Agenda - 11-20-2012 - 6b - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

138 NOTE — if the motion is to reject, meaning the BOCC does not agree the applicant has demonstrated compliance with the specific provision of the UDO, the individual making the motion will need to provide some explanation justifying the finding that the applicant has not established, through competent material and substantial evidence,the project is in compliance with the UDO. e. A motion to either affirm or reject the recommendation of the Planning Board concerning the application's compliance with the provisions of Section 5.3.2 of the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance as detailed within Attachment 6 of the abstract package. Second. Vote. NOTE — if the motion is to reject, meaning the BOCC does not agree the applicant has demonstrated compliance with the specific provision of the UDO, the individual making the motion will need to provide some explanation justifying the finding that the applicant has not established, through competent material and substantial evidence,the project is in compliance with the UDO. f. A motion will need to be made regarding compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2)of the Ordinance as follows (NOTE — Whomever makes the motion will have to cite the 'evidence' in the record utilized justifying the motion to approve or deny. Attachment 6 contains the recommendations of the Planning Board including the evidence utilized to reach the conclusion. This 'evidence' must be spelled out explicitly by the Commissioner making the motion. If the motion is to deny then the Commissioner making the motion will have to spell out explicitly the evidence within the record utilized to justify a negative finding): L Motion finding either there is or is not sufficient evidence in the record the project complies with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (a) of the UDO in that the use will maintain and promote the public health, safety and general welfare, if located where proposed and developed and operated according to the plan as submitted.