Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
18 <br /> <br />o Site plan. <br />• Comments from the BOCC, Planning Board, and the general <br />public. <br />And <br />• A lack of competent material and substantial evidence <br />entered into the record demonstrating the project’s lack of <br />compliance with established standards. <br />If the motion is to find there is insufficient evidence in the record to find <br />the project is in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (a), the <br />Commissioner making the motion will have to specifically denote what is <br />absent and explain what, if any, evidence is in the record disputing the <br />claims of the applicant that they are in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) <br />(2) (a). <br />ii. Motion finding there is or there is not sufficient evidence in the record <br />the project complies with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (b) of the UDO in that the <br />use will maintain the value of contiguous property. <br /> <br />This motion is based on competent material and evidence entered into <br />the record of these proceedings, including: <br />NOTE – the following represents the findings of the Planning Board and <br />staff. If the motion is to find there is sufficient evidence in the record to <br />find compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (b) this list must be read <br />verbatim so it is in the record. <br />• Staff abstract and attachments, including the SUP application <br />and site plan, presented at the February 6, 2018 Public <br />Hearing. <br />• Applicant sworn testimony from the public hearing. <br />• Attachment 1 of the February 6, 2018 Public Hearing package <br />including the following: <br />o Detailed project narrative (pages 22 through 26) <br />o An appraisal completed by Kirkwood Appraisals <br />LLC indicating the project would not impact <br />adjacent property values (pages 104 through 127) <br />o Site plan. <br />• Comments from the BOCC, Planning Board, and the general <br />public. <br />And <br />• A lack of competent material and substantial evidence <br />entered into the record demonstrating the project’s lack of <br />compliance with established standards. <br /> <br />If the motion is to find there is insufficient evidence in the record to find <br />the project is in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (b), the <br />Commissioner making the motion will have to specifically denote what is <br />absent and explain what, if any, evidence is in the record disputing the <br />claims of the applicant that they are in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) <br />(2) (b). <br />