Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
22 <br /> Barrows stated that she felt it may be a shared burden of proof rather than the <br /> burden of those in opposition to prove adverse effects. Willis stated she <br /> would get a copy of the ordinance in order to address the issue of burden of <br /> proof. Barrows asked if Katz would like Willis to read from the ordinance. <br /> Katz responded that he had not seen evidence to prove one way or the other. <br /> He felt that it should be read from the ordinance. <br /> Searles stated that she felt the issue of effects on surrounding property values <br /> had not been addressed. <br /> Willis responded that there was a 100 feet buffer and an additional 90 feet. <br /> She felt this was more than sufficient screening so that the building would not <br /> be visible from surrounding properties. <br /> Price asked about noise. Mr.Wilson responded that there would be no more <br /> than currently. He noted that there is only one residence between the landfill <br /> and Rogers Road and it is on the other side of the street. <br /> Willis read from the ordinance Article 8 Special Uses-The applicant has the <br /> burden of establishing,by competent material and substantial evidence,the <br /> existence of the facts and conditions which this ordinance requires for <br /> approval. <br /> Those opposing approval of the application shall have the burden of <br /> establishing,by competent material and substantial evidence,the specific <br /> manner in which the proposed use does not satisfy the requirements for <br /> approval of the application for a Special Use. <br /> Katz asked about the definition for public necessity. Willis responded that <br /> there is no defmition in the ordinance for public necessity and when there is <br /> no definition,the general dictionary definition is accepted. <br /> Katz continued that dealing with solid waste is a public necessity and <br /> it appeared that the proposed facility would enable the County to handle the <br /> operation in a way that would certainly be better for County employees,is <br /> more convenient and less costly. <br /> Price asked if was possible to rearrange the current landfill site in order to fit <br /> this building on the current site. Mr.Wilson responded no and that was the <br /> primary reason for the purchase of the Johnson Tract. <br /> Barrows stated that the only opponent at the public hearing was Ms.Johnson <br /> who had owned her property only two weeks prior to the public hearing and <br /> she would have known of the landfill prior to that purchase. Walters <br /> responded that she had gotten the impression that Ms.Johnson purchased her <br /> property with the intent to sell it to the Landfill Owners Group. <br /> Price expressed concern with protecting surrounding property owners who <br /> were not in attendance at the public hearing and the role the Planning Board <br /> should play for those who could not or do not understand how to protect <br /> themselves in such situations. <br /> Searles asked about the possibility of adding even more land to the present <br /> landfill. Mr.Wilson responded that Mr.Johnson had come to him and told <br />