Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
15 <br /> 1 2.7.3 of the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance as detailed within <br /> 2 Attachment 5 of the abstract package. <br /> 3 <br /> 4 Vote: UNANIMOUS <br /> 5 <br /> 6 <br /> 7 b. A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner <br /> 8 Burroughs to approve and adopt the recommendation of the Planning Board <br /> 9 concerning the application's compliance with the provisions of Section 2.7.5 of <br /> 10 the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance as detailed within <br /> 11 Attachment 5 of the abstract package. <br /> 12 <br /> 13 Vote: UNANIMOUS <br /> 14 <br /> 15 c. A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner <br /> 16 Burroughs to approve and adopt the recommendation of the Planning Board <br /> 17 concerning the application's compliance with the provisions of Section 5.3.2 (B) <br /> 18 of the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance as detailed within <br /> 19 Attachment 5 of the abstract package. <br /> 20 <br /> 21 Vote: UNANIMOUS <br /> 22 <br /> 23 d. A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner <br /> 24 Burroughs to approve and adopt the recommendation of the Planning Board <br /> 25 concerning the application's compliance with the provisions of 5.9.6 (c) of the <br /> 26 Orange County Unified Development Ordinance as detailed within Attachment 5 <br /> 27 of the abstract package. <br /> 28 <br /> 29 Vote: UNANIMOUS <br /> 30 <br /> 31 <br /> 32 e. A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner <br /> 33 Burroughs that said there is sufficient seconded by will need to be made <br /> 34 regarding compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) of the Ordinance as follows: <br /> 35 <br /> 36 (NOTE—Whomever makes the motion will have to cite the `evidence' in the <br /> 37 record utilized justifying the motion to approve or deny. Attachment 5 contains <br /> 38 the recommendations of the Planning Board including the evidence utilized to <br /> 39 reach the conclusion. This `evidence' must be spelled out explicitly by the <br /> 40 Commissioner making the motion. <br /> 41 <br /> 42 i. A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs <br /> 43 to approve finding there is sufficient evidence in the record the project complies with <br /> 44 Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (a) of the UDO in that the use will maintain and promote the public <br /> 45 health, safety and general welfare, if located where proposed and developed and <br /> 46 operated according to the plan as submitted. <br /> 47 <br /> 48 This motion is based on competent material and evidence entered into the record of <br /> 49 these proceedings, including: <br />