Minutes 09-01-2015 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

the Department of Wildlife as well as North Carolina Department of Environment Natural Resources, there was no identified — specific, excuse me — identified species that would be impacted. And while we take into consideration the recommendation since the buffer standards that we are going to impose, are greater than what they recommended, we believe we are exceeding their suggested mandate with respect to how this project should be developed. Commissioner Jacobs: May I ask our Attorney a question? Chair McKee: Yes. Commissioner Jacobs: When, and if, the legislature reduces buffer standards, having already adopted these that can't be changed by the legislature. It would be an ex-post facto, would it not? John Roberts: That would not apply to this, this Special Use Permit, no. Commissioner Jacobs: Thank you. Michael Harvey: Can I clarify? I'm sorry. The Attorney's correct, unless the Applicant chose to go back through this same process to amend the Special Use Permit. Chair McKee: Are there other....yes. Commissioner Jacobs: In which case, we could have a different vote. John Roberts: That is a correct statement. Michael Harvey: Without further ado, what I would just like to do very quickly— on page 63 — as you begin your deliberation, the first motion you're going to be making, or and I understood from the Attorney at the beginning of the hearing he'd rather you approve or deny the Planning Board recommendation, where we have affirm or reject. But you're going to be either approving or denying the Planning Board's recommendation that this particular project complies with the provisions of sections 2.2 and 2.7.3 of the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance. This deals with the application's complete listed submittal, required submittal requirements, and advertising. Next someone will make a motion to determine whether or not the project complied with section 2.7.5 of the Unified Development Ordinance, that is typically staff's notification of adjacent property owners, and the holding of the Public Hearing. Next will be a motion to approve or deny the recommendation of the Planning Board as it relates to section 5.3.2 (B) of the Unified Development Ordinance; can the project be served by Emergency Services, Sheriff's Department, Environmental Health, Solid Waste, etc. Recommendations have been made that— obviously, there's evidence in the record proving that this site can be supported, as required by section 5.3.2. Next the specific requirements for the development of a Solar Facility— and I'm on page 63, subsection D. It's a motion to approve or deny the recommendation of the Planning Board that the Applicant complies with the provisions of 5.9.6 (c). Those are the specific development requirements for Solar Facility. And again, I want to emphasize, when you go back to attachment 5, the evidence in the record that the