April 1, 2013 - 6:00 PM - County Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes (Rezoning)

10 377 Meeting of the Johnston County Board of Commissioners April 1 , 2013 6 00 pm The Johnston County Board of Commissioners met in regular session Monday , April 1 , 2013 at 6 00 pm in the Commissioners Meeting Room , Johnston County Courthouse Annex , Smithfield , North Carolina The following members were present Present Chairman Jeffrey P Carver , Vice Chairman Tony Braswell , Cookie Pope , Allen L Mims , Jr , DeVan Barbour , Ted G Godwin , and Chad M Stewart Absent None Also Present County Manager Rick J Hester , Clerk to the Board Paula G Woodard , County Attorney David F Mills , and Paralegal Deputy Clerk to the Board Dana Cuddington Chairman Jeffrey P Carver called the meeting to order at 6 00 pm and the following business was transacted 1 Public Comment A EMS Cadet Program Rudy Baker , Chairman of the Johnston County EMS Advisory Board , asked the Commissioners to allow Johnston County EMS to begin a Cadet Program He stated the program would be for students ages 15 to 18 to participate on a volunteer basis with the EMS squads and is an excellent recruiting opportunity for young people interested in the EMS field Mr Baker noted that the three independent EMS agencies in the County already have a Cadet Program and the EMS Advisory Board would like for Johnston County to offer the program as well Commissioner Tony Braswell stated he has been involved in several of the meetings concerning a cadet program Commissioner Braswell explained the need for a County EMS Cadet Program came about because the Princeton , Clayton and Smithfield EMS Agencies used to offer the programs ; however , when the County assumed the operations of those agencies , it did not have the cadet program Commissioner Braswell agreed that a cadet program is an excellent recruiting opportunity He stated Johnston County EMS Division Chief Josh Holloman has worked out all the details related to insurance and they would like to have 20 participates in the program Upon a question by Commissioner Ted G Godwin , Mr Baker stated Johnston County Emergency Services would oversee the cadet program through a non - profit corporation that is already established Upon a motion by Commissioner Tony Braswell , seconded by Commissioner Chad M Stewart , and carried by unanimous vote , the Board approved the request by Johnston County EMS to form and operate a Cadet Program for the County 2 Public Hearing Rezoning and Special Use Requests Advertised – The Smithfield Herald – March 20 and 27 , 2013 Certified letters were mailed to adjoining property owners on March 18 , 2013 A notice was posted at the location on February 1 , 2013 for Case 13 - 01 The Chairman opened the Rezoning Hearing for Case 13 - 01 Case 13 - 01 To rezone 65 acres located at 306 Watson Road in Micro Township from Agricultural Residential AR to Industrial - 2 – Special Use District I2 - SUD Tax ID 10O07064 and 10O07064J Owner Janet Thomason , James S Lee , Dianne Creech and Frances L Moore Applicant Logan Stephens and Olee Olsen , O2 Energies Planning Director Berry Gray stated the petition is to rezone 65 acres located at 306 Watson Road in Micro Township from Agricultural Residential to Industrial - 2 – Special Use District He noted the special use request associated with the rezoning is to allow for a solar farm Mr Gray reported the existing land use is vacant and used for agricultural purposes The surrounding land uses are primarily zoned Agricultural Residential and Town of Micro RA and used for residential and agricultural purposes He added North Johnston High School is located near the proposed rezoning The area is located within a designated “ Secondary GrowthPage378 April 1 , 2013 – 6 00 pm Continued Area ” on the County’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan which denotes areas in which low to moderate levels of growth pressures are anticipated over the next 20 years Commissioner Ted G Godwin asked if stormwater runoff would be a problem on the subject site Mr Gray stated staff is not aware of any type of stormwater runoff issue He noted the project will be reviewed by the County Stormwater Administrator to ensure there will be no negative impacts to neighboring properties Applicant Logan Stephens of O2 Energies , 8725 Creek Trail Lane , Cornelius , North Carolina , addressed the Board Mr Stephens stated O2 Energies is based just north of Charlotte , North Carolina and they have completed seven solar farms to date in North Carolina with five projects currently in development , the Watson Road solar farm being one of those under development Mr Stephens stated O2 Energies has had a good impression of the community and they appreciate the positive recommendation from the Planning Board as well as assistance from the Planning staff Mr Stephens stated O2 Energies would comply with any requirements necessary for the solar farm Commissioner DeVan Barbour noted that Selma Solar LLC is listed on the application and other documents and he asked about the connection between Selma Solar LLC and O2 Energies Mr Stephens responded that O2 Energies establishes an LLC for each individual solar farm , but that O2 Energies is the parent company and long term owner Mr Stephens stated it is not their intent to build the solar farms only to flip them Upon a question by Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr , Mr Stephens stated O2 Energies is a North Carolina company that deals exclusively in solar energy projects At the inquiry of Chairman Jeffrey P Carver , Mr Stephens stated O2 Energies has looked outside of North Carolina but for now they prefer to stay close to home Commissioner Cookie