talk. Everyone will have a chance at the microphone to make their comments if they'd like, but >> the ne the next one is the water retention. I have to say I wasn't aware
of that and they should be taken into consideration. Thank you for spending this time with me. >> Thank you. Good evening. My name is Jennifer Cole. I live at 13 1534 Myrtle Lake Hills Road. I live on Myrtle Lake Hills. So,
I'm representing here as not only a parent of FCA, but as a community member. Um, I am a resident of the community of Myrtle Lake Hills. It is important to clarify that the exit is in concern is not the sole point of ex access.
Um there is there is an alternative route to exit an entrance through like he just stated another entrance. It's just the back way. So it is not the sole in and out. um as a member who serves um in the
church, sometimes we stand in back and um the church is just growing, which is incredible. And the um sometimes we need more chairs. So, our church is filling up. We don't always have all the chairs
out, so we put more chairs out. And if that doesn't go go to show that we are growing, I don't know what was. What is um the building of our growing church is not a home educational program facility.
Um the proposed building expansion is intended to serve as a church sanctuary. This distinct distinction is important when considering the nature of the frequent abuse as well as the potential impact on traffic flow.
So, not only am I a resident, I am a parent of a child who attends FCA um which I'd like to clarify again is not um a traditional school, but is a home instructional program. As parents, we wouldn't know if the school is
expanding. Um the we this is our first year here in our plan is to go there until um our son is in 8th grade which is their current um uh uh it's K through eight right now. Um and we have not been
passed on any information of it expanding to 12th grade or any larger. Um, also a lot of the children who do attend FCA, we live in the neighborhoods and a lot of the times, um, obviously it was a little chillier, but we ride our
bikes. There's, you know, we we hardly even drive, um, unless it's raining, so impact on traffic is from what I see and um, like again live in the neighborhood, I don't see that at all. That's all. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you.
>> Okay. Are there any other members of the audience who'd like to speak in favor or in opposition to this item? Okay, seeing none, we'll close public comment. Uh would the applicant like an opportunity for rebuttal? >> Hi, my name is Rick Dixon, 102 South
Orange Street, New Beach. I'm the project engineer, will be the project engineer for the project. I just wanted to let people know that at this point no significant engineering activities have taken place. We put the components of the site plan on a conceptual site plan just to see how all the the uh different
components would fit on the site plan. Um we have many steps to go through while we get to final design to meet the the county's requirements for the 100red-year storm and for the storm water pond and to meet the uh south water south Florida water management district requirements for the project.
So, so there will be a significant amount of engineering going in the project. The configuration of the site may change. Actually, in the pre-lication meeting, the county did make a comment that maybe the pond would be better suited um closer to EE
Williamson. So, those items will be taken care of. Um we'll meet all the requirements of the county and the water management district and we will not be shedding any water onto the adjacent properties. >> Thank you very much. Are there questions
from the board discussion or do I have a motion? >> I think Oh, I'm sorry. Sorry. Go ahead. >> Just from a few other things, I just wanted to clarify. So, in terms of letting the neighbors know, we did hold a meeting on February 9th and we did a mailing postcard to the list of people
that was sent to us to send out. So, I think that was a couple hundred addresses. I don't know if everybody was on that address, but we did send that out and we did hold that meeting on February 9th. I know a couple of the individuals that are here tonight were there at that meeting. Um,
as far as the parking, I I believe that that is is intended to be crushed shell parking. That's not paved parking. So, I do I do believe there's some water run through there. Um, our our engineer might know better about that. Um, there may be a misunderstanding about the
school. It it does say K to 12, but it only goes to 12th grade for piano lessons. Our golf program, we have a homeschooled um sports program that meets on Wednesday, but at Castleberry Golf Club. So, it doesn't meet on the property. So, um it's it's not like there's classes on
Wednesday. That's a whole separate thing. And um and it goes to 12th grade in Bible as well. But the rest of the school is K through 8 for core science and that's Tuesday and Thursday. And the growth plan for the school is simply well well of course we'd like for the school to grow, but it doesn't have
anything to do with our sanctuary. The sanctuary is a Sunday um worship facility. We we do not have any plans to move to more than two days a week. That's not what we feel like we're called to do. We want to serve homeschool families with a two-day a
week program. And um I think I think that's about it. I just wanted to clear up those things. Uh once again, our goal is to is to be a good neighbor. We wouldn't want that traffic to get any worse than it is either, but I don't believe this project presents
any sort of highintensity weekday um issues for the traffic. So, thank you. Appreciate it. >> Thank you. All right. Board discussion questions. >> I have I have a question for the applicant, actually. Um as far as the
you I'm confused. Um is this is it a homeschool um type of education that you offer? And if so, why why are you having face-toface meetings on Tuesdays and Thursdays? >> Well, it's homeschool direction with
