BOA minutes 121216 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Approved 3113117 Michael Harvey: Ordinance requires a Type C land use buffer per section 6.8.7 of the Unified Development Ordinance. You're looking at having to comply with the minimum amount of plantings for every 100 -foot of linear distance that makes up this buffer. I'm not going to sit here, and it's in my Staff report twice, and tell you that a 40 -foot wide buffer is going to shield a 199 -foot tall telecommunication tower. That's already identified as... You're not going to be able to shield that if the site is totally timbered. What the Ordinance requires is what the Ordinance requires. Samantha Cabe: And they're entitled to do it however they are proposing in their plan? We can't have a condition that they do it a certain way? Michael Harvey: Well, I will point out to the Board, and I think that Ms. Goode and her submittal for your all's consideration this evening alters my condition to as currently with, so if I can call your attention to page 162. Samantha Cabe: Of our Agenda? Michael Harvey: Agenda packet. We have recommended the imposition of 17 conditions. In the instance that this Board makes a determination the applicant has met their burden then you can issue the permit. tower, as detailed improved site pla nI'll go over these incredibly briefly. Number one is it can only be 199 -foot tall in the application package. Number two; existing vegetation as detailed on the as acted uaon this Board shall be maintained as indicated in the applicaiton. 22 think you'll see what Ms. Goode has 23 maintained in the event in the event 24 Unified Development Ordinance. asked you all to modify my condition to say that it will be it's removed it'll have to comply with the provision of the 25 26 Samantha Cabe: So we can choose to not modify that condition? I just want to be sure that we're 27 not imposing something... If we get through the findings of fact, I know we're talking hypothetical 28 now but if we find that they've met all of the required findings and we get to the conditions I just 29 want to make sure that if we decide to impose such a condition as number two, as you have it 30 drafted here, that we're not imposing a condition that we cannot legally impose. 31 32 Michael Harvey: I'm going to let James weigh in on that before I answer. 33 34 James Bryan: And Laura might be in a good position because she's offered an alternative. She 35 might be able to explain why she's offered that alternative, what the distinction is. 36 37 Laura Goode: Sure. So we're only leasing a 100 by 100 -foot piece of this property. And so in 38 terms of the way I look at it is the Special Use Permit is for our use of that property and our use of 39 that leased area and our easement area and any conditions y'all put on that, that's on us. But 40 we're not leasing the rest of the property so we would just ask that you not put the burden on the 41 property owner, that is not part of the Special Use Permit, that they can't do any timbering to their 42 property because we have gotten them to agree to grant us an easement around the perimeter of 43 the property so that if they ever do timber. I mean, it's not certain. I think it's just been discussed. 44 But if it ever is then we would have the room around the facility to install that landscape buffer that 45 is required by the Unified Development Ordinance on sites where there is an existing vegetation. 46 And that's how we would meet that. So that's why I wanted to take that, "We shall maintain the 47 natural vegetation and perpetuity" because we've provided for that alternative. Also, again, the 48 property owners have graciously agreed since there are concerns about the potential for timbering 49 that they would consent to maintaining a 25 -foot wide buffer around the perimeter of the property OC Board of Adjustment — 12/12/16 Page 136 of 156