Subject:
Title
City Pointe Landfall LLC (David Bassford) requests a Small-Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment (24S.11) to change the Future Land Use designation from RES-1, RES- 2, RES-4, and NC to CC and RES-4. (24SS00009) (Tax Account 2411252) (District 1)
End
Fiscal Impact:
None
Dept/Office:
Planning & Development
Requested Action:
Recommendation
It is requested that the Board of County Commissioners conduct a public hearing to consider a Small-Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment (24S.11) to change the Future Land Use designation from RES-1 (Residential 1), RES- 2 (Residential 2), RES-4 (Residential 4), and NC (Neighborhood Commercial) to CC (Community Commercial) and RES-4 (Residential 4). NOTE: The applicant has notified staff that it is willing to accept a change to RES 2 (Residential 2) in place of the requested RES 4 on the residential portion of the property. That alternative is addressed in Addendum #2.
End
Summary Explanation and Background:
The applicant requests a Small-Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment (SSCPA) to change the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) from Residential 1 (RES 1), Residential 2 (RES 2), Residential 4 (RES 4) and Neighborhood Commercial (NC) to Community Commercial (CC) and Residential 4 (RES 4) on a 12.86 acre parcel for the purpose of developing 23 single-family residential homes and a commercial portion for indoor RV storage. The applicant has a companion rezoning application, 24PUD00003, requesting a change from Estate Use (EU) and Residential Professional (RP) to Planned Unit Development (PUD). The subject parcel is currently undeveloped and is located on the east side of N. Highway 1 and the west side of N. Indian River Drive, approximately 200 feet south of Roundtree Drive. N. Indian River Drive bifurcates a small portion of the subject property.
The subject property retains three original FLU designations established in 1988 by the Brevard County Comprehensive Plan: RES 2, RES 4, and NC. The RES 1 FLU designation was established after April 13, 2004, Board Directive, under Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2004A.5, which is found in the March 2005 Small Area Study Examining Policy 1.12 Protection of Riverside Residential Lands. With the amendment being approved, it changed the FLU from RES 4 to RES 1.
To the north is a subdivision, recorded as Parkchester in Plat Book 18, Page 114, with approximately 63 single-family detached homes on approximately 0.2 to 0.25 acre lots with RU-1-11 zoning designation and RES 2 FLU. Additionally, there is one parcel, 8.06 acres, developed with a single-family residence with EU zoning designation and RES 4 FLU. This parcel also includes a nursery, which has AU zoning and RES 1 FLU. There is another parcel which is 0.56 acres, developed with a single-family residence, EU zoning, and RES 2 FLU. The final parcel is 0.49 acres, developed with a single-family residence with EU zoning and includes RES 2 FLU. To the south is a 0.17-acre parcel, cemetery land, with zoning designation IN(L) with RES 1 FLU. A second parcel is 1.67 acres, developed with a single-family residence, EU zoning designation and RES 4 FLU. A third parcel totals 1.53 acres, undeveloped with AU zoning designation and RES 1 FLU. To the east of the subject property is the Indian River. To the west is a 1.32-acre parcel, developed with an office building with RP zoning and NC FLU designation. Additionally, to the west of the subject parcel is Highway 1.
Previous PDP revision was submitted on October 27, 2025. Addendum #1, described the changes and outstanding staff comments to the PDP since the previous Board meeting. A substantive change the Board may wish to consider includes a modification with the 15-foot buffer of the project, which requires a waiver to Section 62-2883(d). This Section reads as follows: “Buffer requirements: In the design of a proposed residential subdivision, a minimum 15-foot perimeter buffer shall be required. Such buffer shall remain undisturbed along all property boundaries and shall be platted as a common tract, separate from individual lots. Landscape improvements may be constructed within said buffer tract subject to review and approval by the county. The buffer requirements described herein shall not apply to minor subdivisions.” In lieu of an undisturbed buffer, the applicant proposes to install landscaping analogous to a type “B” buffer, as defined in Brevard County Code of Ordinances.
The item was continued at the request of the applicant from its September Zoning Meeting to the October Zoning Meeting. At the October Zoning Meeting, the applicant requested that the Board continue the item from its October Zoning Meeting to the November 6, 2025, Zoning Meeting. and the Board did so. On November 6, 2025, the Board continued this item to its December 11, 2025 Zoning Meeting.
Addendum #2 includes revisions to prior staff comments, a summary of outstanding PDP-related issues, remarks made by the applicant during previous Board meetings, and additional considerations for the Board. The addendum also presents an applicant alternative proposal, that would allow for a reduced Future Land Use designation (RES 2) in lieu of the RES 4 applied for (the Commercial land use portion would be unchanged from the application). Please refer to Addendum #2 for the full staff analysis of both the applicants request and the alternative proposed RES 2. Both the original PDP and the alternative proposed PDP reflecting the RES 2 are included in the attachments.
Board Considerations
• Should the Board wish to consider the applicant’s alternative proposal to consider a Small-Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the Future Land Use designation from RES-1 (Residential 1), RES-2 (Residential 2), RES-4 (Residential 4), and NC (Neighborhood Commercial) to CC (Community Commercial) and RES-2 (Residential 2), the Board should consider whether to make the necessary finding that the proposed PDP is compatible with adjacent development in order to make the subject property eligible for the 25% density bonus allowed for under Policy 1.8(D) of the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Should the Board not make such a finding to allow the density bonus, the allowable density on the subject property would allow for 21 units, while the applicants proposed PDP associated with the companion application for rezoning calls for 23 residential units.
Clerk to the Board Instructions:
Please return a copy of the filed ordinance to Planning and Development.