05082018am
MINUTES
CITY OF DUNN
DUNN, NORTH CAROLINA
The City Council of the City of Dunn held a Regular Meeting on Tuesday, May 8, 2018, at 7:00 pm. in the Dunn
Municipal Building. Present was Mayor Oscar N. Harris, Mayor Pro Tem Frank McLean, Council Members Buddy
Maness, Dr. Gwen McNeill, Billy Tart, Chuck Turnage, and Billy Barfield. Also present was City Manager Steven
Neuschafer, Finance Director Mark Stephens, Public Works Director Dean Gaster, Police Chief Chuck West,
Recreation Director Brian McNeill, Human Resources Director Anne Thompson, Librarian Mike Williams, Attorney
Tilghman Pope and Deputy Clerk Melissa Matti.
INVOCATION
Mayor Harris opened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. and asked Reverend Dr. Len Keever, Pastor of First Baptist Church of Dunn
^w. and vice-president of Duan United Ministerial Associations to give the invocation. Afterwards, the Pledge of Allegiance was
repeated_
AGENDA ADJUSTMENT AND APPROVAL
Motion by Council Member Maness and seconded by Council Member McNeill to adopt the May 8, 2018 meeting agenda
with changes, if any, as listed below.
Agenda Items Added:
• none
Agenda Items Removed:
• none
Motion unanimously approved.
PRESENTATIONS
Mayor Hains presented the North Carolina Commissioner of the Year to Eric Sinclair, Sr.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
Mayor Hams opened the floor for a thirty (30) minute public comment period.
Hearing no comments, the public comment period was closed.
PUBLICHF.ARING
Demolition of Structure (Storage Building)
100211004 E. Edgerton Street
PIN# 1516-95-5410.000
The public has been notified that oral and written comments will be heard and received concerning the demolition of the
storage building located at 100211004 1- Edgerton Street
The public was duly advertised on April 24, 2018 and May 3, 2018
Hearing no comments, Mayor Harris closed the public hearing.
Conditional Use Permit CU -01-18
Cubera Solar, LLC (applicant)
The Willoughby, LLC (owner)
PIN#1517-65-0443.000
1000 Block of Meadowlark Road
Mayor Harris stated that this is a request for a Conditional Use Permit [Zoning Ordinance Article IX Section 221461 (8) (k)]
from Cubera Solar, LLC. The conditional use will allow the construction and operation of a solar farm on the existing 18.7
acre parcel.
This Public Hearing is an opportunity for the Council to hear sworn testimony and receive specific evidence from the public
to include any party for or against the request. During this deliberation for decision, questions may only be asked to clarify
previous testimony.
-- The public hearing was duly advertised on April 10, April 17 & April 24, 2018.
Mayor Harris yielded to City Attomey Pope.
City Attorney Pope introduced CU 01-18, a request by Cubera Solar, LLC for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for the
construction and operation of a solar farm on the existing 18.7 acre parcel along the 1000 block of Meadowlark Road. The
property is cuaently zoned R-20, Single Family Dwelling District The hearing on this matter is judicial in nature and will be
conducted in accordance with special due process safeguards. Attorney Pope asked that all persons who wish to testify in this
case, approach the podium to be sworn or give their affirmation_
Swearing -In.
City Attorney Pope administered oaths to:
Mike Fox, Attorney forApplicant
Steve Evans, Cypress Creek Renewables
390
Nick Kirkland, Licensed Appraiser
Tommy Cleveland, Licensed Engineer and Expert in Solar Facilities
Tom Willoughby, Jr., Property Owner
City Manager, Steven Neuschafer
William Glover
Steven Glover
Explanation of Proceeding
Attorney Pope explained that testimony will first be given by City Steven Neuschafer, then from the applicant and their
witnesses, and then from opponents to the request Parties may cross-examine witnesses after the witness testifies when
questions are called for. If you want the Council to see written evidence, such as reports, maps, or exbibits, the witness who
is familiar with the evidence should ask that it be introduced during or at the end of his or her testimony. Reports from
persons who are not present to testify will not be accepted. Attorneys who speak should not give factual testimony but may
summarize their cfiem's case. Before beginning your testimony, please clearly identify yourself for the record.
City Attorney Pope opened the hearing on Case #CU -01-18 Conditional Use Permit Application and asked for testimony
from City Manager Steven Neuschafer.
Testimony from the Planner
City Manager — Acting as the Planning Director Steven Neuschafer asked that the documents contained behind tab #9 in the
City Council packet which includes the conditional use application, Planning Department staff report, statement of
justification from the applicant, maps and all other material be entered as evidence. (A copy of these documents entered as
evidence for Case #CU -01-18 Conditional Use Permit is incorporated into these minutes as Attachment #1).
City Manager - Planning Director Neuschafer stated that the property is an 18.7+/- acre site directly off Meadowlark Road
located in the 1000 block area The property has approximately 900 linear feet of frontage on Meadowlark Road. It is located
outside the city limits, but there is public water available to the site. It is currently zoned R-20, Single Family Dwelling
District Lot acreage for residential housing is 20,000 square feet Mr. Neuschafer directed council to the site plan which
shows the front side and rear set -backs that are required by the zoning ordinance for R-20 District The additional 100'
residential property setback which are noted on the site plan are required by the conditional use portion of the ordinance
specifically toward solar farm applications. For clarification, Manager Neuschafer stated that the front setback that is noted is
the measurement from the public right of way. From the property line (survey line) back into the property. It's not from the
center of the road or from the edge of the pavement, which was talked about during the Planning Board Meeting.
