Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Annotated outline <br /> 0 a <br /> provision as appropriate to establish a submission schedule for all applications. A practical benefit to this approach is that the <br /> application submission schedule can be changed administratively, so that it is not necessary to amend the UDO every time <br /> modifications are needed. <br /> Pre-Application Conference <br /> The Issues Summary above describes the desirability of requiring pre-application conferences. We recommend the common <br /> procedures section of the new UDC establish a standard requirement for apre--application conference between the applicant and staff. <br /> This provision would clarify what types of development applications are subject to the pre-application conference,the purpose of such <br /> meetings, and the effect of such meetings i.e.,discussions are not binding on the town and processing times do not start until a forma! <br /> application is submitted and accepted). The folloWing types of mayor development applications should require apre-appiicatifln <br /> conference with staff before the application is submitted: zoning map amendment, planned developments specEal use permits, <br /> conditional use permits, Type 11 site plans, preliminary plats, and variances. Pre-application conferences would be voluntary for all <br /> other forms of development applications. <br /> Appleicateion Submission <br /> The next step in the planning and development process—and what many persons consider the"beginning"of the development review <br /> process—starts with the applicant's submission of the necessary application and the required fee. This is followed by staffs review of <br /> the application to determine if it meets minimal completeness requirements, and then staffs review of the general merits of the <br /> application and prepara�ivn of a written staff repast. We propose that all applications undergo a completeness review by planning <br /> staff. This process prevents staff's and appEicants'time being wasted by substantive review of appli�ations that are not complete. <br /> Determination of Completeness <br /> These sections establish that the review of a development application is subjected to two increments of review. The first increment <br /> 'b <br /> consists of receipt and review of the application to determine if it has the minimal amount of materials (application contents) so that <br /> staff can conduct an adequate review of the application; it is called a completeness determination. The provision requires that the <br /> determination be made within a reasonable period of time after receipt of the application, such as five business days. The regulations <br /> should also specify how bong an applicant has to correct a deficient application. <br /> If the application is found to be incomplete, the applicant is notified in writing with the specific deficiencies 'Identified. The applicant <br /> may then cc)rrecL the deficiencies, and resubmit the application within a defined time frame for completeness determination. (The fee <br /> schedule established by the Town Board of Commissioners may provide that re-submittals after the first re-submittal be accompanied <br /> by an additional fee to discourage recurring incomplete submittals.} We recommend the t own avoid 'cvdi�}r�ng any development <br /> application review time frames, but include this kind of information in an administrative Manual so that time frames may be adjusted <br /> to changing conditions without need of a lengthy text amendment process. <br /> Actual substantive review of the application,along with preparation of an accompanying staff report,will not begin until the applicaflon <br /> is determined to be complete. <br /> P of Staff Report <br /> Upon a determination of completeness,the second stage of review begins--the staff's evaluation of the application and preparation of <br /> a written staff report. The time frame for review of the application and preparation of a staff report varies between different types of <br /> development applications depending on their complexity. For example, the staff review time for a planned develop'ment may be <br /> longer than a variance because the issues evaluated 1n the application are broader and more campIex. <br /> Schedul*ing Publl*c Hearing . <br /> This subsection establishes a consolidated set of pubic hearing procedures. Some 50 rd and C ommissiflns include public hearing <br /> procedures.within their by-laws. Typically, these provisions spell out the rules governing the conduct of the public hearing, including <br /> what persons have the right to speak, the order of the proceedings at public hearings(how the application is to be presented, in what <br /> order the applicant and public Can speak,and the process for responding to comments), how and under what circumstances testimony <br /> and evidence is excluded, what findings are made to support the decision, and haw requests for a continuance are handled. This <br /> section will include these general p rovi si o ns and defer to established bylaws if they exist <br /> Hillsborough,North Carolina <br /> Page b United Development Ordinance I Craft Annotated Outline <br /> November,2009 <br />