Pope mentioned House Bill 298 and stated it would repeal Senate Bill 3 , which she believed initiated the tax incentives for solar energy Commissioner Pope stated it is her understanding that House Bill 298 does not oppose green energy but it is opposed to the tax incentives that are currently available for such projects Mr Stephens stated Senate Bill 3 was related to the renewable energy certificate credits He explained there is a green attribute to every kilowatt hour that is produced by the solar farms and Senate Bill 3 created a market for those certificates by requiring companies to supply a certain amount of power from renewable energy and energy efficiency Commissioner Barbour asked Mr Stephens if House Bill 298 would affect O2 Energies Mr Stephens stated the project proposed for Watson Road would not be affected by House Bill 298 because it is already under contract to have the certificates purchased from a utility in North Carolina He stated if the legislation passes , it would affect future projects Chairman Carver commented that the proposed project is the first one of its kind for Johnston County and O2 Energies is a young company ; therefore , the Board must consider all the factors Ricky Klein , 460 C Watson Road , Selma , stated he is an adjacent landowner to the subject site , his property located just to the north of the proposed use Mr Klein informed the Board that he has been maintaining the farm path that runs up the middle of the subject site Mr Klein noted he has spoken with Mr Stephens and he is impressed with O2 Energies Mr Klein continued that he lives in the country to avoid any type of industry ; however , if an industry is going to locate near him , then he could not think of a better industry than a solar farm Mr Klein stated he understands the solar farm will be quiet , although he is concerned with taking farming land out of production Mr Klein stated landscaping buffers were discussed at the Planning Board meeting and it appears that a buffer is not presently planned in between the proposed use and his property Mr Klein asked the Board to give some consideration to buffers for his property Chairman Carver stated if the rezoning is approved , the Board would discuss specifics such as landscaping buffers during the special use hearing Chairman Carver asked Mr Klein to also speak during the special use hearing if the rezoning is approved Page379 April 1 , 2013 – 6 00 pm Continued At the inquiry of Commissioner Barbour , Mr Klein pointed out his property on the site plan for the Board in relation to the subject site Commissioner Mims asked about the farm path referenced by Mr Klein and asked Mr Klein how he would access his property if the farm path were closed by O2 Energies Mr Klein stated the farm path is a loop and he has spoken with Mr Stephens who indicated O2 Energies will not close the path Commissioner Godwin stated the initial write up on the case did indicate the farm path would be closed , but that there were other accesses available Mr Gray stated the Planning Board recommended approval of the rezoning based on the fact that special use conditions could be applied to address some of the concerns of the neighbors There being no further comments , the Chairman closed the Rezoning Hearing for Case 13 - 01 Decision on Rezoning Case 13 - 01 Case 13 - 01 To rezone 65 acres located at 306 Watson Road in Micro Township from Agricultural Residential AR to Industrial - 2 – Special Use District I2 - SUD Tax ID 10O07064 and 10O07064J Owner Janet Thomason , James S Lee , Dianne Creech and Frances L Moore Applicant Logan Stephens and Olee Olsen , O2 Energies Commissioner Tony Braswell moved the Board conclude and adopt a statement that the rezoning requested is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan , and it is therefore reasonable and in the public interest , and further that the petition for rezoning case 13 - 01 to rezone 65 acres located at 306 Watson Road in Micro Township from Agricultural Residential to Industrial - 2 – Special Use District be approved Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr seconded the motion , which carried by unanimous vote The Chairman opened the Special Use Hearing for Case 13 - 01 Case 13 - 01 To allow for a solar farm Owner Janet Thomason , James S Lee , Dianne Creech and Frances L Moore Applicant Logan Stephens and Olee Olsen , O2 Energies Those wishing to speak on Special Use Case 13 - 01 were sworn in by the Clerk to the Board Planning Director Berry Gray introduced the special use case and stated the request is to allow for a solar farm Mr Gray introduced the following summary of evidence into the record A pre - application consultation was held with the applicant for Case 13 - 01 on December 28 , 2012 At that time , the applicant was informed of the following • If approved , applicant must provide to the Planning Office a Site Plan for their review and approval • Applicant must comply with the requirement of the Johnston County Land Development Code regarding landscaping , buffering and fence or any additional requirements as approved by this Board • Applicant will be notified in writing of the Board’s decision • If denied , no application can be accepted for the same use affecting the same property for a period of twelve 12 months and that their right of appeal to the Superior Court must be exercised within thirty 30 days of the receipt of notice of denial by the Board of County Commissioners • Applicant’s Special Use Permit will expire at the end of twenty - four 24 months if it is not used as permitted within the time period • When necessary , staff informed the applicant of further Planning and Zoning Department requirements and the