BOA agenda 101016 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

After considering all written and oral evidence presented at the PUBLIC HEARING, the Board made the following 1 findings: 2 a. The application was complete per the provisions of the Ordinance, 3 b. The application demonstrated compliance with the applicable provisions of the Ordinance, 4 c. The applicant, through the submittal of correspondence as well as through direct testimony offered during the 5 hearing, demonstrated that the project was compliant with the various provisions of Section 5.3.2 of the 6 Ordinance, 7 d. The applicant, within the application itself as well as through direct testimony of experts, demonstrated that the 8 project complied with the various site-specific development criteria detailed within Section 5.10.8 of the 9 Ordinance, and 10 e. There was no evidence offered into the record demonstrating the applicant had not met their burden as detailed 11 within the UDO with respect to the approval of the application as submitted. 12 In addition, the Board made affirmative findings on the following standards contained within Section 5.3.2 (A) (2): 13 i. The use will maintain or promote the public health, safety and general welfare, if located where 14 proposed and developed and operated according to the plan as submitted. 15 The applicant and staff provided testimony indicating that the proposed use will maintain the public 16 health, safety, and general welfare if developed on the subject property. There was no evidence 17 entered into the record refuting the applicant’s testimony concerning the project’s compliance with 18 respect to the promotion of the public health, safety, and general welfare. 19 The Board voted unanimously to make a finding that the applicant had met their burden and proved 20 that the proposed use would maintain or promote the health, safety, and general welfare if developed. 21 22 ii. The use will maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property. 23 RECOMMENDATION: While staff has not received any comments from local residents and property owners indicating the project, as submitted, does not comply with the UDO and no information has been submitted to staff establishing the grounds for making a negative finding on the general standards as detailed herein. These standards include maintaining or promoting the public health, safety, and general welfare, maintaining or enhancing the value of contiguous property, the use is in harmony with the area in which it is to be located, and the use being in compliance with the general plan for the physical development of the County. Staff has reviewed the application, the site plan, and all supporting documentation and has found that the applicant complies with the specific standards and required regulations as outlined within the UDO Provided the Board of Adjustment finds in the affirmative on the specific and general standards as detailed herein, and no evidence is entered into the record demonstrating the applicant has either: a. Failed to meet their burden of proof that the project complies with the specific development standards for a telecommunication facility, or b. Fails to comply with the general standards detailed within Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) of the UDO, the Board could make an affirmative finding on this application. In the event that the Board makes an affirmative finding, and issues the permit, staff recommends the attachment of the following conditions: 36