Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
67 <br /> • Staff testimony on the project and its compliance with various <br /> provisions of the UDO. <br /> • Applicant Testimony, specifically: <br /> • Mr. George Retschle a licensed professional <br /> engineer, <br /> • Mr. Thomas Hester a licensed real estate <br /> appraiser, <br /> • Mr. Richard Kirkland a licensed real estate <br /> appraiser, <br /> • Mr. Richard Moretz a site developer with Cypress <br /> Creek Renewables LLC and its subsidiary White <br /> Cross Solar LLC, and <br /> • Mr. Thomas Cleveland a licensed professional <br /> engineer, <br /> on how the project complied with the UDO as well as the <br /> submitted site plan <br /> And <br /> • A lack of competent material and substantial evidence entered <br /> into the record demonstrating the project's lack of compliance <br /> with established standards. <br /> If the motion is to find there is insufficient evidence in the record to find <br /> the project is in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (c), the <br /> Commissioner making the motion will have to specifically denote what is <br /> absent and explain what, if any, evidence is in the record disputing the <br /> claims of the applicant that they are in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) <br /> (2) (c). <br /> 7. Motion to either approve or deny the Special Use Permit <br /> If the motion is to approve the Special Use Permit, this motion would also need to <br /> include language indicating the BOCC imposes the recommended conditions as detailed <br /> within Attachment 5 of the abstract package. Second. Vote <br />