The Planning Board did hold a public hearing as well. It was not judicial in nature but they did receive comments from the
public and from the applicant The Planning Board voted to recommend this request during their meeting on April 24, 2018.
At the end of the City Manager (Planner's) testimony, Attorney Pope asked if there were any questions of the City Manager
(Planner) from the Council.
Mr. Neuschafer was asked what is the right of way of that parcel of land. He responded that he does not have the exact right
of way with the road because we measured from the property line I don't know how wide the right of way is. The site plan
should be from the property lime into the property.
Council Member Maness asked Mr. Neuschafer to explain the maintenance requirements law for that area and what is
included with that as far as keeping it mowed, underbrush, overgrowth, etc., etc. as it pertains to backing up to the boarders of
residential areas for the record. He responded directly verbatim from the Code of Ordinances. Setbacks for solar panels and
any related equipment shall meet the principal building setbacks except where abutting residential property, which requires a
one hundred (100) feet minimum setback Solar farms shall be frilly screened from adjoining properties and adjacent roads
by an evergreen buffer capable of reaching a height of ten (10) feet within three (3) years of planting, with at least seventy-
five (75) percent opacity at the time of planting. And lastly, the owner or future owner of a property onto which a solar farm
is installed assumes all risk associated with diminished performance of said system caused by any present or future adjacent
structure or landscaping that may interfere with the system's ability to produce power at its rated capacity, regardless of when
that adjacent structure or landscaping is constructed or installed.
Council Member Maness asked Mr. Neuschafer if in the event that something were to happen to the buffer area and the trees
that were planted or whatever type of vegetation, who is responsible for maintaining and keeping that buffer up? He
responded that the property owner and/or the operator of the lease on the property would be required to maintain the buffer.
Maintaining the buffer is under a separate section of the ordinance. But that would be inspected and if there was a failure of
the buffer then that would need to be replaced and it would be enforced per the zoning ordinance.
As a follow-up question to Mr. Maness' question, Mayor Harris asked Mr. Neuschafer if the maintenance ordinance required
to be incorporated or inserted as a reference into the contract He responded that as a point of verification in the conditions,
you might want to ask the applicant to consider. The zoning ordinance does allow for inspection of the buffer just like
inspection of the uses. It would be treated just like any another violation of the ordinance.
Council Member Tart asked Mr. Neuschafer about the property behind the property in question. It has been zoned for future
solar panels. Did we put some kind of protection in the event that was no longer used for this purpose, so they couldn't just
walls away and leave it intact? Did we not put something to protect us from that? He responded that under the conditional use
ordinance there is a section that deals specifically with that The planning director shall be provided copies of any lease
agreement, solar access easement, and plan for removal of system/equipment So all those things are for the approval at the
final stages. All the conditions would still have to be met by the applicant So, yes, they do have to show a plan for removal.
Mayor Harris asked Mr. Neuschafer for confirmation that this is the second solar farm within adjoining properties. He
responded that that was correct and directed them to the site map that read Elmore Farms, LLC. Council heard that case in
October, 2016. Mayor Harris asked if there were any problems that the solar people have experienced by a concentration of
solar farms. He responded that he might have to ask the applicant
391
Council Member Tumage asked Mr. Neuschafer about cost income analysis. If we do this, with this being in the ET7 what
tax situation would they apply to the City? He replied that it would be of no benefit tax wise to the City.
Council Member Barfield asked Mr. Neuschafer who was responsible for cutting the grass out there. He answered that it's
considered farm land.
Attorney Pope asked if there were additional questions from council ofMr. Neuschafer. None were heard.
Attorney Pope asked if there were additional questionsfrom those sworn to testify ofMr. Neuschafer. None were heard
Attorney Pope asked for testimony from the Applfcan0lroponents.
Mr. Mike Pott -100 N. Bay St, Durham NC, Attorney spoke on behalf of the applicant
Mr. Fox advised the council that they have several witnesses who have been sworn The witnesses are prepared to give a
brief summary of testimony and are happy to go into much greater detail if there are any questions from council or anyone
else here. The witnesses were introduced as follows Steve Evans, Cypress Creek Renewables which is the company that will
develop this particular solar farm. Steve will talk about the company itself, this particular site and any questions or concerns
that you might have about the site plans and setbacks or Cypress Creek themselves. Nick Kirkland, Licensed Appraiser. His
company has prepared an appraisal study on this particular site, and he will be testifying to you about the results of that
appraisal and he will be offering his opinion that his study indicated that the location of a solar as presented in this plan
would not impair the property values of any adjoining or adjacent property owners and also that the solar farm would be in
harmony with the area in which it is to be located Tommy Cleveland, Licensed Engineer and is an Expert in Solar Facilities.
