Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Hallenbeck, who has a solar array on his property, indicated the height <br />limitation was acceptable. <br />4.Several comments were made about the proposed land use buffers for <br />a large-scale solar array project. Board members indicated 50feet may <br />be too extreme and that a smaller buffer may be more appropriate. <br />Staff indicated this can be a point of discussion during the public <br />hearing. <br />It should be noted that during a meeting with members of the <br />Commission for the Environment a similar concern was expressed. <br />5.Board members indicated an array should be allowed anywhere on a <br />parcel of property so long as it meets setback requirements. Board <br />members expressed concern over staff’s proposal to limit the erection <br />of arrays to side and rear yard areas. <br />Staff Comment: Section 5.5.1 of the UDO indicates accessory uses <br />shall not be located in ‘any required front open space’. Staff was <br />merely looking to treat a solar array the same as other accessory uses. <br />Staff is looking for direction from the BOCC with respect to this issue. It <br />should be noted that members of the Commissioner for the <br />Environment expressed a similar concern. <br />If the BOCC determines that solar arrays ought to be allowed within the <br />required front open space, Section 5.5.1 (a) will need to be amended to <br />eliminate the potential conflict. <br />6.Concern was expressed over proposed regulations over the total <br />amount of electricity that can be generated by a solar array. <br />Staff Comment: Staff is attempting to establish a permitting threshold <br />for various array projects. To address this concern, and after <br />consultation with the director, staff modified the proposal as follows: <br />Proposed limits for accessory solar arraysfor residential land <br />uses will remain as originally proposed, <br />Proposed limits for non-residential land uses will be modified to <br />allow for power generation to match anticipated need for the <br />given development. What staff wanted to do was address the <br />Board’s concern that an industry that needed 100 kilowatts to <br />operate could erect an array that would meet that need. Staff did <br />not want to propose a limit that would, in effect, eliminate the <br />possibility of a non-residential land use becoming self sustaining, <br />As originally proposed there were only 2 processes, site plan <br />and a Class A Special Use Permit process. The revised <br />5 <br /> <br />