Minutes 10-06-2015 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

1l1. A irnotlion was imade Iby Coimimllsslloneir Rich, seconded Iby Coimimllsslloneir Pirllce fin6ngl h e i.r..e li..s. suffil6lent evlldence lin the irecoird the IC project coimp�I�Ies With Secfion 5.3.2 (A) (2) (b) of the UIDO lin that the use W!lH mallntalln the vallue of configuous Iprolperty. "FNIs irnotlion lis (based on competent irnateirliall and evlldence entered unto the irecoird of these pirocee6ngs, lncllu6ng: NOTE —the following represents the findings of the Planning Board. If the motion is to find there is sufficient evidence in the record to find compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (b) this list must be read verbatim so it is in the record. • Application package and testimony including: o Impact Analysis completed by Everett `Vic' Knight on how the project complied with the UDO. • Staff testimony and abstract package from May 26, 2015 quarterly public hearing. • Planning Board packet from July 1, 2015 regular meeting. AND • A lack of competent material evidence in the record demonstrating the applicant did not comply with the UDO. If the motion is to find there is insufficient evidence in the record to find the project is in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (b), the Commissioner making the motion will have to specifically denote what is absent and explain what, if any, evidence is in the record disputing the claims of the applicant that they are in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (b). VOFC: UI'�W'�flHMOUS 1l1l1. A irnotlion was imade Iby Coimimllsslloneir Rich, seconded Iby Coimimllsslloneir P&IlIsslleir fin6ng 1bgfp is' suffil6lent evlldence lin the irecoird the IC project coimp�I�Ies With Secfion 5.3.2 (A) (2) (c) of the UIDO lin that the use lis lin hairimony With the airea lin wNich lit lis to Ibe (located and the use lis lin coimp�I�Iance With the IpIlan -foir the Iphyslicall dev&lopiment of the County as eimbo6ed lin these iregullatlions and lin the Corr pirehensllve Rlan. "FNIs irnotlion lis (based on competent irnateirliall and evlldence entered unto the irecoird of these pirocee6ngs, lncllu6ng: NOTE —the following represents the findings of the Planning Board. If the motion is to find there is sufficient evidence in the record to find compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (c) this list must be read verbatim so it is in the record. • Application package and testimony including: • Biological Inventory completed by The Catena Group; • Forest Stewardship Plan completed by Kelly Douglass;