Laserfiche WebLink
and Zoning Commission's unanimous recommendation. <br />Chairman Macht advised he could not support this rezoning request because, in his <br />opinion, it is not compatible with the surrounding land use. He would only support it at the <br />6 units/acre level. <br />The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in <br />this matter. <br />Bruce Barkett, attorney for the applicant, 756 Beachland Blvd., directed a series of <br />questions concerning this rezoning to Director Keating in order to establish a record in this <br />quasi judicial public hearing. <br />Vice Chairman Ginn posed a question to Mr. Barkett; in responding, he cited case <br />law of Snyder vs Brevard County, <br />Chairman Macht continued his contention that RM -8 is inappropriate, and Mr. <br />Barkett countered that Chairman Macht's argument would be true if a lower density served <br />some public purpose. <br />Mr. Barkett stressed that the County's Comp Plan is the guiding principal for <br />development and the Comp Plan identifies levels of service that are the standard. This <br />application satisfies all those levels of service requirement and there is no testimony or <br />evidence before the Board that there would be any public purpose served by lowering the <br />density. RM -8 is consistent with the Comp Plan and most of the surrounding properties are <br />already RM -8. <br />Vice Chairman Ginn raised concern about a density bonus on this property, and <br />Director Keating responded that the site plan will come before the Board and if a density <br />bonus is requested, it will be included in that site plan. <br />Discussion ensued. <br />April 15, 2003 <br />