supplemental classes in certain core subjects like science and social studies and Bible. So, parents who are homeschooling their kids can bring their kids in for sort of supplemental um instruction in those particular subjects. But we don't, you know, we don't take attendance. We don't provide
grades. Um, all we do is help parents homeschool their children with a few additional courses. >> Yes. I I just wanted to make a comment to the neighbors and I understand that unless you understand ministry, this will be a difficult understanding. Rest assure that if the church is growing,
the ministry is growing. People will come to the church with or without this building. They'll just sit outside over a tent if that's what is necessary. So, I think I would love to move into a motion because I believe that uh this is for a special exemption, not to really
approve the project, right? So, our county will take care of all the concerns in the building. And so, I'd love to move to the planning and zoning commission to recommend the board of county commissioners to approve the special exemption and associated to the development order as per our following
motion. Based on the staff's finding in the testimony and the evidence received at the hearing, the planning and zoning commission finds that the request meets and identifies a portions of the land development code and recommends the board of county commissioners to approve the special exemption and associated
development order to allow and the with conditions the use of the community civic assembly church in the A1 agriculture zoning district on approximately 2.44 44 acres located in the northwest corner of Eee Williamson
Road in Myrtle Lake Hills Road. >> Second. >> Have a motion and a second. All in favor? >> I opposed. >> Okay. Uh the mo then the motion carries and we will move to item number four on our agenda. Rosenvald Community Center
Reszone. Annie Silhouette presenting. I'm going to wait just a minute. I'm making up for all the months I haven't been here. >> Just speak loudly and confidently and >> Okay. Well, let's go ahead then. All right. Um, good evening. Annie Siloway,
principal planner with development services. Um, this request that is being proposed tonight is for a reason from R1 single family dwelling and R2 one and two family dwelling to PLI public lands and institutions.
The reason is to allow for the development of a public park and a community center. The subject property has a public quasi public future land use designation which permits a maximum floor area of 65. This designation is intended to identify locations of
suitable uh locations suitable for a range of public and quasi public uses including but not limited to public private recreational facilities, educational institutions and libraries. The subject site being approximately a
little over 12 acres was previously occupied by the historic Rosenwald School in the East Altoont community. Seminal 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 classification does not support the proposed use necess necessitating the reszone.
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 and controlled by the public. Staff finds the requested PLI zoning classification to be consistent with the
Simol County Land Development Code and 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.
So staff requests the planning and zoning commission recommend to the board of county commissioners adoption of the ordinance enacting a reszone from R1 single family dwelling in R2 one and two family dwelling to PLI
public lands and institutions as per the following motion. Um I did want to state before I go into the motion that staff did receive an email in favor of the reszone which has been provided to you guys by email and in person. Um, so the motion follows as based on staff's
findings and the testimony and evidence received at the hearing, the planning and zoning commission finds the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan and it meets the applicable portions of the land development code and recommends the board of county commissioners adopt the ordinance enacting a reszone from R1 single family
dwelling and R2 one and two family dwelling to PLI public lands and institutions. And that concludes my presentation. >> Thank you. Are there questions of staff? >> Okay. Um, is the applicant present?
Who's who's serving as the applicant? >> Okay. >> Well, I didn't know someone from Parks was here that wanted to talk. >> Love it. >> Um, are there any members of the audience that would like to speak in favor or in opposition to this item? I don't have any cards.
>> Yes. Okay. Come on up, sir. Good afternoon. My name is uh Anthony Wilson. I reside at 115 Plymouth Avenue, Antoine Springs. Uh there was some more members. Uh the wife Christine wasn't
feeling good, so her husband, Mr. Wag, had to take her home. So, they asked me to turn in their uh comment sheets to the board here tonight. the uh reszoning of Rosen Mall. What What's the What's the purpose? I mean, what the
purpose of reszoning this school? Can you all tell us, please? >> Sir, um why don't you go ahead and finish your comments and then we'll have staff answer your question.
Well, that was my main one of my main concern. And uh I want to thank the county for for coming this far with building a need in the community, which is a community center, which is great,
and it's going to serve the community very well and whatnot. So, my other question is for y'all can let me know later on about the reasoning. Once the building is built, yes, it is. Uh we know that going to be it's going
to serve multi-purpose. What uh have y'all come up with a cost yet for just say if I like to rent the main uh ballroom uh for maybe 3 hours? What what are the prices
would be ranged at? Do y'all have a price in mind? That'd be another step. >> Well, so sir, um, parks and recreation will be able to provide that information to you and we can give you their number. >> Personal parks and recreation.
>> Yes. Mhm. They set the rates for rental rates for um, park facilities. So, they'll be able to provide that for you. >> All right. Well, before I leave tonight, can I uh, get that information? >> Sure. Yeah. One of our planners will give it to you.
