Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
109 <br />807 Michael Harvey: With this Resource Management Plan, they are denoting areas that will be left in the natural state <br />808 and others will be buffered. That is part of their Resource Management Plan. We are requiring a full blown <br />809 landscape plan if the recommendation is approved. <br />810 <br />811 Jay Bryan: What are we being asked to do tonight regarding the conditions and application? <br />812 <br />813 Michael Harvey: Staff has asked that you begin deliberation on the application packet and make a determination <br />814 based on the information provided. We have provided information this evening that we received on August 4, 2008. <br />815 <br />816 Jay Bryan: In terms of our duty, what is necessary, if there was a motion to approve, what would be included in our <br />817 motion? <br />818 <br />819 Michael Harvey: We have provided, in your packet, the Staff Recommended Special Use Permit Matrix, for all your <br />820 SUPs. WE have made various determinations based on this projects compliance with standards of the ordinance. <br />821 Our original recommendation was denial due to lack of one provision of the ordinance. That provision has been <br />822 addressed so ultimately if the board finds sufficient information has been submitted justifying the affirmative finding of <br />823 the three required findings of fact, Section 8.2.1, Subsection 61, 62 and 63. <br />824 <br />825 Renee Price: You said there was one condition that was met but there was also a concern about the variable buffer. <br />826 <br />827 Michael Harvey: That is the condition that we have recommended we require a Type A 30 foot buffer along the <br />828 whole property. <br />829 <br />830 MOTION made by Jeffrey Schmitt to approve all the technical n~uirements stated by the ordinance in these various <br />831 subsections and offer as evidence the suggestions that have been put forwarded by staff, including within the column <br />832 evidence submitted to support findings beginning on Articles 8.6 and 8.8 and continuing to page 147 which includes <br />833 information regarding public road access. I would suggest we have a second deliberation on items listed on page <br />834 .148 as to whether those are met and the specific recommendations included. Seconded by Renee Price. <br />835 VorE: Unanimous <br />836 <br />837 Jay Bryan: Are there additional motions? We have a list of conditions on page 126, I would suggest unless there are <br />838 changes to those conditions, that someone make a motion as to those conditions. <br />839 <br />840 Craufurd Goodwin: It seems the critical Article is 8.2.1 on page 148, are we using the 1981 Comprehensive Plan? <br />841 <br />842 Michael Harvey: The existing Comprehensive Plan. <br />843 <br />844 Craufurd Goodwin: Is it your judgment that this is consistent <br />845 <br />846 Michael Harvey: The only guidance that I can make because you have to make this finding based on the material <br />847 submitted into evidence, is that staff has already testified that we have found that it complies with provisions of the <br />848 Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. <br />849 <br />850 Michelle Kempinski: In consideration of the schedule, if there will be continued discussions, we might take <br />851 advantage of the opportunity to have a second meeting to continue discussion of this. <br />852 <br />853 Judith Wegner. Is there time sensitivity? <br />854 <br />855 Steve Yuhasz: Not with the school year but with the purchase of the property. <br />856 <br />