Minutes 09-18-2012 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

doing, because with the dates and times and subsections and numbers, no one is going to be able to track that in the audience. John Roberts: I misunderstood what you were saying, I thought you were saying put it up on the screen and vote on what you see. Commissioner Hemminger: I would still prefer to have it on the screen so that they know what we are doing. Chair Pelissier: I know that it is our plan to arrange to be able to do that for all of our motions. A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner McKee to close the public hearing. VOTE: UNANIMOUS The BOCC will first need to take action on the Special Use Permit findings of fact. The findings of fact have been organized per relevant UDO section to aid in making motions to approve or deny. The cadence on taking action should be as follows (NOTE —This script has been written based on the belief the permit will be approved. If not, the Motion from the BOCC would be to reject the Planning Board's recommendation and make a finding the applicant had not met their burden. Please bear in mind if this is the case, there will need to be evidence provided indicating how the BOCC member making the motion arrives at the conclusion the applicant has not met their burden): A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner McKee to affirm the recommendation of the Planning Board concerning the application's compliance with the provisions of Section(s) 2.2 and 2.7.3 of the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance, as detailed on pages 85 through 87 of the abstract package. VOTE: UNANIMOUS A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to affirm the recommendation of the Planning Board concerning the application's compliance with the provisions of Section 2.7.5 of the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance, as detailed on page 88 of the abstract package. VOTE: UNANIMOUS