Agenda - 10-06-2015 - 6a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

13 1 Michael Harvey: Can I clarify? I'm sorry. The Attorney's correct, unless the Applicant 2 chose to go back through this same process to amend the Special Use Permit. 3 4 Chair McKee: Are there other....yes. 5 6 Commissioner Jacobs: In which case, we could have a different vote. 7 8 John Roberts: That is a correct statement. 9 10 Michael Harvey: Without further ado, what I would just like to do very quickly— on 11 page 63— as you begin your deliberation, the first motion you're going to be making, or 12 and I understood from the Attorney at the beginning of the hearing he'd rather you 13 approve or deny the Planning Board recommendation, where we have affirm or reject. 14 But you're going to be either approving or denying the Planning Board's 15 recommendation that this particular project complies with the provisions of sections 2.2 16 and 2.7.3 of the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance. This deals with the 17 application's complete listed submittal, required submittal requirements, and advertising. 18 Next someone will make a motion to determine whether or not the project 19 complied with section 2.7.5 of the Unified Development Ordinance, that is typically 20 staff's notification of adjacent property owners, and the holding of the Public Hearing. 21 Next will be a motion to approve or deny the recommendation of the Planning Board as 22 it relates to section 5.3.2 (B) of the Unified Development Ordinance; can the project be 23 served by Emergency Services, Sheriff's Department, Environmental Health, Solid 24 Waste, etc. Recommendations have been made that— obviously, there's evidence in 25 the record proving that this site can be supported, as required by section 5.3.2. 26 Next the specific requirements for the development of a Solar Facility— and I'm 27 on page 63, subsection D. It's a motion to approve or deny the recommendation of the 28 Planning Board that the Applicant complies with the provisions of 5.9.6 (c). Those are 29 the specific development requirements for Solar Facility. And again, I want to 30 emphasize, when you go back to attachment 5, the evidence in the record that the 31 Planning Board, and ultimately—originally, the staff relied on to make an affirmative 32 recommendation — is listed for you. As you can see the rationale, both staff and the 33 Planning Board. Then finally it's voting on whether or not the Applicant complies with 34 the provisions of 5.3.2. And again, there are three individual areas you're going to be 35 making a recommendation on: First, that the use will promote the public health, safety 36 and general welfare. We have provided you in this script the language, or the findings, 37 of the Planning Board. And again, without repeating myself, but to reiterate, one of 38 those findings was that there was a lack of competent or material evidence entered into 39 the record indicating the Applicant had not met there burden. 40 Next 5.3.2 (A) 2 (b). is that the use will maintain or enhance the value of 41 contiguous property. I'll remind you, at the Quarterly Public Hearing, we had testimony 42 from the Applicant's appraiser, and there were questions posed not only by this Board, 43 by the Planning Board, as to the contents of those documents that were submitted into 44 the record at the Public Hearing. 45 Finally, 5.3.2 (A) 2 (c): that the use is in harmony with the area, and consistent 46 with the physical development of the County, as embodied in the comprehensive plan. 47 If there are affirmative findings on those three items, we will ultimately need you then to 48 make a motion to approve the Special Use Permit, and impose the conditions as we 49 have detailed in article 5. 1 know that's a lot to digest, but part of the reason we have to 50 go through this with you is that Special Use Permits, as you know, require a heightened