BOA agenda 031317 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

DRAFT OC Board of Adjustment – 11/9/15 Page 153 of 156 Samantha Cabe: I’m just looking back at Mr. Parkers report. 1 2 Matt Hughes: Mr. Smith? 3 4 Samantha Cabe: Mr. Smith, sorry… I guess one difference in the expert opinions; Mr. Smith’s 5 report did include a subdivision that’s within Orange County, in the rural buffer. So it was more 6 similar. Even though it’s still not exactly like this property. I don’t think we’re going to find a direct 7 comparison with this particular property. But it is within Orange County so it has a lot of the same 8 factors in determining value as far as location and amenities and that kind of thing. I don’t know 9 if… I’m happy to discuss this more. If anybody has a motion either way? 10 11 Matt Hughes: I move that the use will maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property. That 12 we accept the Staff recommendation. 13 14 Samantha Cabe: And just for clarification, what is the finding based upon? 15 16 Matt Hughes: That the finding is based upon the Application package as well as… The finding’s 17 based on the above findings, Applicant’s Narrative and Staff report, as well as the testimony of the 18 experts. 19 20 James Bryan: To clarify, part of it Samantha’s point about Mr. Smith’s including the property in 21 Orange County versus Wake County? 22 23 Matt Hughes: That’s right. 24 25 Motion made by Matt Hughes to adopt Staff recommendation in regard that the use will maintain 26 or enhance the value of contiguous property, based upon Applicant’s Narrative and Staff’s report 27 as well as the testimony of the experts, and the expert Mr. Smith’s inclusion of the Orange County 28 properties. Seconded by Barry Katz. 29 30 VOTE: 3-1(Barrows) 31 32 Karen Barrows: I’m opposed for the reasons I have stated …. 33 34 Samantha Cabe: So that’s three for yes, and one for no… The third and final finding is that the 35 location and character of the use is developed according to the plan submitted will or will not be in 36 harmony with the area in which it is to be located and the use is in compliance with the plan for 37 the physical development of the County as embodied in these regulations, or the comprehensive 38 plan or portion thereof adopted by the Board of County Commissioners. So this is the. Would this, 39 if developed, this plan be in harmony with the area? 40 41 Barry Katz: Am I right, Mr. Harvey, that the submittal and the recommendations we would get to 42 the point that the submission getting as far as a Special Use Permit implies that this application is 43 in harmony? I know I heard something along those lines so please clarify that. 44 45 James Bryan: Yeah so that the BOCC has allowed an Special Use Permit as a use in this area is 46 the prime facie case that it is in harmony. 47 48 Barry Katz: That’s what I heard. 49 50 155