Currituck Planning Board approves UDO change to ease county transfer-station expansions

The Currituck Planning Board on March 10 approved PB26-01, a text amendment to the county's Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) that changes permit requirements for county-owned public convenience centers and transfer stations.

Staff told the board the amendment, sponsored by the Board of Commissioners, would remove the special-use-permit requirement when the county itself proposes an expansion and substitute a zoning permit instead, while adding a required community meeting before applications are filed. According to the staff presentation, the change "better separates policy decisions from permit review, reduces unnecessary costs and litigation risk, and still ensures transparency and meaningful public input." (Staff member)

The amendment was described as consistent with the county's Imagine Currituck 2040 vision plan and the county's adequate public facilities ordinance; staff recommended approval based on those policy goals and the UDO's general purpose and intent. Staff emphasized that when the county is both applicant and decision maker, requiring a full special-use-permit process creates potential fairness concerns and additional appraisal and expert-witness costs.

After no substantive questions from board members, the board moved, seconded and approved the amendment by voice vote. A committee member restated the motion on the record, saying PB26-01 "is in conformance with the general purpose and intent of the Unified Development Ordinance, and is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Imagine Currituck 2040 vision plan." The board chair then called for the vote and announced the motion passed.

The ordinance language described in staff materials includes two main changes: 1) amending the UDO summary use table to remove the special-use-permit requirement for county-owned public convenience/transfer-station expansions and replace it with a zoning-permit requirement; and 2) adding a community-meeting requirement to the specific standards for public convenience centers/transfer stations. The staff packet cited land-use Goal 2 (mitigate incompatibility of intensive uses) and infrastructure and county services Goal 1 as potentially applicable review standards.

The board did not record an individual roll-call tally in the minutes; the approval was by voice vote and the transcript records only the Chair announcing the motion passed. The motion's text and staff's presentation are entered in the official meeting record; next procedural steps for implementing the amendment were not specified during the meeting.