Minutes 05-27-2014 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

chose this area because it was located within the rural buffer, and we believed that the thoughtful zoning regulations in the rural buffer would work to preserve the rural character of Orange County. Tonight I want to express our strong opposition to a granting of a special use permit for the proposed project. I have outlined our general reasoning for opposing the project in a written statement that I submitted to staff earlier today; and since that statement overlaps with much of what previous speakers have already said, I won't cover that ground again. I would however like to address two specific deficiencies that I found in the applicant's submittal that I believe are very important. The first of these has to do with whether the soil types and compaction study requirements of the UDO have been met for the SUP submission. In section 5.9.6 C 1 of the UDO there are specific submittal requirements for solar arrays of this scale, that is utility scale solar arrays. Part C 1 states that in addition to the information required by section 2.7 the following shall be submitted as a part of the application. In submittal requirement D—there are 4 requirements listed — D reads as follows: "A soils report denoting the types of soil on the property including detail on the compaction necessary to support the proposed development." This language appears to be plain and straightforward that a soils report and a compaction study are required for submittal. I have not been able to find any documents concerning soils in the applicant submittal materials, although staff has told me—the planning staff has told me there is a soil map of some sort. I don't know what detail that map contains because I haven't see it. However, in the site plan for the development, the developers proposed to conduct a geotechnical study after approval of the SUP. A full geotechnical report should be required prior to consideration of approval of the SUP submission for the following reasons: First, this development calls for a large-scale 20 acre, 5 megawatt power installation requiring the erection of 18,354 solar panels in 966 strings. Based on the site plan drawings and the information you saw tonight these are going to be held up by relatively small supports along their length. The structures will be subject to wind shear, to soil-soaking rains and other stresses, so a full assessment of soil properties is critical in order for planning staff to fully understand the site's suitability. Such a report could well reveal soil compaction characteristics, subsurface rock features at a shallow depth - and by the way, I have rock outcrops in my yard, just a 100 or so feet away from the boundary - or other unknown but important features that would affect the Planning Staff's opinions and recommendations, and also possibly the State regulatory agency approvals. In addition, the property owners affected by this project would then have an opportunity to review and comment on the soil report, which we have not had. So I request, even though it may cost extra expense for the developers— may eat into their profits ultimately a little bit— I request that the commission require submission of a full soil test as required by the UDO before any decision is made on the SUP. The second issue that I want to touch on has to do with the serious flaws in the Binks noise impact assessment. I think these flaws invalidate this assessment. The applicants initially based their impact assessment on two documents. Could I turn on the overhead? Does someone know how to do that? So this is included in the application packet. In this view of the site the applicants showed eight, 500 kilowatt inverters scattered across the site, none of which are located particularly near to an adjacent property. The nearest one to a property along Cascade Drive would be this on, which is 200 feet away. The applicants also submitted data from an independent testing lab on the type of inverter that they propose to use—a Solaron — anyway, it's a 500 kilowatt inverter from a particular company— In that testing, the lab said that the noise produced by this inverter at 1 meter was 68 decibels. This is the data you heard earlier tonight, I believe from Mr. Wallace. However, in the current— in the site plan the