Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Issues Summary <br /> of an application by the town does not begin until after a formal determination that the application is complete. Applications are <br /> "�vmplete" when they contain a�� the relevant and appropriate appli�atian submit►! requirements and the required fee. Since the <br /> determination of what constitutes a acomplete"application i s made by the town's professi o nal staff, appeals of completeness decisions <br /> would be taken to the board of adjustment <br /> Typically, town staff should need no more than five working days to reView and make such a "completeness' determination. The <br /> provision also establishes rules for a deficient appl'cation, including a specified period within which a revised application must be <br /> submitted or be considered withd yawn. We also suggest a p ro�is�on for req ui ring re-submittal fees after a certain number of <br /> incomplete applications are submitted,to deter multiple deficient submittaIs. <br /> include Publ'l'c Hearing Procedures <br /> another technique many communities are using to clarify and make the development review process more procedurally efficient is to <br /> include a basic set of rules in the code for the way d evelopment applicat�ons subject to a p ublie hearing are govern�d.These provisions <br /> normally spell out the rules governing the conduct of the public hear ing, including what persons have the right to speak, the order of <br /> the p roceed i n gs at the public hearing(h ow the applicati on i s to be presented, in what arder the applicant and public can speak, and <br /> the process for responding to comments), how and under what circumstances testimony and evidence can be excluded,what findings <br /> must be made to support the decision, and how requests for a continuance are handled. These kinds of specifics can be included <br /> either in the UD�or in an accompanying administrative manual. <br /> CLARIFY REVIEW RESPONSIBILITIES <br /> Clarify Decision=Mak'ing Bodies <br /> Currently, review responsibilities for various permit and approval types are scattered in provisions throughout the current zoning <br /> ordnance. We recommend the new UDC provide a unified section in the AdminisLration article clearly setting forth the powers, <br /> duties, authority, and rode of each advisory and decision-making board or person responsible for undertaking development review in <br /> the town. It is our experience that provisions such as these help establish clear dines of authority for the review of development in the <br /> code. <br /> We also suggest the town consider streamlining and clarifying several of the existing development review procedures by: (1) adding <br /> several new procedures; (2) consolidating several review procedures; and (3) codifying review procedures that are bung applied in <br /> practice but are not in the existing regulations. <br /> The following table summarizes how the development review structure is proposed to work in the new UDO. Cane proposed <br /> departure from the current code is the site plan process. It is recommended the fawn amend the site plan procedure to recognize two <br /> different levels of site plan review(based on the type, size, or location of a proposed use), and that review authority be modified to <br /> help streamline the review process. <br /> Hillsborou North Carolina <br /> Page 8 Unified Development Ordinance I Draft Annotated Oudine <br /> November,2009 <br />