All right. Um, thank you very much. And so we do see that there uh there's some developing that is going on on the property uh now and everything. And then the boat ramp, but you said that all of that
would be you I would have to go through the county to to find out about the boat ramp and the uses of the lake and and the facilities and all. >> Yeah, this will be so if you don't mind, chair. Um, so this resoning is required because currently all that's allowed on
the property per the zoning is single family units and dwelling units. The county doesn't want to do that. As you know, we're going to put in a community center there. So, we have to reszone the property to allow the changes to occur on the site. So, that's why they're that's why the county is coming to do
this is to make everything legal. So, once that happens and the projects develop, then parks will set up how the how it's going to be utilized. um the cost for utilization and those types of things. So if you have a question on the plan um Joy will give you the contact in
parks and you can talk to them. This plan is specific as as you need answers to. We don't have >> so it will stay so but it will stay zoned as commercial not >> it'll be it'll be public lands. So the county will always own it. So it's a public land. >> Okay. It'll be a public land. So it'll
still be uses as residential. No, it'll only be used as a park. >> It's only be used >> at a community center. >> Okay. Not commercial. >> Nope. >> Okay. And well, I got another question always. Uh the property owner, will it
will it taxes go be raised? >> Nope. It's just the county owns it, so we don't pay taxes to oursel. >> All right. Right. Good. Thank you. Is there any other member of the audience that'd like to speak? Come on up. Irving Simpson at 2091 South Ronald
Reagan Boulevard. I'm one of the community leaders, the president of East Alto Community Association, and I'll get with Mr. Wilson to answer some of his questions. But this is this is a great I'm for the project. Um, I was retired from the military after 23 years. And
when I moved back here in 2011, my mom and all her friends and everybody in the community been waiting to see something happen on this property. Um, now that we see dump trucks and tractors, we see a sidewalk and we see
these new pictures, we're ecstatic about the development of this. So, some of the concerns that Mr. Wilson may have, I I'll be able to answer some of them with him. And there was some confusion. They thought that when this the mail out came out that there was going to be
apartments built on and the county was trying to do something slick. So, I'm glad to hear that that's not the road we're going down and that is reszoning because the confusion is that it was a school there. So, how can it be residential? So, that y'all already cleared up some of these questions and
concerns. We just ready to continue continue to see this project develop and come to life. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you for your service. >> Okay. And with that, we'll close public comment. >> Um, would the applicant like to say anything else? >> Nope.
>> Okay. Um, are there questions from the board? Discussion or a motion? >> I'd like to make a motion. >> Second. I'd like to recommend that the board of uh county commissioners adopt the ordinance enacting a reszone from R1 single family dwelling and R2 one and
two family dwelling to PLI public lands and institutions on approximately 12.96 acres located on the north side of Merit Street approximately 0.25 miles east of Ronald Reagan Boulevard. >> Very good. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Okay. Motion and a second. All in favor?
I. Any opposed? No. Motion carries. Right. Um, Jack Murray, do you have anything for the board tonight? >> No, nothing to report. I don't know if it's on or not. um just um we're going to be um once the
legislation now that the legislation closed I'm pretty sure that Nessa will bring some updates that are relevant to the to the board and um and that's the only and then we're going to be working on some of the additional updates to the comprehensive plan due to those new
legislations that have been completed during this session. Okay, >> did you have some updates? >> Um, I don't have a comprehensive update at this time. Um, there were some legislation passed and some that didn't
pass and some we're still waiting on to see if the governor signs it or not. So next by the next meeting I should have something to be at least give you a synopsis of the bills that were passed that concern us and then if there's any
code changes or anything that we need to make then I'll let you know we'll start working on those. Okay. >> I will say there's going to be some changes, some things that we have to do for compatibility and how to um how we
are required to look at compatibility for residential next to residential. It will be something that the board actually has to look at when like the first project came that came to you tonight. Uh yes, the Sandy Lane project.
Um because House Bill 399 requires the county to do certain things with regard to compatibility just between residential and residential uses, not between any other land use or zoning category. And that bill actually went into effect um as soon as the governor
signed it. So it's in effect now. I haven't it just happened last week. I haven't been able to do a full analysis with that. And since you're a recommending board, I didn't feel it was necessary to explain because I really don't have a good my head wrapped around
it yet. But that will be something that will come to the board. And then um once I get a a good idea of what we're going to need to do and how to direct you as it pertains to that, that I will be talking about that in May when we come back because that'll be something that
we'll be we will have to address immediately. >> Okay. Thank you. Would you the board have anything else to discuss? >> Uh if I may um madame chairman, um just in regards to the land development code update, um if you please feel free to
reach out to me or Maya as you review the document if you have any questions or concern and um and also to clarify what would be the the expectation of the board at the next meeting in regards to staff's uh presentation. And would you like to see the presentation once again
that was presented today or would you like us to just do like a quick summary and enter into discussion and answering any questions? >> I think a quick summary and then allow us to present any question that we've developed um over the month. >> Okay. Thank you. I'm I'm also available
for questions too on the land development code amendments. If there's anything that you think would be in my wheelhouse, you can feel free to give me a call. We can talk about it. just we want you to be prep we want to be prepared at the meeting. We want to be able to give you the answers that you
need. So if you give us a little heads up beforehand then we can be prepared. >> No need to reprint the whole thing again unless unless there's going to be changes. >> Save our taxpayer dollars. >> Sorry. We'll send you meeting a journal.
Down. Doo doo doo doo doo.