Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning Map Amendment topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Oviedo LPA votes to approve rezoning of about 3.8 acres on Pine Avenue to R-3 for 11 duplexes

5514399 · July 31, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Oviedo Local Planning Agency voted to approve Ordinance No. 17-59, changing roughly 3.8 acres from R-2 to R-3 to permit an 11-duplex (22-unit) multifamily development; staff said utility capacity is conditionally available pending a consumptive-use permit modification.

The Oviedo Local Planning Agency voted July 29 to approve Ordinance No. 17-59, a zoning map amendment to change roughly 3.8 acres on the west side of Pine Avenue (about 500 feet north of State Road 426) from residential R-2 to residential R-3, allowing a proposed 11-duplex (22-unit) multifamily development.

City planning staff told the panel the property’s 2045 Comprehensive Plan future land use designation is medium-density residential (MDR), which allows up to eight dwelling units per acre — about 30 units on the site’s acreage — and that the R-3 zoning would be consistent with the MDR designation. “The multifamily residential land use is not currently permissible within the property's R2 zoning district,” staff said, noting the R-3 district would permit the duplex-style multifamily product the owner proposes. “The only difference is the way that the lot is subdivided,” a staff member added.

The applicant, Chris Thompson, identified himself as “the civil engineering consultant and applicant on the project” and described the plan to develop 11 duplex buildings on a single lot rather than subdividing into individual lots for each duplex. Thompson and staff said the proposed layout would not increase the site’s maximum permitted dwelling units under the comprehensive plan; staff calculated about 30 potential units by-right under the MDR designation and said the proposed 22 units fit within that envelope.

Public comment included a neighboring resident, Myron Meyer of 201 North Pine Avenue, who said he was “concerned about my property value” and that the project and existing duplexes had contributed to trash and a change in the neighborhood’s character. Staff and the applicant responded that the proposed duplexes would be similar in character to nearby development and that solid-waste service would follow standard pickup procedures; the applicant also said infrastructure for the multifamily development — rights-of-way, stormwater and utilities — would be privately owned and maintained rather than dedicated to the city if the site is developed as multifamily.

Staff’s review reported adequate transportation, sewer and solid-waste capacity for the proposal, and said the city has operational water treatment capacity but cannot fully vest water service until the city’s consumptive-use permit (CUP) with the St. Johns River Water Management District is modified. Staff noted a CUP modification has been filed and that a Lower Floridan Aquifer test well project is anticipated to start construction in 2025 with completion in 2026. Staff said those measures are intended to address regional water-permitting limits and that the city is approaching its permitted withdrawal limit.

On schools, staff cited a Seminole County Public Schools impact analysis and said students generated by the development could be accommodated within Seminole County, though one middle school (Jackson Heights) was described as having “tight capacity” and could lead to some students going to other nearby schools within the county. Staff emphasized that school capacity decisions are made by the school district and not by the LPA.

After discussion and public comment, the agency moved and seconded approval of Ordinance No. 17-59; members present voted in favor and the motion passed. Specific implementation timing and any required site-plan approvals or utility vesting were not specified during the meeting; staff emphasized that water service cannot be guaranteed until the CUP modification and related well project proceed.

The record of the meeting shows the LPA approved the zoning map amendment as presented; any subsequent permits, site-plan review, or utility assurances would occur through separate city processes and regional water-permitting steps.