requirements of other departments such as soil erosion and sedimentation requirements , Health Department regulations , stormwater and public utility requirements • Subsequent to the pre - application consultation , all required notices were mailed to property owners within 500 feet The property was posted and notices of public hearings were advertised in accordance with the requirements of the North Carolina General Statutes On February 19 , 2013 The Johnston County Planning Board held a public hearing regarding Rezoning Special Use Permit Case 13 - 01 and made the following recommendations Upon a motion by Ms Hackler to approve the rezoning request , seconded by Mr DeLaine and carried by a th unanimous vote of 7 - 0 , Rezoning Case 13 - 01 was granted preliminary approval at the February 19 , 2013 Planning Board Meeting StatementPage380 April 1 , 2013 – 6 00 pm Continued This request is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan in that it is suited for a rural , low density area within an agricultural rural conservation area The request is reasonable in that the proposed use would benefit the community and the conditions will ensure that the request is compatible with the surrounding area and will not negatively impact the public Upon a motion by Mr Summerlin to approve the Special Use Conditions with the changes to conditions in reducing the fence requirement from 8 feet to 6 feet , vegetative buffer of 4 evergreens trees shrubs every 100 linear feet , and height of equipment no larger than 12 ’ , seconded by Ms Hackler and carried by a unanimous vote of 7 - 0 , Rezoning th and Special Use Case 13 - 01 was granted preliminary approval at the February 19 , 2013 Planning Board Meeting Finding of Facts for the Special Use Permit 1 That the use or development is located , designed , and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health , safety , and general welfare ; Applicant The proposed use of the property is a 40 acre solar farm The site was chosen for its favorable terrain and proximity to nearby roads The system is designed to operate with no noise , no smell , and no emissions The solar farm will have no moving parts The site will double as a working farm in partnership with a local farmer to raise crops , sheep , and other forms of agriculture The project will reduce emissions , promote a healthier community , and provide work and educational opportunities for local citizens , contractors , and students Staff The site will be fenced in completely and the solar panels are not to generate any safety issues or a nuisance to surrounding property owners This request will be subject to the special use conditions which will ensure that the development maintains the public health , safety and general welfare of the community 2 That the use of the development appears to comply with all required use and intensity regulations of Articles II & IV of the Johnston County Land Development Code and the applicable specific standards in section 14 - 257 and with all applicable regulations ; Applicant The development will comply with all required use and intensity regulations of the Land Development code including Sec 14 - 123 The solar farm will comply with the most recent 2011 National Electrical Code and the Johnston County Inspections Department The solar farm is approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission , the North Carolina Utilities Commission , and Progress Energy Staff The use shall comply with the use and intensity regulations as set forth in the Land Development Code 3 That the use or development is located , designed , and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property , or that the use or development is a public necessity ; Applicant The solar farm will be valued at approximately 15 million , thereby increasing the property tax value of the parcel Businesses and homes may wish to locate near the solar farm and existing property owners could potentially see their property values rise The solar racking equipment will not have any concrete foundations ; therefore the owner of the solar farm can remove the equipment at the end of its useful life and return the property to agricultural immediately Staff The site will be maintained by someone locally , and along with the special use conditions required by the Boards , will maintain the value of contiguous properties 4 That the use or development conforms with general plans for the physical development of the County’s Planning jurisdiction , the Design Manual , or other development policies as adopted by the Board of Commissioners Applicant The solar farm conforms to the Land Development Code by ensuring orderly growth without negatively affecting the county’s revenues or ability to provide services The solar farm will likely increase county revenues and will be a community asset for workforce training , education , agriculture , and clean energy The “ community and visual character of the county as a desirable place to live and conduct business ” will be enhanced without causing overcrowding or congestion Staff Applicant’s development will conform to all requirements of the Land Development Code and any conditions as required by the Boards and Federal , State and Local agencies Specific Land Uses APPLICANT To allow for a solar farm Special Use Conditions 1 Permitted Uses To allow for a solar farm 2 The Special Use Permit shall expire with the violation of any Special Use Condition 3 Applicant shall submit a detailed site plan for review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Department Staff 4 All buildings and or structures must comply with rules enforced by Federal , State and Local agencies 5 Provide 4 small evergreen