TO: Indian River County Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: John A. Titkanich Jr., County Administrator
FROM: Patrick J. Murphy, Chief of Long-Range Planning
DATE: November 26, 2025
SUBJECT: Gladys Bastin’s Request to Rezone Approximately
±1.50 Acres from A-1, Agricultural District to
RS-6, Residential Single-Family District
(96090014-98557) [Quasi-Judicial]
__________________________________________________________________
BACKGROUND
The subject property, comprising approximately ±1.50 acres, is located on the north side of 16th Street, approximately 750 feet east of 74th Avenue. The parcel is currently zoned A-1 (Agricultural District) (Attachment 1), is within the Urban Service Area (USA), and has a Future Land Use designation of M-1, Medium-Density Residential-1 (Attachment 2). The property is located within the SR 60 Corridor Plan Area, as set forth in Section 911.19. - SR 60 Corridor special development regulations of the Indian River County Land Development Regulations (LDRs). These regulations are intended to promote an attractive and orderly corridor through enhanced landscaping, quality building design, and coordinated signage, consistent with the vision of SR 60 as a significant business and residential center.
The applicant’s justification letter states, “I am requesting to rezone my property from A-1 to RS-6 to allow for a small portion of the property be lot-split and conveyed to my grandson. The purpose of this request is to enable him to build a single-family home on the newly created parcel.” The applicant currently resides on the property within an existing single-family home and has lived on the site since 1975, when the surrounding area was zoned Agricultural and characterized by rural land use patterns. Over the past 50 years, as the SR 60 corridor has developed, most of the adjacent surrounding properties have transitioned to residential subdivisions and other uses consistent with the M-1, Medium Density Residential Future Land Use designation. According to Table 2.14 of the Comprehensive Plan, A-1 zoning is not a permitted implementing district within the M-1 Future Land Use designation.
Pursuant to Section 911.06 of the County’s Land Development Regulations, the A-1 district requires a minimum lot area of 200,000 square feet (one dwelling unit per five acres); with an existing lot size of approximately 1.5 acres, the subject property is nonconforming for residential purposes in an area now predominantly developed for that use. Accordingly, the requested RS-6 zoning would implement the M-1 Future Land Use designation, bring the parcel into conformity with surrounding zoning and development patterns, allow development at an intensity appropriate for the Urban Service Area (USA), and enable the applicant to pursue a lawful lot split to accommodate a second single-family residence for a family member. The Comprehensive Plan specifies under AGRICULTURAL LAND (Page 107) that “all land designated for agricultural use is located outside the Urban Service Area”
The surrounding area reflects a residential development pattern of the SR 60 corridor, with an established mix of multiple-family and single-family residential. Directly north of the subject property are two single-family residences located on separate A-1 zoned parcels, both longstanding residential uses established in the early 1970s. These parcels, like the subject property, are nonconforming under current A-1 standards. Immediately north of this small cluster of A-1 parcels is undeveloped farmland zoned RM-6. To the east of the site lies the Breezewood Park subdivision, a single-family neighborhood platted in 1956 and zoned RS-6. Further East along 16th Street is the Village of Lexington multifamily subdivision, platted in 1986 and zoned RM-6. South of the subject parcel, across 16th Street, is the Point West East Village a single-family subdivision, platted in 2006 and zoned PDTND (Planned Development Traditional Neighborhood Design). Directly abutting to and west of the subject property, the Willows subdivision, approved in 2016 as a plat-over-site-plan single-family development, is zoned RM-8. Farther west, across 74th Avenue, is Westlake Estates, platted in 1979.
Collectively, the surrounding developments illustrate the SR 60 corridor’s gradual transformation over the past five decades from rural and agricultural uses to a cohesive residential area characterized by medium-density neighborhoods. The subject property’s M-1, Medium Density Residential Future Land Use designation aligns with this established development pattern, and the requested rezoning from A-1 to RS-6 would provide consistency with adjacent and nearby residential zoning districts, supporting a logical continuation of the corridor’s residential framework under the SR 60 Corridor Plan and the County’s Comprehensive Plan.
