Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
3 <br /> <br />quarterly public hearings and also the BOCC meetings at which a <br />decision is scheduled for items on which the Planning Board has made <br />a recommendation. <br /> Allow Comprehensive Plan amendments to be heard at any quarterly public <br />hearing. Existing language that states “principal” Comprehensive Plan <br />amendments are “generally” considered only once per year at the quarterly <br />public hearing in February is proposed for deletion (Section 2.3.7). <br />Additionally, language that classifies Comprehensive Plan amendments into <br />“principal” and “secondary” amendments (Section 2.3.4) is proposed for <br />deletion because it is relevant only in conjunction with Section 2.3.7. <br /> Legal advertisement of quasi-judicial hearing items: due to comments made <br />at the September 8, 2015 public hearing, staff is suggesting that the <br />newspaper legal advertisement for Special Use Permits will be retained and <br />that staff work on language to be included in the legal ads to clarify who may <br />testify in quasi-judicial matters. [Within the materials presented at the public <br />hearing, the Attorney’s office had suggested that Special Use Permit <br />applications (both Class A and Class B) no longer be included in legal <br />advertisements since the general public does not have standing to participate <br />in quasi-judicial hearings.] <br /> Mailed Notification Distances: Due to comments made at the September 8, <br />2015 public hearing, the notice distance requirement for all types of <br />amendments or projects that require mailed notification is proposed to be <br />increased from 500-feet to 1,000-feet. Staff is proposing that notices be <br />mailed via first class mail instead of certified mail, as is currently done, to keep <br />costs and staff time lower. <br /> Closure of public hearings: Modifications in Section 2.3.11, 2.7.9, and 2.8.9 <br />would mean that the BOCC would close the public hearing the night of the <br />hearing. At that time, the BOCC could defer a decision to a later BOCC <br />meeting date; make a decision; or, as a procedural right not included in the <br />text of the UDO, send an application back to the Planning Board for further <br />review. If the BOCC chooses to defer a decision to a later meeting date, <br />legislative items could be listed on the future BOCC agenda as “Regular <br />Agenda” items and additional public comment could be accepted. The <br />existing requirement for only written comments after the quarterly public <br />hearing is proposed for deletion. <br />o In order to meet legal sufficiency requirements, hearings for quasi- <br />judicial items (Class A Special Use Permits) would be continued to a <br />date/time certain if additional evidence is requested at the quasi-judicial <br />hearing. The date/time certain could be a regular BOCC meeting (e.g., <br />not necessarily the next quarterly public hearing). Written evidence <br />after the quasi-judicial hearing would no longer be permitted. <br /> The BOCC may wish to consider adding an additional heading to <br />its agendas: Quasi-Judicial Hearings, along with a note <br />explaining that only persons with legal standing can participate in <br />quasi-judicial hearings. Quasi-judicial items deferred for decision <br />to a later meeting date or for which the hearing was continued in <br />order to receive additional evidence would be listed on the <br />BOCC agenda under this new heading.