Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
6 <br /> 1 way that the UDO is structured is any expansion of the School would treat it as if it was a new <br /> 2 Class A Special Use Permit application. So that's why we're here tonight. Reviewing the case <br /> 3 and the essence of, basically, the better part of a year's worth of work, has been the School's <br /> 4 effort to develop a Master Plan, get all of their envisions — expansions for the next ten, fifteen, <br /> 5 twenty years approved in one fell swoop, so they can not have to come back to you each and <br /> 6 every time they do a building. <br /> 7 <br /> 8 Patrick Mallet reviewed the following PowerPoint slides: <br /> 9 <br /> 10 MAY 26, 2015 <br /> 11 AGENDA ITEM: C-1 <br /> 12 QUARTERLY PUBLIC HEARING <br /> 13 CLASS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT <br /> 14 DEVELOPMENT/RE-DEVELOPMENT <br /> 15 OF THE EMERSON WALDORF SCHOOL <br /> 16 <br /> 17 <br /> 18 <br /> 19 PROPERTY INFORMATION <br /> 20 • PI N(s): 9871- 64-7391; 9871-64-5632; 9871-65-8140; 9871-74-3098; and 9871-72- <br /> 21 1935. <br /> 22 • Size: Approximately 55.27 acres total (total). <br /> 23 • Zoning : Rural Buffer (RB). <br /> 24 • Future Land Use Map Designation: Rural Buffer. <br /> 25 • Growth Management System Designation: Rural. <br /> 26 • Joint Land Use Plan Designation: Rural Buffer— Rural Residential Area. <br /> 27 <br /> 28 REQUIRED REVIEW <br /> 29 Project involves the review of a Class A Special Use Permit in accordance with the provisions of <br /> 30 Section 2.7 of the UDO. <br /> 31 • Held in a quasi-judicial format meaning all parties, for and against the application, <br /> 32 provide sworn testimony as well as competent material and substantial evidence on the <br /> 33 merits of the proposal. <br /> 34 • Applicant has burden of demonstrating project complies with the provisions of the UDO. <br /> 35 <br /> 36 REQUIRED REVIEW <br /> 37 • Anyone opposing the application is required to demonstrate through sworn testimony as <br /> 38 well as competent material and substantial evidence that the project does not comply <br /> 39 with the provisions of the Ordinance. <br /> 40 • Hearsay or unsubstantiated opinions are not sufficient testimony. <br /> 41 • If applicant proves compliance with applicable standards, and there is no evidence in the <br /> 42 record the project does not comply, the permit must be issued. <br /> 43 <br /> 44 BACKGROUND <br /> 45 • School opened in 1984 prior to establishment of Orange County's school development <br /> 46 standards (i.e. Sec 5.8.4 of UDO), and requirement for a Class A SUP for Schools, <br /> 47 • Nature of request requires Staff review the request as if it were a new Class A SUP <br /> 48 application (Sec 8.6 of UDO). <br />