In terms of permitted uses, there are both similarities and differences between the existing A-1 district and the proposed RS-6 district (See Attachment 3 for a zoning district comparison table). The distinctions between these two zoning districts are best illustrated through their respective purpose statements, as outlined in the County’s Land Development Regulations (LDRs). These purpose statements provide a clear framework for understanding the intent and scope of each district's allowable uses and development potential. The purpose statements are as follows:
A-1: Agricultural-1 District: This District is intended to provide areas suitable for agriculture, silviculture, and the conservation and management of open space, vegetative cover, natural systems, aquifer recharge areas, wildlife areas, and scenic areas. These districts are also intended to provide opportunities for residential uses at very low densities to promote housing opportunities in the county. These districts are further intended to permit activities that require non-urban locations and do not detrimentally impact lands devoted to rural and agricultural activities.
RS-6: Single-Family Residential District: This district is intended to provide areas suitable for moderate-density single-family residential development within the Urban Service Area, at a maximum density of six (6) dwelling units per acre. The RS-6, Single-Family Residential District is established to implement the policies of the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan for managing land designated for residential use, promoting single-family housing opportunities, and ensuring adequate public facilities to meet the needs of residents.
ANALYSIS
The following analysis is per Chapter 902: Administrative Mechanisms, Section 902.12(3), which states that all proposed amendments shall be submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission, which shall consider such proposals in accordance with items (a) through (k) of Section 902.12(3).
Item A - Whether the proposed amendment conflicts with any applicable portion of the land development regulations (LDRs).
Staff cannot identify any conflicts between the requested RS-6 zoning and the County’s LDRs. Both the current A-1 zoning and the proposed RS-6 zoning are established districts under the LDRs. The requested RS-6 zoning district is consistent with, and would bring the property into conformity with the existing M-1 (Medium Density Residential-1) Future Land Use designation.
Item B - Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan.
The goals, objectives, and policies outlined in the comprehensive plan are critical to guiding the County's development. Policies serve as actionable commitments that direct how the County will shape and manage growth. These policies form the foundation for all land development decisions, ensuring that the County’s planning efforts align with its long-term vision.
The request to rezone to RS-6 is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, particularly the provisions of Chapter 2 Future Land Use Element regarding development and land use compatibility. Several key Comprehensive Plan policies and objectives apply to this proposal:
Urban Service Area & Efficient Growth: The Comprehensive Plan directs development into the Urban Service Area, where infrastructure and services are available. (Objective 1: Compact, Energy Efficient, Low-Density Development). The subject property is located within the Urban Service Area and fronts 16th Street a Major Collector roadway with county water and sewer service available. By focusing development on this infill site consistent with its M-1 designation, the rezoning advances the Plan’s intent to concentrate growth where it can be most efficiently served (Objective 1), thereby discouraging sprawl and ensuring effective use of infrastructure investments. The request is also consistent with Policy 4.1, which states that land use districts should be located in a manner that “concentrates urban uses, thereby discouraging urban sprawl.”
The Comprehensive Plan provides that all residential development greater than 0.2 units/acre and all non-agricultural uses shall be located within the Urban Service Area (Objective 2). Policy 2.2 specifies that the County shall encourage and direct growth into the Urban Service Area through zoning and the application of LDRs. Since the proposed rezoning would allow Single-Family residential development on the subject property, and the property lies within the Urban Service Area, the request directly implements Policy 2.2 by aligning the zoning with the site’s designated land use.
Future Land Use Designation: Policy 1.13 of the Comprehensive Plan designates Medium-Density Residential areas for urban-scale development within the Urban Service Area and near existing urban centers. The Future Land Use designation of M-1 (Medium-Density Residential-1) permits residential uses up to 8 dwelling units per acre (Policy 1.14). The requested RS-6 zoning appropriately implements this designation by allowing single-family residential development within the permitted density range. As the Comprehensive Plan specifies that Future Land Use Map densities represent maximums, the proposed zoning remains fully consistent with Policies 1.13 and 1.14 by supporting appropriately scaled, efficient infill development within the established SR 60 corridor.
