Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
And this is the site plan. What I would like to bring to the Board's attention is as follows: You <br /> have approximately 11 to 12 acres of open and landscaped space on the property. The area in <br /> this general vicinity has several streams that will be protected by a 60 foot—65 foot stream <br /> buffer. That includes these wetland delineated areas, here and here. This shows the MTC <br /> transportation corridor buffer that's required to be 100 feet. There is the required mandated 50 <br /> foot type D land use buffer along this property line. According to the applicant, they are going to <br /> maintain either existing foliage or plant new foliage to our existing buffer standard. The height <br /> of the trees is actually anticipated to get anywhere from 15 to 20 feet in height before it has to <br /> become managed or topped, and that's to insure that they are not going to have shadow <br /> created on the actual individual solar panels; but you are looking at a 15 to 20 foot high buffer. <br /> This set of panels along this area of the property here is actually set back 150 feet from the <br /> identified residence, again the Efland —the former Efland Home for Girls, which is currently <br /> being lived in. Here is the access point off of Redman. You will also note on the site plan, <br /> planning staff has required the applicant to reserve/identify a potential future road right of way. <br /> As this Board will recall, we have an access management strategy in the Efland area to insure <br /> perpetual ingress/egress access to several parcels of property, both to the west and the east, <br /> that are landlocked. They have shown the required access area that would be running through <br /> this property, consistent with that plan. Once again, here is the utility substation, which is where <br /> the power—where the facility is going to be tied in to. And this of course here is the existing <br /> Rhino manufacturing plant. <br /> As the planning board Representative Hartley has indicated, this is reviewed under the Class A <br /> special use permit process, as identified within section 2-7 of our Unified Development <br /> Ordinance. It is held in a quasi-judicial format, meaning that all parties both for and against the <br /> application will provide sworn testimony as well competent material evidence on the merits of <br /> the proposal. The applicant ultimately bears the burden of demonstrating the projecting <br /> complies with the provisions of the UDO. Anyone opposing the application is required to <br /> demonstrate through sworn testimony and competent material and substantial evidence that the <br /> project does not comply with the UDO. And I will remind you, as we have identified in our <br /> abstract, hearsay and unsubstantiated opinions are not sufficient testimony. Last, but certainly <br /> not least, if the applicant proves compliance of applicable standards and there is no evidence in <br /> the record that the project does not comply, there is a requirement that we issue the permit. <br /> At this juncture, what I would like to do is call the Board's attention to page 6 of our abstract, just <br /> so I can run down staff comments, which are contained in Attachment 3 of your abstract. First <br /> being that we have heard from the Sheriff's department that has indicated they have no <br /> concerns over this project, and I will go back to the site plan. EMS staff has actually indicated <br /> that the Efland Fire Department— not Eno— I apologize for the typo -will serve this site and they <br /> will provide emergency services as well. Both Deputy Chief Hallenbeck and Orange County <br /> Emergency Services have indicated they have no concerns over the development of the <br /> proposed site. As we have identified in this abstract, and as with other solar projects, there is <br /> no septic or well systems proposed for the property; so there will be no requirement for <br /> environmental health review or permitting. We have met with representatives of the Department <br /> of Environment Agriculture Parks and Recreation, who have provided you a memorandum <br /> specifically on the Efland School for Girls — indicating in this memorandum, which you will find in <br /> Attachment 3, that given the substantial buffer that is being proposed and the setback of the <br /> array from the facility, they do not anticipate any negative impact on that historic structure. <br /> Orange County Solid Waste has indicated the request, if approved, will not impact their ability to <br /> provide services. <br />