Minutes 11-20-2012 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

• Recommended approval finding the applicant complied with the standards of the UDO. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Receive the Planning Board recommendation, 2. If necessary, deliberate further on the application, 3. Close the public hearing, Michael Harvey: There is an existing stream through this portion of the property. You will recall from the August Quarterly Public Hearing we introduced into the record a letter from Orange County Erosion Control relating to the completion of a surface water investigation that certified that the stream does indeed stop and restart, so the applicant is showing the appropriate buffer on the site plan. Attachment 6 of this packet is the Planning Board's recommendation with various findings. You will recall that with Special Use Permits, decisions are based on competent material and substantial evidence entered into the record. The Planning Board found sufficient evidence in the record that the applicant complied with all requirements in terms of a Class A SUP Application and Major Subdivision Applications; that the applicant complied with all development design criteria; that the applicant had complied with all specific and general standards in the UDO for the issuance of the special use permit. Ultimately, the Planning Board recommended the imposition of numerous conditions, which you will find at the end of Attachment 6 regarding the overall development of this property. The recommendation tonight is that you receive the Planning Board recommendation; if necessary, deliberate further; close the public hearing; and that you take action on this request by utilizing the script staff has provided to you in Attachment 7 to review and approve the various findings of fact associated with this project; and that ultimately you have a vote to approve the special use permit and impose the recommended conditions as recommended by the Planning Board. What the Planning Board has essentially recommended is that you find the applicant has met their burden with respect to compliance with Section 2.2 and 2.7.3 of the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance and that they have complied with all of the allocations and requirements. You have the opportunity in affirming this to essentially utilize and refer the Planning Board recommendation. Having said that, if the motion is to reject this finding, you're going to have to come up with your rationale for the evidence that's in the record justifying that finding. As I move on, the Planning Board has voted to affirm that the applicant has met their burden with respect to complying with Section 2.7.5 of the UDO. This section deals specifically with public notice and public advertisement. They determined that there was sufficient evidence in the record and to make this an affirmative finding. The next motion will be concerning to affirm or reject compliance with Section 7.14.2. Once again, the Planning Board voted unanimously to find that there was sufficient evidence in the record to make this determination. The next motion will deal with affirming or rejecting compliance with Section 5.15.6 of the UDO, which deals with the special use permit composed within the subdivision. Once again, the Planning Board voted unanimously to find that the applicant complied. Next, you're going to be asked to affirm or to reject the Planning Board's finding with respect to compliance with Section 5.3.2b where the applicant is required to demonstrate compliance with