Zoning Compatibility: The proposed rezoning from A-1 (Agricultural District) to RS-6 (Single-Family Residential District) is compatible with surrounding land uses and consistent with the locational criteria for zoning outlined in Future Land Use Policy 1.43 of the Comprehensive Plan. The subject property is surrounded by established residential zoning on all sides, including A-1 parcels with single-family homes to the north, RS-6 zoning to the east within the Breezewood Park subdivision, RM-6 zoning further east within the Village of Lexington, and RM-8 zoning directly west within the Willows subdivision. South of the site, across 16th Street, lies the Point West East Village Phase I subdivision, also developed with single-family homes. The area is entirely residential in character and is not adjacent to any commercial or industrial zoning districts. By meeting the guidelines of Policy 1.43, the proposed rezoning is consistent with Comprehensive Plan policies aimed at promoting compatible land use arrangements.
Item C - Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with existing and proposed land uses.
The proposed rezoning is consistent with the existing and planned land uses in the vicinity, as reflected in both the current development pattern and the County’s Future Land Use Map. The subject property’s Future Land Use designation of M-1 (Medium Density Residential) ] allows for residential development up to 8 units per acre. While the existing A-1 zoning does not implement or correspond to the M-1 designation, RS-6 is an allowed and appropriate implementing district.
Item D - Whether the proposed amendment follows the adopted county thoroughfare plan.
The County’s Thoroughfare Plan identifies 16th Street as an east-west collector serving this portion of the Urban Service Area. The subject property has direct frontage on 16th Street, providing suitable access for urban residential development. Concentrating residential use at this location is consistent with thoroughfare planning principles, as collector roadways are designed to accommodate traffic volumes associated with suburban infill development. At the time of development review, the project will be required to meet all applicable access management standards under the County’s Thoroughfare Plan and Land Development Regulations. The rezoning itself does not propose any changes to roadway alignments or classifications and remains fully consistent with the adopted Thoroughfare Plan.
Item E - Whether the proposed amendment would generate traffic which would decrease the service levels on roadways below the level adopted in the comprehensive plan.
The rezoning is not expected to cause any adverse impact to traffic levels of service on area roadways. Under the current A-1 zoning, the property can yield no additional dwelling units beyond the existing home. Based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition), detached single-family housing generates an average of 9.43 daily trips. Under the proposed RS-6 zoning, the property could support up to nine single-family units, generating approximately 85 daily trips. Although not practical due to the constraints of development standards, this density “potential” represents a net increase of 76 daily trips at full buildout.
According to County concurrency standards, projects generating fewer than 400 daily trips are not required to submit a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA); therefore, a TIA was not required for this rezoning. 16th Street is currently operating at its adopted level of service standard, and if the subject property were developed to its maximum allowable density, the resulting traffic would not degrade roadway operations below acceptable levels. Importantly, this trip generation scenario reflects a maximum-intensity concurrency analysis for rezoning purposes only; a rezoning does not commit the parcel to the assumed use nor guarantee that this level of traffic will occur.
Item F - Whether there have been changed conditions which would warrant an amendment.
Since the establishment of A-1 zoning on the subject property, which was implemented through the original 1975-1985 Indian River County Zoning Atlas and has remained unchanged since that adoption, the surrounding area has experienced significant change consistent with the broader development of the SR 60 corridor. Over the past several decades, this portion of the Urban Service Area has transitioned from predominantly agricultural and rural uses to established residential neighborhoods, reflecting the corridor’s evolution into a medium-density residential community. The Comprehensive Plan recognizes the SR 60 corridor as an area suitable for urban-scale development within the Urban Service Area, where residential growth can be efficiently served by existing infrastructure. Given these conditions, the continued application of A-1 zoning is no longer reflective of the prevailing development pattern or the M-1 Future Land Use designation.
Item G - Whether the proposed amendment would decrease the level of service established in the comprehensive plan for sanitary sewer, potable water, solid waste, drainage, and recreation.
Based upon the analysis conducted by staff, it has been determined that all concurrency-mandated facilities, including stormwater management, solid waste, water, wastewater, and recreation, have adequate capacity to accommodate the most intense use of the subject property under the proposed rezoning. Per Indian River County LDRs, the applicant will be required to pay utility connection and other customary fees and comply with other routine administrative procedures. As with all developments, a more detailed concurrency review will be conducted during the development review process.
