Browse
Search
Agenda - 11-20-2012 - 6b
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2012
>
Agenda - 11-20-2012 - Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 11-20-2012 - 6b
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/23/2015 11:52:40 AM
Creation date
11/16/2012 4:16:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
11/20/2012
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
6b
Document Relationships
Minutes 11-20-2012
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2012
S Planning - Weekly Homes LLC re ICP Dunhill, LLC Special Use Permit - Agenda 11-20-2012 - 6b
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Various Documents\2010 - 2019\2014
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
141
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
140 <br /> ii. Motion finding there is or there is not sufficient evidence in the record the <br /> project complies with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (b) of the UDO in that the use <br /> will maintain the value of contiguous property. <br /> This motion is based on competent material and evidence entered into the <br /> record of these proceedings, including: <br /> NOTE — the following represents the findings of the Planning Board. If <br /> the motion is to find there is sufficient evidence in the record to find <br /> compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (b) this list must be read verbatim <br /> so it is in the record. <br /> • The application package and project narrative contained within <br /> Attachment 1 of the August 27, 2012 Quarterly Public Hearing <br /> package. <br /> • A letter from Joe Lyle, real estate broker, indicating the project <br /> will not impact the value of adjacent property contained within <br /> Attachment 1 of the August 27, 2012 Quarterly Public Hearing <br /> package. <br /> • Applicant testimony from the August 27, 2012 Quarterly Public <br /> Hearing and the October 3, 2012 Planning Board meeting. <br /> and <br /> • A lack of competent material and substantial evidence entered <br /> into the record demonstrating the project's lack of compliance <br /> with established standards. <br /> If the motion is to find there is insufficient evidence in the record to find <br /> the project is in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (b), the <br /> Commissioner making the motion will have to specifically denote what is <br /> absent and explain what, if any, evidence is in the record disputing the <br /> claims of the applicant that they are in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) <br /> (2) (b). <br /> Motion finding there is or is not sufficient evidence in the record the <br /> project complies with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (c) of the UDO in that the use <br /> is in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and the use is in <br /> compliance with the plan for the physical development of the County as <br /> embodied in these regulations and in the Comprehensive Plan. <br /> This motion is based on competent material and evidence entered into the <br /> record of these proceedings, including: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.