Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
13 <br /> 1 <br /> 2 Chair Pelissier: I know that it is our plan to arrange to be able to do that for all of our motions. <br /> 3 <br /> 4 <br /> 5 <br /> 6 A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner McKee to close <br /> 7 the public hearing. <br /> 8 <br /> 9 VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br /> 10 <br /> 11 The BOCC will first need to take action on the Special Use Permit findings of fact. The findings <br /> 12 of fact have been organized per relevant UDO section to aid in making motions to approve or <br /> 13 deny. The cadence on taking action should be as follows <br /> 14 <br /> 15 (NOTE—This script has been written based on the belief the permit will be approved. If <br /> 16 not, the Motion from the BOCC would be to reject the Planning Board's recommendation <br /> 17 and make a finding the applicant had not met their burden. Please bear in mind if this <br /> 18 is the case, there will need to be evidence provided indicating how the BOCC member <br /> 19 making the motion arrives at the conclusion the applicant has not met their burden): <br /> 20 <br /> 21 A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner McKee to <br /> 22 affirm the recommendation of the Planning Board concerning the application's compliance with <br /> 23 the provisions of Section(s) 2.2 and 2.7.3 of the Orange County Unified Development <br /> 24 Ordinance, as detailed on pages 85 through 87 of the abstract package. <br /> 25 <br /> 26 VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br /> 27 <br /> 28 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to affirm the <br /> 29 recommendation of the Planning Board concerning the application's compliance with the <br /> 30 provisions of Section 2.7.5 of the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance, as detailed <br /> 31 . on page 88 of the abstract package. <br /> 32 <br /> 33 VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br /> 34 <br /> 35 A motion was made by Commissioner Yuhasz, seconded by Commissioner Hemminger to <br /> 36 affirm the recommendation of the Planning Board concerning the application's compliance with <br /> 37 the provisions of Section(s) 3.3 and 6.3 of the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance, <br /> 38 as detailed on pages 89 through 90 of the abstract package. <br /> 39 <br /> 40 VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br /> 41 <br /> 42 A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner McKee to <br /> 43 affirm the recommendation of the Planning Board concerning the application's compliance with <br />