Tommy will offer his opinion as to the safety and operation of the solar farm such as explained here. He will give you his
opinion that there are no safety issues or health issues related to the operation of the solar farm like the one that is proposed
here. He can also answer any questions you may have about how the farm is set up or how it actually works. Tom
Willoughby, Property Owner. We don't have a presentation for him. He wanted to be here. He is sworn in the event that you
have questions about the particular property. Your ordinance is a very thorough ordinance. I commend you on the
thoroughness of your solar ordinance. I get to see a lot of them, and yours has been well drafted and covers the important
things that it needs to cover. For your consideration, just a reminder as your attorney will do the same as well. What you're
looking at are several questions: (1) That the use request gets listed on all the conditional uses in the district in which the
application is made. I would continue to get eyewitnesses to confirm that as your manager has presented how our application
and your ordinance is and how serious it is when he said if we don't meet that then we don't get this. (2) That the requested
use is essential to public convenience or welfare. Mr. Cleveland will speak to that as to the acquisition of solar energy and
having to convert it into traditional energy sources that give it back to the public. (3) That the requested use will not impair
the integrity or character of the surrounding adjoining districts nor be detrimental to the health, wellness and welfare. That
will be covered by a combination of Mr. Cleveland talking about the health and welfare and then Mr. Kirkland who tell you
about the character and the integrity of the surrounding adjoining property owners. (4) That the requested use will be
conforming with the land development plan. The Staff Report talks about that and Mr. Kirkland will also talk about the
harmony of the district to the area. (5) The facilities have each been provided that will all be covered on the site plan that you
have been provided Mr. Evans can talk about that as well. He is facilities, water/sewer things like that would obviously go
-- in connection to the utility lines, which Mr. Evans can talk about So, those are the things that you are required to look when
you consider this. A report was distributed to council for their review and it was entered into evidence. Mr. Fox explained
that Cypress Creek is "sort of the parent company. They are a solar energy company that develops facilities like this around
the country and other places in North Carolina and other companies and each of their separate facilities has its own corporate
organization, structure and so forth. Cubera Solar, LLC is the secondary entity, which is controlled by Cypress Creek for this
particular solar farm. There are a Iot of reasons for that It takes a lot of approvals to get one of these solar farms going and
this is just one of the steps. It's a critical step to get a land use approval from a local jurisdiction. But, there's a myriad of
other approvals from utilities commission, Duke Energy in terms of connect, from all the normal things that you would have
to have. You need to get a driveway permit, and you may have to have your electrical permit That's the relationship between
these two entities. Mr. Willoughby is the landowner and he has a lease with the Solar, so that's the relationship between him
and Cubera Solar.
Mayor Harris asked Mr. Fox if they were all parties to the agreement that the council has before them tonight Mr. Fox
responded to the application, Yes. Certainly, I think the application's done in the name of Cubera Solar. You have to have the
agency of the authority and landowner to yield to pemvt special use on the property.
Mr. Nick Kirkland, Licensed Appraiser spoke on behalf of the applicants.
Mr. Kirkland has worked with Cypress Creek Renewables for several years now and while working there the main focus was
researching solar farms not just in North Carolina, but in the central region of the United States. Over 200 of the 400 apps are
from North Carolina specifically. And an overwhelming majority of these are located in agricultural and residential areas.
Page 27 includes the 334 solar farms out of our database. We'll use a median percentage of the adjoining use, which means
longer parcels that are affected by solar farms. Combined residential, agricultural, adjoining uses by acreage about 95% of
what we had seen in our database. If we're gonna look at it by the number of parcels at it, approximately 2/3 of the lots are
small lots that are adjacent to it Those are 94% of the adjoining uses_ So, it's our professional opinion that based on the latest
use for a solar farm, this is typically the kind of area that it would be located in. We have over twenty different tax payer
studies that we've done on completed solar farms. Nine (9) of which are included in this one. Each of those show no impact
regarding property values. So, it's a professional opinion that solar farms as proposed at this location would have no impact
on adjoining property values.
Council Member Barfield asked Mr. Kirkland what his plans were for the grass cutting. Mr. Kirkland responded that that is a
question Mr. Evans can address. He'll be the one with Cypress Creek that's in charge of maintaining all that Mr. Kirkland is
our Appraiser and while he can give you an opinion as to the property value, he won't really have anything to do with the
maintenance of the site.
Attorney Pope asked the Council if they had questions ofMr. Kirkland.
Mr. Kirkland was asked which municipalities were used to do the comparisons for the City of Dunn. He responded that
generic study is for editing across North Carolina Also, there's a map on a another page that shows this county and adjoining
392
counties in a breakdown very similar to that one, so we just look at that That starts on page 28. This one shows that same
type of information. Looking at that same median rate for this one use by Iikard. I'm going to take page 29 following the
median across and that just goes to show that is in line with the capable areas that you find solar farms.
Attorney Pope asked the Council if they had questions ofMr. Kirkland
Attorney Pope asked those sworn if they had questions ofMr. Urlland
Tommy Cleveland, Licensed Professional Engineer in North Carolina spoke on behalf of the applicant
Mr. Cleveland advised the council that he has been working in the solar industry for over a dozen years. Almost all that time
at NC State University. I have a contractor that does commissioning of solar projects for Duke Energy across North Carolina
and South Carolina. I'm going to talk about two of the items that you're considering this evening. Solar farms provide us
with electricity that's essential to modern society/modern life and they're doing that cause it's a renewable resource that's
clean as opposed to the finite resources that are not as clean. Something cleaner, something political and something that has
energy security benefits because of how it is produced that we can't lose the fuel supply to a solar project I want to again talk
about it being detrimental. In fact it helps the welfare of the technology. The situation I looked closely when I was back at
NC State, and wrote a paper on this before leaving there. But, more particularly that helped explain the benefits. And, it's my
professional opinion that there are no negative health and safety impacts that occur in a project such as this. There are none
shown from the project Standard stuff to help the public. One of the common concerns is that the amount of pollutants
generated. It is my professional opinion that this project is conventional and it is not detrimental to the public health or safety.