trees and 4 evergreen shrubs per every 100 linear feet along the road right of way and along the Olivia Lee property line within the 30 ’ setback area 6 Maximum height of equipment shall be 12 ’ 7 Hours of operation to be 24 hours a day , seven days per week for any repairs that may be needed 8 The area housing all the equipment shall be enclosed within a 6 ’ chain link fence topped with barb wire 9 All signage must comply with the sign code ; one ground sign no more than 60 sf and 6 ’ tall Mr Gray referenced the site plan and pointed out the farm path that runs through the middle of the subject site Mr Gray stated the farm path does continue to the left adjacent to the Klein Property to another access point Mr Gray noted the farm path was discussed during the rezoning hearing and whether or not it would be left open , which the applicant has indicated they will leave open Commissioner Ted G Godwin asked how the farm path would affect the fencing PagePage pageNumber5381 April 1 , 2013 – 6 00 pm Continued Mr Gray stated the fencing would run up both sides of the farm path leaving the path open Mr Gray listed and reviewed the proposed special use conditions with the Board Mr Gray noted the special use conditions as proposed call for a buffer of four small evergreen trees and four evergreen shrubs per every 100 linear feet along the road right - of - way and along the Olivia Lee Property line within the 30 ’ setback area Mr Gray pointed out the Olivia Lee Property on the site plan for the Board , noting it is the triangular shaped property located adjacent to the subject site Mr Gray stated there is a house on the Lee Property and the proposed use would backup to the Lee Property and the house Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr asked about the hours of operation during the construction period , noting the Board does not usually specify the hours of operation for the construction period , but that he could foresee the construction crew working on the property seven days a week installing the equipment Mr Gray stated the hours of operation during the construction period may be a problem because the construction staging area is planned behind the Olivia Lee Property and there could be some disturbance late at night Mr Gray stated the Board could consider limiting the hours of operation during construction Commissioner Mims asked about buffering for the Klein property and the houses that are located on the backside of the subject site Mr Gray stated the Planning Board only recommended buffering along Watson Road and the Olivia Lee Property Mr Gray reviewed the proposed buffer and building setback areas with the Board , pointing them out on the site plan Commissioner Mims stated that four small evergreen trees and four evergreen shrubs per every 100 linear feet is not a lot of screening and he asked about the criteria regarding the size of the trees at the time of planting Mr Gray stated the Design Manual does have minimum caliper requirements of how large the trees must be at the time of planting It was determined there were additional audience members that wished to speak and they were sworn in by the Clerk to the Board Alvin Lee husband of Olivia Lee , 184 Watson Road , Selma , stated their property adjoins the subject site Mr Lee expressed his concerns with the height of the trees that will be planted for the buffer , noting if small trees are planted it could take a year or more for the buffer to screen the site Upon additional questions , Mr Gray again listed and reviewed the proposed special use conditions with everyone Mr Gray stated typically the evergreen trees used in the landscaping buffers are six feet in height and shrubs are three to four feet in height at the time of planting He stated the buffer was discussed at the Planning Board Meeting and the Planning Board wanted to make sure that the trees planted would be evergreen so they would provide an adequate buffer during the winter months Commissioner Mims commented that he drove by a solar farm in Harnett County that had a type of black opaque fencing instead of trees and he asked if that is something that could be installed temporarily until the trees begin growing Commissioner Tony Braswell asked if there is any other type of tree or evergreen that would grow larger and meet the needs for screening immediately Mr Gray stated he is not sure of another type of evergreen that would completely provide screening immediately , but he stated the Board could require additional trees and shrubs to be staggered that would better fill in the buffer Commissioner Cookie Pope stated Burford Holly Trees are a type of evergreen that grows fast and wide Mr Gray stated in terms of shrubs , there is a shrub known as the Wax Myrtle that also grows large and fast Ricky Klein , 460 C Watson Road , Selma , asked how opaque the buffer would be at maturity PagePage pageNumber6382 April 1 , 2013 – 6 00 pm Continued Mr Gray stated at maturity , the landscaping buffer should completely screen the site with no gaps Applicant Logan Stephens of O2 Energies , 8725 Creek Trail Lane , Cornelius , North Carolina , stated regarding the buffering requirements , O2 Energies has completed seven projects to date never having to provide screening before and now they are encountering a couple of projects where screening is being required He stated the landscaping buffer is an extra expense for them , but they are willing to install the buffer to be good neighbors Mr Stephens stated his only concern is that if the screening requirement precedent is too strict and costly , it may make it difficult to pursue more projects in the County Mr Stephens stated O2 Energies is willing to do what is necessary