Browse
Search
BOA minutes 121216
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Orange County Board of Adjustment
>
Minutes
>
2016
>
BOA minutes 121216
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/26/2018 9:14:19 AM
Creation date
3/7/2018 9:58:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
12/12/2016
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Advisory Bd. Minutes
Document Relationships
BOA agenda 121216
(Attachment)
Path:
\Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active\Orange County Board of Adjustment\Agendas\2016
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
156
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br />42 <br />43 <br />44 <br />Approved 3113117 <br />these regulations or the Comprehensive Plan or portion thereof adopted by the BOCC. That <br />finding would be based upon the evidence submitted in the application package, including <br />Narrative at tab 1, the impact analysis in tab 32, the site plan at tab 8, the balloon test results at <br />abstract attachment 5, as well as the fact that the prima facie case has been established for the <br />use being in harmony and there's not been sufficient evidence to refute that prima facie case. And <br />that the Applicant has met this burden. Seconded by Matt Hughes. <br />VOTE: 3 to 1 (Barrows against) Barrows indicated she did not believe the applicant demonstrated <br />full compliance. <br />Samantha Cabe: So the Staff is recommending that the ultimate issuance of the Unified <br />Development Ordinance be subject to conditions that are set forth on pages 162 and 163 of the <br />packet. Any Discussion? <br />Barry Katz: Didn't the applicant disagree with one of these ...... <br />Matt Hughes: The buffer condition about trees ..... <br />Samantha Cabe: I think we have the ability to modify or not. Having said that I think we have <br />recommendations from staff and I am not sure I have heard compelling reasons to deviate ..... <br />Barry Katz: Yeah but can we really ... I mean the buffer standard is what the Ordinance says. <br />Susan Halkiotis: I think the conditions are reasonable. <br />Matt Hughes: I ..... hang on .... I think the conditions address some of the concerns we have <br />heard. <br />Samantha Cabe: Do I have a motion? <br />Motion made by Barry Katz to approve the permit and impose the conditions recommended by <br />staff. Seconded by Matt Hughes. <br />VOTE: Unanimous. <br />AGENDA ITEM: ADJOURNMENT: <br />MOTION by Barry Katz to adjourn. Seconded by Karen Barrows <br />VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br />OC Board of Adjustment — 12/12/16 <br />NAME OF CHAIR, CHAIR <br />Page 156 of 156 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.