Orange County NC Website
This motion is based on competent material and evidence entered into the record of <br /> these proceedings, including: <br /> • Staff abstract and attachments, including the SUP application and site plan. <br /> • Staff testimony on the project's compliance with the UDO from the Public Hearing and the <br /> March/April Planning Board meetings. <br /> •Applicant testimony from Mr. Louis lannone, Mr. Bret Niemann, Mr. Gabriel Cantor, and Mr. <br /> Richard Kirkland, on how the project complied with the UDO including the affidavit entered into <br /> the record at the Public Hearing and written correspondence submitted to the March and April <br /> Planning Board meetings. <br /> •Adjacent property owner a-mails and applicant responses. Comments from the BOCC, <br /> Planning Board, and the general public; and <br /> • A lack of competent material and substantial evidence entered into the record demonstrating <br /> the project's lack of compliance with established standards. <br /> VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br /> A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier, seconded by Commissioner McKee <br /> finding there is sufficient evidence in the record the project complies with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) <br /> (b) of the LIDO in that the use will maintain the value of contiguous property. <br /> This motion is based on competent material and evidence entered into the record of these <br /> proceedings, including: <br /> • Staff abstract and attachments, including the SUP application and site plan. <br /> • Staff testimony on the project's compliance with the LIDO from the Public Hearing and the <br /> March/April Planning Board meetings. <br /> •Applicant testimony from Mr. Louis lannone, Mr. Bret Niemann, Mr. Gabriel Cantor, and Mr. <br /> Richard Kirkland, on how the project complied with the UDO including the affidavit entered into <br /> the record at the Public Hearing and written correspondence submitted to the March and April <br /> Planning Board meetings. This included a real estate evaluation indicating the project would not <br /> have an impact on adjacent property value, and: <br /> •A lack of competent material and substantial evidence entered into the record demonstrating <br /> the project's lack of compliance with established standards. <br /> VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br /> A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier <br /> finding there is sufficient evidence in the record the project complies with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) <br /> (c) of the LIDO in that the use is in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and the <br /> use is in compliance with the plan for the physical development of the County as embodied in <br /> these regulations and in the Comprehensive Plan. <br /> This motion is based on competent material and evidence entered into the record of these <br /> proceedings, including: <br /> • Staff abstract and attachments, including the SUP application and site plan. <br /> •Applicant testimony from Mr. Louis lannone, Mr. Bret Niemann, Mr. Gabriel Cantor, and Mr. <br /> Richard Kirkland, on how the project complied with the LIDO and <br /> •A lack of competent material and substantial evidence entered into the record demonstrating <br /> the project's lack of compliance with established standards. <br /> VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br />