so long as it does not break the project Commissioner Mims asked if the farm path would be left open with fencing on each side of the path Mr Stephens stated at the Planning Board meeting there was a question about whether or not there is a prescriptive right - of - way for the farm path He explained it is a complicated matter to determine ; therefore , O2 Energies has decided to leave the farm path open which does mean additional expenses for extra fencing , but their plan at this point is to leave the path open Commissioner Godwin asked who uses the farm path , other than Mr Klein Mr Stephens stated he is unsure who else uses the path , although there are houses on the backside of the property , but as he understands , those houses have another access point to the west Commissioner Godwin asked if it would be better for the adjacent landowners , if the money for the additional fencing on the farm path was spent instead on extra landscaping buffers to aid with the visuals of the proposed use , if the farm path is not used often and there is other access available Commissioner Mims asked Mr Stephens if O2 Energies would be opposed to a limit on the hours of operation during the construction period Mr Stephens stated if the construction hours are limited , it will increase the window of the construction phase Mr Stephens reported typically it takes the General Contractor approximately four to six months to complete the build and they will work overtime if they are trying to meet a deadline Mr Stephens stated O2 Energies does have a deadline with the contractor because they are paying interest on construction loans Mr Stephens stated they may have to adjust the construction schedule to add extra time if the construction hours are limited Commissioner Mims expressed his concerns for the adjacent landowners during the construction phase , especially the Olivia Lee Property , noting that property backs up to the construction staging area Mr Stephens stated there should not be a lot of noise during construction because the equipment comes prefabricated and is assembled on site Commissioner Cookie Pope asked who would clean up the site once the solar farm reaches the end of its life and could the property be reverted for row crops Mr Stephens stated even at the end of its life , the solar equipment will have scrap value ; therefore , it is unlikely that the equipment would be abandoned Commissioner Pope asked if O2 Energies would assume the responsibility of the cleanup Mr Stephens stated O2 Energies would assume the cleanup responsibility as the owner of the property , unless they sold the property to another company Mr Stephens stated there is no impervious surface or concrete foundations so the property could revert back to row crops At the inquiry of Commissioner Godwin , Mr Stephens briefly reviewed the types of racking systems used in the solar farm construction Commissioner Braswell asked Mr Stephens if it would create too much of an expense if the Board were to require additional landscaping on the buffer for the Lee Property Mr Stephens stated he does not have a lot of expertise on the costs of landscaping for the buffers PagePage pageNumber7383 April 1 , 2013 – 6 00 pm Continued At the inquiry of Commissioner Braswell , Mr Gray stated the length of the Lee Property line that would require a buffer is approximately 450 ft Ricky Klein asked Mr Stephens how long are the construction hours during the construction phase Mr Stephens responded the construction hours are usually daylight hours Mr Klein noted the fence at his property line and stated it has been his experience in other States that one property owner takes care of one half of an adjoining fence and the other property owner takes care of the other half Mr Klein stated he has been maintaining his fence to contain his animals since he has lived on the property Chairman Carver stated the Board has never set requirements regarding neighbors maintaining a fence together and it would be a precedent setting matter Commissioner Mims noted O2 Energies would be fencing around the solar farm and that fence would not extend back to the Klein Property Alvin Lee asked when the fence and trees would be installed Mr Stephens stated the fence and landscaping buffers would be installed first Commissioner Mims noted the Lee Property is adjacent to the proposed construction staging area and he asked Mr Lee how he felt about the hours of operation during construction Mr Lee responded that as long as the fence and buffers are put in first , then he does not mind the construction Mr Lee stated if the contractor has to work overtime to finish the job then he has no problem , but he would not appreciate the contractor working every Sunday continuously At the inquiry of Commissioner Godwin , Mr Lee stated he would appreciate it if the trees are at least six feet in height for the buffer at the time of planting Commissioner Braswell asked Mr Lee to confirm his thoughts on the hours of operation during the construction period Mr Lee stated he would not mind the contractor working on Saturdays to get the job finished or Sundays if they got behind on the schedule , but he would not want the contractor to work every Sunday just because he could Commissioner Barbour asked to get a better understanding regarding the farm path Commissioner Barbour asked Mr Stephens if O2 Energies would prefer to close the farm path Mr Stephens stated if it was a simple process , O2 Energies would prefer to close the farm path , but they feel it may be difficult legally to close the path due to the prescriptive right - of - way ; therefore , they feel it is safer to leave the farm path open Chairman Carver asked the Director