Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
• The Planning Board reviewed this item at its August 3, 2016 meeting. (This <br />meeting was not a public hearing). <br />o Two near-by residents attended the meeting but did not choose to speak. <br />o The item was presented by a representative of the company that would <br />own the solar array. This person was not present at the formal September <br />quarterly public hearing where the item was represented by an attorney <br />who questioned sworn witnesses, in the same manner special use permit <br />matters are normally handled in North Carolina. <br />• The BOCC approved the Class A special use permit the night of the public <br />hearing. There was no testimony in opposition to the permit at the public <br />hearing. <br /> <br />Wrap-Up <br /> <br />• Many of the items on the quarterly public hearing agendas in 2016 were low <br />controversy items and the revised public hearing process seems to have been <br />successful in streamlining and speeding up the project review/decision process <br />for such items. Even for items that were not decided the night of the hearing <br />(namely, the amendments related to the Hillsborough EDD), a decision was <br />reached after additional revisions, review, and discussion. <br />• The opportunity for interested parties to comment throughout the legislative <br />review process has been made available. Some Planning Board meetings in <br />2016 had interested persons in attendance, which was very rare in previous <br />years. <br />• The published start times of quarterly public hearings were not delayed in 2016 <br />due to lack of a Planning Board quorum. Planning Board member attendance at <br />hearings remains sparse even though members are aware they are expected to <br />attend the hearings. The BOCC will receive advisory board attendance sheets, <br />including the Planning Board, sometime in early 2017. This information is <br />collected and distributed by the County Clerk. <br />• There was only one quasi-judicial matter in 2016 (which is not atypical) and it <br />was a lower-controversy proposal. Until a higher-controversy special use permit <br />application goes through the revised process, it may be difficult to draw <br />conclusions about how well the revised process is working for quasi-judicial <br />matters. <br />• The Amendment Outline Form continues to be an important aspect of <br />government-initiated amendments so staff can offer regulation issue avenues to <br />improve or resolve a topic. Staff will continue to work with the attorney’s office to <br />pursue solutions within the intent and scope of the matter. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />(Attachment: Table Listing 2016 Quarterly Public Hearing Items) <br />4