Attorney Pope asked the Council if they had questions ofMr. Cleveland.
Mayor Barris stated that a question that he has heard and did not know was that there is some leakage from the equipment
itself and it seeps into the ground and may contaminate the ground. Is there any truth to that? Mr. Cleveland responded that
this is the primary conclusion that is out there in the public now. There is nothing liquid to leak from down there. They're
almost entirely glass and aluminum components and there's a little bit of plastic, some silicone and little bits of metal mixed
with copper, so there's nothing to leak from it They're very well sealed. Even in the event that they crack and you get rain
water across the cracked panel that's the central nerve. It's still nothing to be concerned about
Attorney Pope asked the Council if there were any other questions ofMr. Cleveland.
Attorney Pope asked those sworn if they had questions ofMr. Cleveland
Mr. Cleveland was asked what the impact was on wildlife. His property is just across the street from the proposed site and we
just have concerns of there being any impact on wildlife at all. Mr. Cleveland responded, not really. There are physical
factors you have from construction. You've got a fence around the perimeter so we're talking about the technology to grab
the electricity and that's about all. There are rumors that birds that are searching for water will fly into them. I've done
research on that, typed papers about that and haven't come across anything to validate the rumors.
Attorney Pope asked those sworn if there were any other questions ofMr. Cleveland
Council Member Barfield asked Mr. Cleveland where does this energy go to or does it just get distributed back Mr.
Cleveland responded that it actually could immediately feed into the lines of the utility poles. It automatically follows the
path of least resistance. So it'll go to the local houses and businesses near -by. It will be separate from the actual bluebill. It
should be simpler, than it could be on paper, to better answer who the electricity is actually being sold to. The electrons
themselves will go to local demands for electricity near the project This would not back feed very far in that direction, if at
all. It would primarily serve the host for that property, and the substation downstream. There could be occasional times where
it back feeds to the substation a small distance or those nearby. I wouldn't expect the electricity to leave the Dunn area and
head back to the transmission lines.
Council Member Tumage stated that the energy flow is transparent to us, the customer. What we could see as a reduction is
Duke Energy so they're not having to produce as much to keep our levels the same and not having to spice at different times.
Council Member Maness offered a simple explanation and asked for correction if he's wrong. We have installed a solar panel
on our home that ties in with our meter base. It feeds our home first and anything that is produced we're not being charged
for because it's going into our home. If we produce in excess, the meter will go backwards which will reduce our savings.
It's going to be basically the same way here. The power is generated from the solar farm and is going through the
transmission lines and it's just like power that Duke brought us when we overproduced or wherever it's being sent from to
Dunn so it'll get used here. It has nothing to do about meters. It has nothing to do about charges because our energy use is
merely based on what feeds into our home anyway. So, it's not going to have any impact whatsoever as far as the pace of
meters. It can't.
Attorney Pope asked if there were any other questions ofMr. Cleveland.
Mr. Steve Evans, Zoning & Outreach Manager for Cypress Creek Renewables spoke on behalf of the applicant
Mr. Evans advised the council that he actually goes around and sort of help sort out of some of these details and questions
regarding solar facilities. Just a little background about Cypress Creek Renewables: We are one of the largest utility sales
solar operators in the country. We are one of the very few solar utility companies that you will have before you that actually
owns, operates, engineers and constructs our own power facilities. So, we are not a developer bringing insight to you and
then basically hands it off to someone else who will come behind to do the construction and management of it We will
actually be with the longstanding neighbors or operators of this facility thereby being the neighbors of you all here and this
great community. We currently operate over and on our portfolio approximately 175 solar facilities. 134 of which are here in
North Carolina We are located out of Durham, North Carolina in terms of our engineering, construction and operations team.
We just approximately three weeks ago had the grand opening for our multi-million dollar operations center, which is tied
into the national grid. It is one of the few facilities of its type, and the only one in terms of solar facilities where we are able
to monitor individually each and every one of our solar facilities. We have a monitoring system to where we can tell you
which facility is doing what in terms of efficiency. We can look at each stand of where these solar panels are located. If there
I=
is a solar panel on a particular road that is not operating at its full efficiency, or has been damaged we can immediately detect
that, dispatch on that and have someone to make certain that it's managed and up and taken care of. With respect to
questions, Mr. Barfield, regarding the vegetative maintenance, we do have a vegetative maintenance team. They go around
and they make certain that these sites are looking as best as they can. We also do our very best to hire locally for landscape
maintenance. It is a lot easier for us to have someone here in this community that can go out and look at this facility versus
me having to dispatch teams to all our sites throughout North Carolina. So, we do our best to try and find a Iocal landscaping
company that will go by routinely and make certain these sites are well kept and well maintained. And that's what we will
look to do for this site as well, seeing as how we will have these two sites. Because the Meadowlark site, which has already
been approved, is also under Cypress Creek as well- So, we will have a vested interest in both of these facilities and make
certain that they are well kept My job ultimately is to review ordinances and make certain that we fall in compliance to the
ordinances as they are committed Upon my review of yours, we do find that we are in compliance within the restraints of
your ordinance. We addressed some concerns at the Planning Board Meeting that was held previously regarding setbacks.