of Cooperative Extension for Johnston County , Bryant Spivey , to comment on the proposed use Director of Cooperative Extension Bryant Spivey stated he sees the proposed use as a competing use for agriculture Mr Bryant added he is a proponent of property rights and wants people to use their property to make money so long as it does not interfere with those around them Mr Bryant stated he is dismayed with the term “ solar farm ” as he does not believe it is a “ farm ” Mr Spivey reported that Cooperative Extension has been approached by landowners in the County indicating they have been contacted by solar farm companies to sell or lease their property Mr Spivey commented that most of the farmers in the County depend on leasing farm land ; therefore , he feels the proposed use is a competition for those farmers Chairman Carver commented that the situation is all about balance for the County Commissioner Godwin stated in the write up for the case it was mentioned that the property would support sheep grazing PagePage pageNumber8384 April 1 , 2013 – 6 00 pm Continued Mr Spivey stated he was not aware that O2 Energies planned to graze sheep Commissioner Pope noted the grazing of sheep on the solar farm would not constitute a farm use exemption Commissioner Barbour stated the intent of the sheep would be to maintain the grass Mr Stephens stated on all seven of their operating solar farms , O2 Energies has a Farm Coordinator that coordinates with local people to obtain sheep for grazing Commissioner Pope commented that she understands the earlier comments from Mr Spivey that it is a competitive use for agriculture Mr Spivey stated he is concerned over the economics of solar farms long term and whether it is the actual power production driving the facilities or if it is the tax incentives and how the solar farms would be affected if the tax incentives are eliminated Alvin Lee asked about the sheep that would graze the property and if there would be an odor associated with grazing sheep Chairman Carver noted that the land is currently zoned Agricultural Residential and the applicant could graze sheep on the property now if they wanted to without a rezoning County Attorney David Mills agreed with Chairman Carver and confirmed that there would most likely be an odor just as with any other livestock Mr Lee asked if the applicant would be required to clean up after the sheep Mr Stephens stated the care of the sheep would be up to the Farm Coordinator Mr Lee asked the Board if they would set a condition regarding the cleanup of the sheep Chairman Carver stated he did not believe the Board could require a condition or put an ordinance in place that would require an individual to clean up after their own livestock on their own property Mr Mills agreed that the Board could not establish such requirements for livestock because the land is originally zoned Agricultural Residential Mr Spivey stated there are State laws in place that govern the density of livestock which will limit the number of livestock that can be contained on the property Mr Stephens noted that the sheep are used on an as needed basis and would not be on the property all year Mr Gray stated the Planning Board recommended approval Mr Gray continued that based on comments during the hearing , the Board may want to consider revisions to Condition No 5 requiring a buffer along the Klein property line and doubling the buffer along the Olivia Lee property line Mr Gray stated the Board may also want to consider revisions to Condition No 7 to limit the hours of operation during construction Mr Gray also stated the Board could consider adding a condition related to the removal of the equipment after the solar farm has reached the end of its life Commissioner Mims noted the Pate Property to the west of the subject site and asked Mr Gray if he had heard from the Pate landowners since it does not appear that any buffering will be done at that property line Mr Gray stated staff has not heard from the owners of the Pate Property Chairman Carver asked Mr Gray if he had a recommendation on limiting the hours of operation during construction Mr Gray stated the Board could limit the hours of operation during construction to Monday – Saturday 7 00 am until 9 00 pm and Sunday 12 00 pm until 9 00 pm PagePage pageNumber9385 April 1 , 2013 – 6 00 pm Continued Commissioner Godwin noted that the County has a noise ordinance in place and he does not see a need to limit the hours during construction Mr Gray stated the noise ordinance exempts construction ; therefore , the Board could limit the hours of operation during construction to daylight hours Commissioner Mims noted that his concern was that the construction staging area would be next to the Lee Property Mr Gray summarized the proposed revisions to the special use conditions as follows Condition No 5 Provide 4 small evergreen trees and 4 evergreen shrubs per every 100 linear feet along the road right of way and the Klein property line and 8 small evergreen trees and 8 evergreen shrubs along the Olivia Lee property line within the 30 ’ setback area Condition No 7 Hours of operation to be 24 hours a day , seven days per week for any repairs that may be needed Construction hours shall be daylight hours only Add Condition No 10 Solar farm facility shall be removed , at the owner’s expense , within one hundred eighty 180 days of a determination by the Zoning Administrator that the facility is no longer being maintained or used in an operable state of good repair Commissioner Godwin asked Mr Gray if he had received any feedback from other counties that have solar farms Mr Gray stated he has spoken with the Nash and Franklin County Planning Directors and they