Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

Currituck commissioners opened their January 6 meeting at the historic courthouse by approving a staff-initiated text amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) related to shopping center standards.

County planning staff felt a need to redefine standards for shopping centers to better define what is intended as a shopping center and how to apply design standards.

The current ordinance defines a shopping center as 5,000 square feet or more, four units or more, and no minimum lot size. A special use permit is required. The new definition, which is designed to encourage commercial growth in the county, sets shopping center building size to 15,000 square feet or more, three or more units, on four or more acres. A special use permit is required for centers over 30,000 square feet; centers below that size are only required to attain a zoning permit.

Commissioners then held a public hearing to consider a text amendment to clarify public participation procedures for evidentiary hearings. Changes proposed differentiate between legislative hearings and evidentiary hearings, and ways in which the public can participate in those hearings.

The following sentence was added to the UDO under the category “Opportunity to Present Testimony and Evidence” during evidentiary hearings: “A non-party witness with personal knowledge may be afforded reasonable opportunity to present sworn, factual, non-repetitive, and material testimony relevant to the application at the discretion of the person chairing the body conducting the evidentiary hearing.”

“I think clarifying the difference between a legislative hearing and special use permit or evidentiary hearings … is going to help the general public a little bit better to understand their standing – what we can consider and can’t consider,” said Chairman Paul O’Neal. “I think this is good for the commissioners and the county, to have it delineated a little more clearly.”

Vice Chairman Selina Jarvis agreed: “It’s important for citizens to know how and when they can participate. It’s important to let people know they can participate and be heard.”

The amendment passed.

Several members of the community asked for clarification about public involvement in county decisions. Steve Hedrick asked about community meetings for proposed developments under 50 lots, which, by his understanding of the UDO, wasn’t required but should be.

Chairman Paul O’Neal asked for clarification by staff on this matter.

Resident James Mims brought up the point that the public is not allowed to express opinions for topics when the board will be sitting as a quasi-judicial board. County attorney Megan Morgan brought up the legal implications of public input during various types of legal hearings. Currently, public comment is for anything the public would like to discuss, other than something that is on the agenda for a public hearing. Staff will explore this further and return at a later meeting with recommendations.

In new business, commissioners approved a resolution for $110,820 in upgrades to the public safety recorders for the 911 communication center to capture and record audio calls. The board then approved a letter of concern to be shared with federal representatives about OSHA’s new emergency response rules. The rules, while county manager Rebecca Gay said were positive in intent, could create significant costs in compliance to local municipalities. For example, the new rules require mandatory replacement of equipment after a set number of years, rather than when the equipment is no longer useful.

Using a fire truck as an example, Chairman O’Neal said, “It might still be a good fire truck but you’d have to spend a million dollars to replace it. It makes no sense at all.”

In commissioner reports, O’Neal said that he and commissioner Janet Rose have been in conversation about holding a work session with local commercial fishermen about the burdensome regulations of Marine Fisheries.

“They make rules and [those rules are] harming our local commercial fishermen. And [commercial fishermen] have no voice. The meetings are held far away where they can’t attend,” O’Neal said.

He proposed scheduling a work session with some of the commercial fishermen for the purpose of advocating for their issues.

“There’s flounder out there but we can’t fish them. There are foreign trawlers all over the local coast of North Carolina but our local folks can’t make a living fishing,” he added. Though O’Neal admitted there is some science to it that he may not fully understand, he said, “but I know the science isn’t always right in the rules that they make.”

READ ABOUT MORE NEWS HERE.

SUBSCRIBE TO THE COASTLAND TIMES TODAY!