Your ordinance currently requires a thirty foot front setback for these facilities. At a request from one of the residents that
was concerned about aesthetics along this well -traveled road He asked if you would possibly look at moving the setbacks at
first We were able to push it back an additional twenty feet so we now offer a fifty foot front setback along this site. We will
also have two rows of vegetative buffering which will as staff reported earlier be evergreen. Something along the limes of
Leland Cypress that has spread, that will provide for rear opaqueness, as we get into the perfect growth season. They willbe
at the least ten feet capacity within the three year period. I believe that it is identified as. We are doing all that we can to make
certain that we properly attest what the ordinance requires and meet those standards because as I mentioned earlier we will be
the longstanding neighbor. We are not just here to facilitate the construction of this site and then move on to the next one.
With regard to issues such as safety. We will meet with the local fire department to go through all the checks and balances as
far as for fire safety, access to the site, emergency out off; things of that sort that are requirements for these facilities to
operate within the permitted range of what they are supposed to be. I'm trying to think of particular things that I can address
to you all in regard to this. At this point, I will be most happy to answer any questions that you may have. Maybe that's the
best way to field some of the concerns.
Attorney Pope asked the Council if they had questions ofMr. Evans.
Council Member Maness thanked Mr. Evans for being here to explain this. He went on to say that Mr. Evans had mentioned
having a landscape maintenance team. Mr. Evans responded yes, we do. Council Member Maness asked what the frequency
of their visits will be. Or, if you contract them and hire locally, what is frequency that they will be out there on site reviewing
and assessing the site situation to see if any maintenance is required Mr. Evans explained that ultimately during growing
season we probably have rotation of our dedicated maintenance teams to come around and inspect site about once a month.
Now, we will likely be looking to hire a local landscape team to go out and actually access the site. We have not identified
who that will be because we will have these two facilities that they will need to keep an eye on and maintain For these
facilities, these grass that is actually planted within the solar arrays themselves is a very slow low growing grass and of
course the outer perimeter will be from the buffering of the evergreens. So, for any of the upkeep around the evergreens
themselves, the grass in that area will also be a slow low growing grass. But we do understand that there are weeds that can
get into that and they will come out and do that I don't have a specific frequency scheduled, but I will be more than happy to
address if there is something that you all wanted to see in terms of frequency of vegetative inspections. Council Member
Maness said, "So, a monthly inspection by your thinking is a minimum." Mr. Evans responded "Correct" So, during growing
season that is where we are, at a monthly ride around to look at these sites, to see what these sites look like and then contact
either a local landscape team or if it's a small enough job we could have our in-house guys here to do that. Council Member
Maness asked what is included in the upkeep and maintenance that you refer to. I'm assuming grass mowing when needed,
pre -emergent treatment to control noxious weeds or things of this nature, cleaning of any debris to include broken limbs or
whatever if something should happen with the buffer. Replacing of any damaged trees or trees that may not survive planting.
Is this part of the company policy, or is something that we need to ask to be added to be agreed to in the conditional use
permit? Attorney Pope said that we can discuss that during the deliberation. But if it's not a condition on the granting of the
permit, it's not enforceable. Mr. Evans said So, if that was the requirement of you all wanting to add that to the conditions,
then that's fine. We would be agreeable to that as a condition. As I mentioned, I would like the option of also looking at the
mobile companies to contract out the work Council Member Maness added that the only reason that he's adding this is that
there's been a lot of concern in the public with regards to the upkeep and maintenance. What happens should you choose to
get rid of this specific project? I know that's typically not what you do. You've got 175 facilities that are operating right
NOV But, if we have it as a condition, is it only with the current applicant or also those in the future? Attorney Pope
responded that it goes with the permit, therefore it goes with the land. Council Member Maness said so, you see why I'm
trying to work it in that fashion, sir. I'm not trying to be hard to get along with, but I've also got to look after the best
interests of the communities in the event that you're not there. Mr. Evans replied that generally where we can least see that
the issuance of the conditional use permit in prudence complies with your landscape buffer, for example. So, if something
were to happen with it, half of the trees were to die and we weren't in compliance with that, we would have to bring that back
up or we would be in jeopardy of being in violation of our new permit which mean that you could shut us down. So, to us
that's a serious consequence, which we take very seriously. Council Member Maness responded that he understands that, but
what he's talking about goes beyond the ordinance requirements. So, that why there needs to be a proper conditional use
assessments. Mr. Evans said that I totally understand, and like I said I will leave that to the leisure of the board in regards to
the conditions.
Attorney Pope asked if there were questions ofMr. Evans.
Council Member Barfield asked Mr. Evans in the event that we approve tonight, when would you start? Mr. Evans responded
I do not have an answer to that So, what happens in terms of the process of all this. We've done some environmental studies
and we've done some survey work But the more intensive work, the surveying, environmental impact studies, wetland
delineations, and all those types of things occur after we have secured site control from the conditional use aspect So, in that
queuing of where things are, it could mean probably twelve months to fifteen months out It could be two years out, as with
the case with Meadowlark When we got it approved, often times the frequency of where we are and with a lot of these firms
that have to provide these services it's not always up to our time schedule. So, I don't have a definitive answer to that. Mr.
Evans responded and too that's the point Just as if this farmland was taken out of rotation of being farmland. And they're
starting to where they allow for growth of tree famming or just allow for overgrowth We don't maintain the early stage
development of grass cutting, things of that sort because at that point in time all the way up until the point where we actually
have the greenlight to operate or start the construction. These parcels are still able to be farmed and used as the use of the
394
current land holder as they deem appropriate and necessary. So, it is not until we actually start construction that we start that
process of maintaining the property in the use of what it would be in for solar service. Attorney Pope advised Council
Member Barfield that there may be another witness that can better address your questions. Mr. Willoughby, can you come
forward and identify yourself and your address please, before you come to the mike.
