Agenda - 09-01-2015 - 6a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

30 1 somewhere around 10.5 acres. And that final acreage and size will be determined by the final 2 electrical design. What you see on the plan now, is a preliminary layout of the panels, and 3 some of that will gyrate a little bit as the final electrical design is done. That won't happen until 4 after we receive approval from the County Commissioners and just before the permitting 5 process. 6 7 1 know that you've been handed an Affidavit that's got my full testimony on it. But I wanted to 8 just kind of summarize a couple of the major points. In my professional opinion, this project, as 9 it is shown currently on the latest plan that it meets all the applicable portions of the UDO. And I 10 believe, in my professional opinion, that if the project's built as designed it will be harmonious 11 with the area given the buffering that we've provided. And it will not be injurious in any way to 12 the public's health, safety or welfare. 13 14 And I'm here to answer any questions that you have. 15 16 Chair McKee: Seeing none. 17 18 Beth Trahos: Mr. Chairman, just one note. I would be remiss if I didn't tell you that as a part of 19 our discussions with adjacent property owners, we're going to be tweaking the plan and we will 20 be resubmitting a new plan that will require that along the northern property line, thirty feet of the 21 buffer, closest to the property line remain, be undisturbed. Closest to the property line, to the 22 north, remain undisturbed. And that there be a green screen installed on the fence facing the 23 northern property line. And we will add that to our site plan so that it is available to you in the 24 record. 25 26 1 would ask, ah, Mr. Hester to come forward. Mr. Hester is a North Carolina Real Estate 27 Appraiser. 28 29 Tom Hester: Hello. My name is Tom Hester. I'm a State Certified Real Estate Appraiser in 30 North Carolina. I have a North Carolina Broker's License, and I'm a designated member of the 31 Appraisal Institute, which is a National Professional Organization. I have the MAI designation. 32 I've been active in appraising properties in central North Carolina for about 33 years. My 33 assignment in this case was to make a determination of whether this proposed use would have 34 a negative effect on adjacent property values. To make that determination I at first am looking 35 at what types of properties— or what characteristics —would have an effect on adjacent 36 properties. And so I'm considering traffic, noise, lighting, dust, hazardous materials, and visual 37 effect. And for this proposed use —for the Solar Farm-it's a very passive use. So there's really 38 no traffic, there's no noise, there's no lighting, there's no dust. The only effect on adjacent 39 properties is visual: can you see it? And my determination is to look at other existing farms and 40 make a determination. If you can see the solar farm, does it have an effect on values? So to 41 make that determination, I looked just— not just at this property but at about 30 other, existing 42 solar farms. All put into service since 2011. And I used an analysis called paired sale analysis. 43 I'm looking at transactions, sales of real estate, sales of properties —generally residential 44 properties —that are potentially effected by solar farms. I looked at sales of properties that 45 occurred before the solar farm was built. And then similar properties after it was built. And 1 46 also looked at properties that have close proximity to existing solar farms versus transactions of 47 properties that are further away but in the same general vicinity. 48 49 My finding, using that paired sale analysis, before and after— and also inside and outside the 50 ring surrounding the solar farms — is that the existing solar farms that I investigated have had no 51 effect on actual transaction prices. Sales generally the same price—the same price range —