Minutes 05-27-2014 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

As the Chair has already alluded, this application is a Class A special use permit. The review if this permit is held in a quasi-judicial format, meaning all parties for and against the application provide sworn testimony as well as competent material and substantial evidence on the merits of the proposal. The applicant, according to our regulations, ultimately has the burden of demonstrating that the project complies with the provisions of the UDO. Anyone opposing this application is required to demonstrate through sworn testimony and competent material evidence that the project does not comply with the ordinance. You will remember from past meetings, hearsay and unsubstantiated opinions are not sufficient testimony. What I will remind the Board is if the applicant proves compliance with the applicable standards of the ordinance, and there is no evidence it the record demonstrating that the project does not comply with the regulations, then the permit must be issued. The review process is as follows. We are in step 1. This is the review of the application at a joint quarterly public hearing by the County Commissioners and the Planning Board. The BOCC will be asked to —or is going to adjourn the public hearing to a date time certain, in order to receive the Planning Board recommendation. Step 2 is the review of the application by the full Planning Board, who is going to make a recommendation on the application, based on the evidence and testimony entered into record. What I would like to remind everybody is that the Planning Board is currently scheduled to meet and begin review of this item at their June 4 and July 2 regular meetings. These meetings convene at 7 o'clock and are held at the west campus office building —the Planning Department Building, at 131 West Margaret Lane in the main conference room on the lower level. Step 3 will be the re-convening of the public hearing to receive the Planning Board recommendation. As you will note, no additional public comment or testimony is accepted at this hearing. This is specifically to allow the Board to receive the Planning Board recommendation as well as any additional written testimony that has been offered into the record. You will then take action on this proposal based on evidence entered into the record this evening, as well as other written testimony introduced to the Planning Board. Our initial review, which we have covered on pages 5, 6 and 7 of the abstract, is the applicant has submitted documentation required for the review of this project. They have submitted required documentation for a Class A special use permit, as outlined within section 2.7.3, and staff will indicate that there are goals, objectives and policies within the comprehensive plan lending credence to the viability of the proposal. I will also point out to the Board, that on page 7 we provide an assessment that this project appears consistent with the various goals outlined within the joint planning land use plan. You will also note on page 8, we have submitted this (application), per the joint planning agreement we have, to the Town of Chapel Hill for review and comment. As of this time, we have not received any comments from the Town of Chapel Hill, so we are obviously moving forward with the project. The recommendation, as detailed in our abstract, is that you: receive this application; you conduct the public hearing and accept public, County Commissioner, and Planning Board comments; you refer the matter to the Planning Board with a request that a recommendation be returned to you in time for your September 16�2014 regular meeting; and that you adjourn the public hearing until that date, in order to receive and accept the Planning Board recommendation as well as any additional submitted written comments on the project. Mr. Chair, with your indulgence, I would like to turn it over to the applicant. Chair Jacobs: The attorney. Michael Harvey: I'll turn it over to the attorney. Thank you, sir.