have received no complaints or negative comments from solar farms in those counties There being no further comments , the Chairman closed the Special Use Hearing for Case 13 - 01 Decision on Special Use Case 13 - 01 Case 13 - 01 To allow for a solar farm Owner Janet Thomason , James S Lee , Dianne Creech and Frances L Moore Applicant Logan Stephens and Olee Olsen , O2 Energies Based on the findings of facts and revised special use conditions as summarized by the Planning Director above , Commissioner Tony Braswell moved the Board authorize the Planning Department to issue a special use permit for Case 13 - 01 to allow for a solar farm on 65 acres located at 306 Watson Road in Micro Township Commissioner Ted G Godwin seconded the motion , which carried by unanimous vote Findings of Fact for the Special Use Permit The Board of Commissioners adopts the findings of facts as set in Staff’s recommendation in the above summary of evidence , as its own Special Use Conditions 1 Permitted Uses To allow for a solar farm 2 The Special Use Permit shall expire with the violation of any Special Use Condition 3 Applicant shall submit a detailed site plan for review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Department Staff 4 All buildings and or structures must comply with rules enforced by Federal , State and Local agencies 5 Provide 4 small evergreen trees and 4 evergreen shrubs per every 100 linear feet along the road right of way and the Klein property line and 8 small evergreen trees and 8 evergreen shrubs along the Olivia Lee property line within the 30 ’ setback area 6 Maximum height of equipment shall be 12 ’ 7 Hours of operation to be 24 hours a day , seven days per week for any repairs that may be needed Construction hours shall be daylight hours only 8 The area housing all the equipment shall be enclosed within a 6 ’ chain link fence topped with barb wire 9 All signage must comply with the sign code ; one ground sign no more than 60 sf and 6 ’ tall 10 Solar farm facility shall be removed , at the owner’s expense , within one hundred eighty 180 days of a determination by the Zoning Administrator that the facility is no longer being maintained or used in an operable state of good repair Page0386 April 1 , 2013 – 6 00 pm Continued 3 Public Hearing – Code of Ordinances Amendment – Section 14 - 426 Advertised – The Smithfield Herald – March 20 and 27 , 2013 Chairman Jeffrey P Carver opened the public hearing to allow for public comment on a proposed amendment to the Code of Ordinances regarding a Flood Panel Date Amendment Planning Director Berry Gray explained the revision is to Section 14 - 426 , Basis for Establishing Areas of Special Flood Hazard He stated FEMA has changed two of the 155 Flood Panels reflecting new mapping within Nash County and some of their panels overlap with Johnston County The data within Johnston County has not changed other than a reflection of a new date for the two maps Mr Gray continued that the North Carolina Office of Geospatial and Technology Management are requiring the amendment to reflect the new dates Mr Gray stated staff has worded the revision so if the dates are changed again , they will not have to come back before the Board There being no further comments , the Chairman closed the public hearing Upon a motion by Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr , seconded by Commissioner Cookie Pope , and carried by unanimous vote , the Board approved the following amendment to the Johnston County Code of Ordinances , Land Development Code , Section 14 - 426 Sec 14 - 426 - Basis for establishing the areas of special flood hazard The areas of special flood hazard identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency in its latest flood insurance study for the county , with accompanying maps and other supporting data , and any revision thereto are adopted by reference and are declared a part of this article and such areas demonstrated to constitute floodway and floodplain , supported by flood study by a qualified professional engineer and accepted by the county Add the following text The Special Flood Hazard Areas are those identified under the Cooperating Technical State CTS agreement between the State of North Carolina and FEMA in its FIS dated April 16 , 2013 for Johnston County and associated DFIRM panels , including any digital data developed as part of the Flood Insurance Study , which are adopted by reference and declared a part of this ordinance Future revisions to the FIS and DFIRM panels that do not change flood hazard data within the jurisdictional authority of Johnston County are also adopted by reference and declared a part of this ordinance 4 North Carolina Department of Transportation – Update on Interstate 95 Economic Study Roberto Canales , Coordinator for the Secretary of Transportation’s Strategic Initiatives , North Carolina Department of Transportation , addressed the Board Mr Canales stated the North Carolina Department of Transportation undertook the Interstate 95 Planning and Finance Study to determine how Interstate 95 could be reconstructed Mr Canales reported the studies have determined the DOT does not have sufficient funding to address the needs of the interstate and if they were to try and address all the needs under existing funding allocations , it would take approximately 70 years to complete the 182 miles of interstate from Virginia to South Carolina Mr Canales informed the Board that as part of the Planning and Finance Study , it was determined that tolling came to the surface as one potential alternative to fund the needed improvements He continued that the General Assembly directed the DOT to go a step further and undertake an Economic Impact