As per Section 910.07 of the County’s LDRs, the conditional concurrency review examines the available capacity of each facility with respect to a proposed project. Since rezoning requests are not development projects, County regulations call for the concurrency review to be based on the most intense use of the subject property allowed within the requested zoning district. The site is within the urban service boundary therefore all essential utilities and services are either currently available at the site or can be extended to serve future development, and there is adequate capacity to accommodate the maximum potential development of the property under RS-6 zoning:
1. Size of Area to be Rezoned: ±1.5 acres
2. Existing Zoning District: A-1, Agricultural District
(up to 1 unit /5 acres)
3. Proposed Zoning District: RS-6, Multiple-Family Residential District
(up to 8 units/acre)
4. Most Intense Use of Entire Property 1 dwelling unit (based on existing)
Under Existing Zoning District:
5. Most Intense Use of Entire Property 9 dwelling units (based on 6 units/acre)
Under Proposed Zoning District:
Item H - Whether the proposed amendment would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment.
No adverse environmental impacts are expected to result from the rezoning. The subject property does not contain any land designated by the State of Florida or the U.S. Federal Government as environmentally sensitive or protected land, such as wetlands or sensitive uplands. The rezoning does not authorize any specific construction or site disturbance (it only changes the zoning map designation), and so it has no direct impact on the environment. When development is proposed for the subject site, a more detailed environmental analysis based on the site-specific development proposal may be conducted.
Item I - Whether the proposed amendment would result in an orderly and logical development pattern, specifically identifying any negative effects on such pattern.
The proposed rezoning will facilitate an orderly and logical development pattern in this area. By replacing the existing A-1 zoning with RS-6, the amendment brings the parcel into conformity with its M-1 Future Land Use designation and surrounding single-family residential context, ensuring consistency with the established neighborhood pattern and resulting in no adverse effects.
Item J - Whether the proposed amendment would conflict with the public interest and is in harmony with the purpose and interest of the land development regulations.
Staff has not identified any adverse impacts to public welfare and finds that the request aligns with the purpose and intent of the land development regulations. The proposed amendment is consistent with established planning principles and supports the broader objectives of promoting orderly growth and compatible land use. As such, the request is deemed to be in harmony with the County's regulatory framework and community development goals.
Item K - Any other matters that may be deemed appropriate by the planning and zoning commission or the board of county commissioners in review and consideration of the proposed amendment, such as police protection, fire protection, and emergency medical services.
Based upon the analysis conducted by staff, it has been determined that all concurrency-mandated facilities have adequate capacity to accommodate the most intense use of the subject property under the proposed rezoning. The subject property is in an area of the County that is readily serviceable by existing fire and emergency medical facilities. The Indian River County Sheriff’s Office provides law enforcement in the unincorporated area and routine patrols already cover the SR 60 corridor. No issues are foreseen in extending coverage to new development.
REQUIRED NOTICE
For this project, staff were required to publish a legal advertisement in the newspaper, send out notice by mail to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site, and post a project notice sign at the project site. All these items were completed by staff.
CONCLUSION
Based on the analysis above, staff concludes that the request to rezone the ±1.5-acre parcel from A-1 to RS-6 is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, meets all applicable land development regulations, and will advance the County’s planning objectives for the area. The subject property is located within an established residential area where the proposed RS-6 zoning will promote compatible infill development and reinforce the County’s vision for balanced, orderly, and sustainable residential growth within the Urban Service Area.
BUDGETARY IMPACT
The rezoning request has no budgetary impact
PREVIOUS BOARD ACTIONS
At their regular meeting of November 13, 2025, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the requested rezoning from A-1 to RS-6.
POTENTIAL FUTURE BOARD ACTIONS
This request is the only Board actions necessary to effectuate the rezoning request
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Recommended Action
Based on the analysis and conclusions outlined in this report, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the request to rezone the ±1.5-acre subject parcel from A-1 to RS-6.