I remove the subject area from the cemetery master plan is correctly submitted as an <br />2 application for CUP modification.' <br />3 "°The applicant's request for a determination that no modification is required to <br />4 remove the Zone 6 property from the Rest Haven CUP is denied." Record 8-9 <br />5 (quoting from portions of the planning director's decision at Record 308-09). <br />6 Petitioners argue first that the hearings officer mischaracterized the issue as whether (1) <br />7 Zone 6 is part of the 1995 CUP or (2) a proposal to remove Zone 6 from the 1995 CUP required <br />8 a modification of the 1995 CUP. According to petitioners, the actual issue petitioners presented <br />9 was whether. a proposal to develop Zone 6 with uses otherwise allowed in the R 1 zone required <br />10 modification of the 1995 CUP to remove Zone 6. Petitioners contend that the hearings officer <br />11 never resolved the actual question presented. <br />12 Although portions of the hearings officer's decision appear to mischaracterize the issue in <br />13 the manner petitioners contend, we believe that the hearings officer understood the question <br />14 presented and that the adopted findings adequately resolve that issue. Fairly read in the context of <br />15 other findings in the decision, the hearings officer essentially concluded that the 1995 CUP <br />16 approved conceptual uses and imposed conditions such that modification of the 1995 CUP is <br />17 necessary in order to approve development that is different from that conceptually approved (i.e., <br />18 cemetery uses) or that affects compliance with conditions imposed on development of Zone 6, such <br />19 as the requirement for a 75-buffer along the southern periphery. The hearings officer's conclusion <br />20 to that effect is adequate for review. <br />21 Turning to petitioners' challenge to that conclusion, petitioners argue that the hearings <br />22 officer's misconstrued the 1995 CUP. According to petitioners, the 1995 CUP simply required <br />23 that if petitioners want to develop Zone 6 with cemetery uses, petitioners must submit a more <br />24 detailed development plan for approval and that plan must require a 75-foot buffer between <br />25 cemetery uses and the residences adjoining the southern property line. Petitioners contend that <br />26 nothing in the 1995 CUP prohibits a non-cemetery use in Zone 6. Further, petitioners argue that the <br />27 sole purpose of the condition requiring the 75-foot buffer is to separate cemetery uses in Zone 6 <br />Page 7 <br />