Tom Willoughby, Jr., Property Owner
Mr. Willoughby advised the council that he was the land owner. He lives at 2107 Red Hill Church Road, Dunn. I think the
difference, and you can correct me if I'm wrong on this, between this project and the first one is the land was sold. On this
one, we're doing a lease. Until they exercise their options and they start paying the monthly lease, I'm going to keep farming.
I mean the Jernigan's are going to farm, it's going to be active. It's not going to be they come to me and say stop farming and
a year later I've lost a year's rent because theirs hasn't kicked in. So, it should be a shorter time period from when they stop
farming and construction begins. Does that sound right? Mr. Evans said Correct We do not have to go through process of the
closing of the land from a purchase, with this being a lease. Like I said, we still are in the que as far as the environmental
work that has to be done as tbis is a slightly small parcel- So, it should not take as long and as was mentioned, the site would
still be used in whatever the current facility until we got the greenlight to start building.
Attorney Pope asked fthere were questions ofMr. Evans.
Mayor Harris asked Mr. Evans if Cypress Creek was over Cubera and that Cubera would actually do the construction and
operation of the solar farming. But, it would be Cypress Creek's responsibility to make sure that they did it in the proper
manner. Mr. Evans is the parent company for Cubera, LLC. So, what happens as Mr. Fox mentioned earlier, each of these
facilities operate as their own entity. It helps with the liability issue. It also helps with the financing structure in our lease.
So, that's why Mr. Phillips has his own operating LLC, but Cypress Creek Renewables is shill the engineering company, the
constructor, the operator, and the managing owner of these facilities throughout their duration and time. Mayor Harris went
Rather to ask if he would be correct to say that the situation would prevent filing bankruptcy if they happen to be covered in
the lease, as to what happens in that case. Mr. Evans responded No, it wouldn't be covered in the lease. These facilities are
like a mortgage, in a sense. For each LLC, we have investors that invest in the operation of these facilities. And these
investors are major banks and insurance companies and major Wall Street investors. So, they invest their funds in the
operation of the site itself the electricity, the equipment is all collateralized through that investment And so, these facilities
are many millions of dollars to get up and running. If for some reason Cypress Creek went bankrupt, then the investors of the
LLC would then jump in just as they would if someone was buying a mortgage and take over the operation of this facility.
Keep in mind that these facilities are highly valuable because they are still generating electricity. So, they are still paying out
regardless of Cypress is in charge of it or someone else is in charge of it So, they will take over the operation and they can
continue to operate it or they can sell that operation to Duke Energy who would then take over an operating facility that they
have limited investment in and continue making money off of that These are pretty secure investment structures, so even if
something were to happen to Cypress Creek the operation and the facilitation of this site would go on as they had done
originally with or without Cypress Creek So, that's the best way I know to explain. Mayor Harris asked whether Cypress
Creek would be the managing member. Mr. Evans confirmed that they would be the managing member. As a point of
clarification, it was pointed out that each one of these sites has to have individual and separate approval in terms of utilities.
So, that's really a primary reason as well as to why there's separate approvals. It's unlikely to say that Cypress Creek had
blanket approval to bring in 72 solar farms. I can look at each individual one and say that's one of the primary reasons why
they're structured like that.
Attorney Pope asked if there were any questions ofMr. Evans
Attorney Pope asked those sworn f they had questions ofMr. Evans
Since Mr. Willoughby provided testimony, Attorney Pope asked if there were any questions ofMr. Willoughby
Attorney Pope asked those sworn if they had questions ofMr. Willoughby
City Attorney asked if the applicant had arty further witnesses.
Mr. Fox responded that that's all the witnesses we have. We would ask that you would take this into evidence and we
appreciate your time and consideration in this. I believe that we've met the criteria your organization requires and we ask you
approve the request Council Member Maness said Thank you, sir.
City Attorney Pope said that we will now hear from people opposing the request. If there are attorneys or other
representatives who will give a general summary of the position, we'd like to get to you fust. If not, anyone that wishes to
testify in opposition to the request may come forward at this time.
Steve Butler, resident of Dunn testified regarding the request Steve explained that on April 24, 2018 I came to the planning
board meeting concerning property use. At that time, I had the opportunity to voice my opinions. I neither endorse it nor
condemn it I looked at it as the lesser of the two evils down the road. I'm mainly trying to be as it is now. Most of what I
wanted to say has been touched on. From what I understand, your plan is to place cypress in the front chain fence on the
north side and the east side of the facility. This faces Meadowlark Road, in this way you create a buffer. This kind of grass is
going to be out approximately six times a year. This is a power generating plant in the middle of a residential area on road
frontage. All of the main structures in this section of road have manicured yards, single family dwellings and the middle
school. Any of these could allow their yards with fronts to go for two months between cuttings and I feel certain it would be
addressed by the City of Dunn After all, this facility is a blend of properties in which it is being inserted- And as a note,
North Carolina national grass included weeds. Without heavily burdening the applicant, maybe some sort of shrubbery more
typical of residential communities might be substituted, possibly with professional landscaping and maintenance_ This facility
should blend with its neighboring properties, not stand out At the Planning Board I raised the issue of a thirty-foot setback
on the front When asked what else I would like to see, I responded, I hope to see a hundred feet but we can't be picky.
