Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Citypoint Pud Continuance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners grant continuance for CityPoint Landfill PUD amid resident opposition
Summary
Brevard County commissioners agreed to continue two companion land-use and PUD zoning applications from CityPoint Landfill LLC to the July 3 meeting after the applicant said it would substantially revise plans following a meeting with residents.
Brevard County commissioners voted 5-0 April 3 to continue two companion applications from CityPoint Landfill LLC — a small-scale comprehensive plan amendment and a PUD rezoning — to the board's July 3 meeting so the applicant can redesign the proposal after neighborhood opposition.
The applicant, represented by Kim Risenka, asked for the continuance and told the board the developer held a meeting April 1 attended by about 59 residents and District 1 staff and that the developer plans to “substantially revise” the proposal, including a reduction in density. County Attorney Morris recommended granting the first continuance request as a matter of fairness and to avoid legal challenges that could overturn any later decision.
The request on the record were applications 24SS0009 (plan amendment) and 24PUD00003 (PUD rezoning). Risenka said the applicant would like time to redesign the project so it would be more acceptable to neighbors. “We just had the opportunity to meet with them on Tuesday, April 1. Fifty-nine attendees…we've listened to them,” Risenka told the board.
County Attorney Morris explained the legal rationale for the continuance, saying that if testimony is taken now and the plan changes materially before final action, “none of the testimony from tonight can be considered and it would confuse the record.” He recommended the board grant the continuance unless the applicant had abused the continuance privilege.
Planning staff said a revised PUD that reduces density could still be processed on the board’s July 3 schedule if the applicant files a revised application by mid-May and the matter can be considered at the June local planning and zoning meeting. Staff cautioned, however, that because a PUD’s preliminary development plan is integral to approval, many changes typically trigger a return to planning and zoning for a new recommendation.
Commissioner Altman moved to continue H1 (plan amendment) and Commissioner Delaney seconded; the roll call showed Delaney, Goodson, Atkinson, Altman and Chairman Feltner voting yes. Commissioners similarly voted 5-0 to continue H2 (PUD rezoning) after a separate motion.
The board’s action preserves the record while the applicant develops revised plans and schedules an additional public meeting for neighbors before the next hearing.
Two companion agenda items that require separate board action were continued to July 3; staff said the applicant may be able to meet the schedule if updated materials are submitted by mid-May.