Study He stated the Economic Impact Study looked at the matter from three perspectives , one being “ Business and Usual ” where the DOT would try to take their existing funding and keep the interstate in the condition it is presently in as best as they can The second perspective looks at funding the improvements though the use of tolling and the third perspective looks at any other potential funding sources that could be used to reconstruct the interstate to meet the needs of the future Mr Canales stated they are reviewing the potential impacts of tolling from an economic development aspect Mr Canales reviewed the following PowerPoint Presentation with the Board Page1387 April 1 , 2013 – 6 00 pm Continued I - 95 Economic Assessment Status Update April 2013 Study Purpose • Compare economic impacts of the proposed alternatives – Business as Usual – Funding improvements by tolling – Funding improvements by other methods • Provide information for decision making Key Elements • Review existing studies reports • Engage and inform the public and officials • Analyze impacts to – Freight and logistics – Economic development – Traffic – Economy in general • Screen & analyze funding optionsPage2388 April 1 , 2013 – 6 00 pm Continued Advisory Council • An advisory council of external stakeholders was established to help guide study • Members – NC Retail Merchants Association – NC Chamber of Commerce – NC Trucking Association – NC Farm Bureau – NC Travel & Tourism Coalition – NC Travel Industry Association – NC State University Agriculture & Resource Economics – No Tolls I - 95 Coalition Involving Stakeholders Advisory Council Surveys Interviews • Interviews • Trucking industry • Shippers Agriculture • Meetings • General public • Trucking industry • Electronic updates • Economic developers • Site selection consultants • County engineers • Tourism officials • NCDOT management Website Meetings Focus Groups • Study updates • No Tolls I - 95 board • Shippers • Fact sheets • Advisory Council • Trucking Industry • Meeting notices • NCDOT mgmt • Economic developers • Comments • Public in May • Tourism stakeholders • Public survey link • General public • Agriculture businesses • Roadway contractors Linking Transportation to the EconomyPage3389 April 1 , 2013 – 6 00 pm Continued Impact Categories for Assessing I - 95 Alternatives Direct User Impacts Business Economic Competitiveness Impacts Travel time Productivity GDP Vehicle operating Market access costs Employment Business revenue Safety cost and spending Income Reliability Profits Traffic volumes Study Schedule Next Steps • Final Advisory Council Meeting April 2013 • Finalize Draft Report April 2013 • Public Meetings May 2013 • Present to General Assembly May 2013Page4390 April 1 , 2013 – 6 00 pm Continued Mr Canales stated it is the DOT’s intent to present a final draft of the Economic Study to the General Assembly in early May He offered to answer any questions Commissioner Tony Braswell noted the poor condition of Interstate 95 in Johnston County and spoke on the amount of money that was spent to extend Interstate 495 at Exit No 58 in Fayetteville where there is significantly less traffic Commissioner Braswell questioned how the project decisions are made asking would it not be better to put the funding and resources in areas where there is more traffic Mr Canales explained that if the project in Fayetteville was included in the Transportation Trust Fund Law , then it was required to be built He also stated the military base must be considered in the Fayetteville area and there were some projects there that were done to encourage the Federal Government not to reduce the military presence through the Base Realignment and Closure BRAC program Mr Canales spoke on the need for more and better communication to understand how the decisions for improvements are made Commissioner Braswell spoke on the First Responders in Johnston County and how they must respond to accidents on Interstate 95 Commissioner Braswell stated the safety of those First Responders when dealing with accidents on the interstate are a big concern for the County Commissioner Ted G Godwin asked how much tolling affects industry decisions and economic development matters Mr Canales responded that as it relates to freight movement , generally the major trucking companies understand the need for tolls He added the smaller companies can see more of an impact on their profit margins Mr Canales noted that his answer is not data driven and is based on his conversations with other States The Board thanked Mr Canales for the update 5 Manager Reports and Comments A Monthly County Department Head Meetings County Manager Rick Hester reminded the Board that the County Department Heads hold a monthly staff meeting on the morning after the Commissioner meetings at 8 15 am in the Land Use Center Conference Room He invited the Commissioners to attend the meetings B Lottery Funds County Manager Rick Hester presented a draft of a letter to the Board that would be signed by the Chairman and sent to the Legislative Delegation requesting the full lottery allocation to be distributed to the counties It was the unanimous consensus of the Board for the Chairman to send the letter to the Legislative Delegation Following comments from the Board on the letter , staff stated the letter would be revised and prepared for the Chairman’s signature 6 Board Reports and Comments None There being no further business , Commissioner Cookie Pope moved the Board adjourn Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr seconded the motion , which carried by unanimous vote The meeting adjourned at 7 35 pm Jeffrey P Carver , Chairman Paula G Woodard , Clerk to the BoardPage