Thank you Mr. Evans and Cypress Creek for the setback Mr. Evans has informed me of this yesterday. This particular
request isn't just for eye appeal, but also for a safety factor. This stretch of road is known for a good place road test vehicles.
I drive on this road and currently live there. I can attest that there have been several speed related accidents on this very road-
To
oadTo me, it was only practical to increase the setbacks. This is a community that I'm proud to be a part of and wanted to make
the City of Dunn equally proud Council members, the decision you make tonight will only take a few minutes. For residents
of this street, it will be a decision they will have to live with for the remainder of their lives. I hope the decision you make
will be one that will allow the mutual pride to be shared with the team. Thank you.
M11
Attorney Pope asked if there were any questions ofMr. Butler
Council Member McNeill asked Mr. Butler, are you saying you're neither for it nor against it? Mr. Butler responded, I said
I'm not totally against it, and I'm not for it I am neutral. I am open but I think there should be contingencies set on it if it's
approved. It should be landscaped the same as the residential places around it It shouldn't look like an industrial site or a
commercial site. You have all these nice landscaped yards and all of the sudden, there's a place with a gravel driveway, stuff
growing out the front of a chain link fence with barb wire and signs on it Then you have well -manicured yards and the
school is well maintained. Anybody in the future coming and looking or lives so long in Dunn is going to have to drive by
this. Fortunately, I've been studying and I'd been willing to work with the City on this and do something, but you've got to
do it beforehand Listen, once you pass it, it's over with your hands are off of it
Attorney Pope asked if anyone else had any questions ofMr. Butler
Council Member Turnage told City Manager Neuschafer that he had a quick question for him on code enforcement in the
ETJ. Mr. Neuschafer responded that with the zoning, that's where we have most of the feasibility of it It's not necessarily
through the city code which generally governs the overgrowth and weedy lots and things like that It's in the second section
of the City Ordinance. Mr. Tumage said but, that's not covered in the ETT. Mr. Neuschafer responded, that's right, only in
the city limits.
Council Member Maness said that he was glad that you asked because I wanted to bring important clarification out for the
general public and the viewing public. Those properties out there that are outside the city limits are not subject to our city
ordinances. I want you to understand that too Mr. Barfield. I believe we can't control the height of grass, we can't control
weedy lots. That's all in the county and that's subject to the county requirements, not the City's. So, there's nothing we can
do currently. I just wanted to make sure that everyone understands that If they're outside the city limits, we don't have any
control on height restrictions, for weedy lots or anything else. The school's not in the city limits. The houses across the street,
one or two houses are outside the city limits, all the rest are inside the city limits that are across the road and down the street
from it Council Member Maness said but this track of land is out the city limits and is subject to the county.
Attorney Pope asked those sworn to provide testimony or any of the attorneys ifthey had questions ofMr. Glover.
Michael Glover, owner of property to the east of the proposed site along Meadowlark Road. It's still a commercial operation.
One that is designed to make money. Solar farms have been looked upon as an alternative energy source and gives that warm
and fuzzy feeling that they're going to be used to save the planet what I trouble getting my head around is why would the
City of Dunn submit a plan such as this solar farm in the ETJ. None of its benefits are replete from the City or from the
citizens. Harnett County will get the taxes on the property as it falls outside the city limits. Dunn grants approval for one solar
in the ETT allowing another phenomenal decrease in benefits for our community for the next thirty years. what's logical,
there is a reason for them doing this. My family's home is located directly across from the proposed site. Right where my
grandfather's home and farmland is. I was raised here and am currently staying with one of my mother's sister at the age of
93. My family has been there for fifty years. They haven't paid taxes to the City of Dunn in decades. Now, Dunn is
considering bringing a commercial facility like this across the street from us, and yet will not be subject to the same taxes or
regulations to abide by. This is not fair. I find that many of my neighbors do not like the fact of a street side solar farm.
Especially considering it will be inserted slowing into our neighborhood. This is a residential neighborhood and it is not the
perfect place for a solar farm by any means. There are no benefits or need for this facility. You come home and when you get
the time you walk out of your house you're looking at a chain link fence with trees standing there and barbed wire across the
top and a few bushes. I put in serious question as to how that will be maintained. It is beautiful and there is no need for a
buffer. And there is a need to question how it would be maintained. The flashing lights with the signs with the chain link
fence with the upkeep of the questionable greenery that been spoken of The question in regard to other than the fact that it's
going to be used to block it I don't have the confidence that this will be maintained properly and I do have serious questions
about the property value. It seems to have great data backing that up, all but I'm not convinced. Aesthetically in the growing
season it will not be home that I grew up in. The solar farms that I've ever seen, I can't imagine that this would at all
positively (maybe negatively) impact that property. Than you for hearing my comments tonight
Attorney Pope asked council f they had questions ofMr. Glover
Council Member Maness said that he would like to know which property he says he owns. Mr. Glover responded that there's
a R-20 zone location. You'll see a pond there. It's the R-20 property across the street from that. Council Member Maness
asked Mr. Neuschafer if he could identify it on the map that's before us. I'm Iooking for your name and I don't quite frankly
see it Mr. Glover responded that it's the Jackie Glover property. Council Member Maness asked do you own it or does your
mother own it. Mr. GIover replied "my mother". Council Member Maness said so your mother's the Iand owner. Mr. Glover
said she is.
Attorney Pope asked council if there were any other questions ofMr. Glover
Attorney Pope asked those sworn, or the attorneys ifthey had questions ofMr. Glover
Mr. Fox addressed the council and said he didn't have questions for Mr. Glover, he would just ask that the objections is
testimony for otherpeople. He referenced having talked to neighbors and how they felt. I askfor confirmation of all that.
Attorney Pope said objection is noted.
Attorney Pope asked if there were any other questions ofMr. Glover. Shank you, sir.
Attorney Pope entertained fiovther questions from the City Council members for the applicant, proponents, opponents at this
time. He explained that once the public hearing is closed, the only questions that the Council may pose to the applicant
proponents or opponents shall be for clarification. No new evidence can be introduced after closing the public hearing. Any
conditions that the Council wishes to consider to place upon the use of the land by the applicant, must ask the applicant if
he/she will voluntarily place the condition upon his/herproperty at this time.
396
Attorney Pope asked council if there were any other questions for any of the parties that have previously testified.
Mayor Harris said that some of the questions that were asked and received answers to, I think there was one that you said that
we needed to ask now for the record personnel if we had certain conditions that we need to add. Attorney Pope said that if the
council desires to place conditions on the granting of the conditional use permit that are over and above what our code
requires, you must ask the applicant now if they will agree to those conditions. But, you are not required until later in the
agenda whether or not you actually want to put them on that permit One in particular that has come out through testimony
that appears voluntary on behalf of the applicant which is a fifty (50) foot front setback That's not part of your ordinance.
So, if you want to make that a condition, you need to have to ask now and you have to sign that they will agree to that and
then you may consider that as one of your conditions. Mayor Harris asked should we ask the question now as to whether or
not they would be willing for it to be rezoned into the city. In the condition that you wish the applicant to consider and the
property owner would also have to consent to that one. In that case the question that they would voluntarily agree to
annexation within the city limits and that would also cover the semantics of incorporating in our ordinance. Attorney Pope
said that Mr. Willoughby and somebody on behalf of the applicant will need to respond to that Mr. Fox said if we could,
could we have just a second to confer with Mr. Willoughby, since it's not just unilaterally our decision on the question.
Council Member Maness said if you're going to do that, perhaps we'd better get all of our conditions together prior to you
doing that "conferring". Mr. Evans understood where I was going then and said that But I want to at this point incorporate
that as a condition to the conditional use for the maintenance agreement However you agree with being annexed into the
city, I want to add the maintenance agreement as a condition to the conditional use that you agreed to. So, that way we can,
once and for all put to bed about who's going to be responsible for maintainin the area, keeping the grass mowed, taking
care of the buffer area, etc. etc. etc., frequency, and the responsibility of same. That way it becomes part of the conditional
use and it transfers in the event anything happens, correct? Attorney Pope responded yes, but if you're going to ask that that
be a condition, you're going to have to specify what the condition is, whether its grass has to be cut within a certain
frequency or is it merely an inspection requirement You're going to have to be more particular other than just saying that it
will be regularly maintained. Council Member Maness responded that he will yield to the recommendation from our City
Manager, who has also served in the planning department as to helping me craft that verbiage. Manger Neuschafer said one
suggestion for you is maybe consider that this falls under the same rules as properties that are inside the city limits. Council
Member Maness said this is a residential property so, my concern there is that we have different treatments for commercial
properties than we do residential properties. Manager Neuschafer clarified only properties that are over a certain size.
Council Member Maness said I just want to make sure. Manager Neuschafer that would be nice if you're looking for another
standard within the code that would be measureable, you could look at asking them to consider putting themselves trader the
same as a residential lot in the city limits. Council Member McLean asked but if they agree to a voluntary annexation into the
city, then all this would apply to them at that particular point It would automatically. Council Member Maness said as a
condition to the conditional use assessments, I would like to see, to keep it maintained to the same standards as are required
by the current city ordinances for lots under an acre. Mr. Evans responded that I guess I will need to see what that is
considering that this is much larger than an acre lot I don't know what that is. Manager Neuschafer responded not to be over
twelve inches in height Mr. Evans said twelve inches in height, oh I want to make sure I get all the conditions and we can
confer with everything and that way we can answer at one time in regard to the conditions. Attorney Pope said so far what
I've heard is 50 foot front setback, also I believe there was an agreement for two rows of trees at the buffer, which is over and
above what the code requires. That would be the second condition The third would be whether or not a voluntary annexation
into the city. A fourth would be that the maintenance requirement for the property would be to the standard of lots under one
acre as provided in the Dunn City Code.
Attorney Pope asked if there were any other conditions that the council would like to add to the applicant and the property
owner to consider whether or not they would agree to those as part ofgranting the permit.
Council Member Tumage asked why would we tag annexation. To me that's a separate issue than what we're dealing with
here. That's between us and the property owner or the property owner and us, not the solar farm fellas. Attorney Pope
responded that right now we're only asking the applicant and the property owner what conditions they would accept, and then
later in the agenda when you deliberate you're going to try to switch it and the conditions you want to put in there, so you can
discuss all your options.
Attorney Pope asked if there were any other conditions that the anybody on the council would like to ask the applicant and
the property owner to consider whether or not they would accept, ifyou choose to ask them all.
Council Member Maness said If I'm right Mr. City Manager, back to when I requested and got some help trying to put
together, I would like to incorporate what Mr. Evans said their corporate policy was concerning these properties as far as the
monthly inspections. I mean if that's what you say that you do, but I don't guess it's necessarily required that you do. Mr.
Evans responded Correct Can I offer something in counter to that just in the conversation? We would also, and I don't know
if you did this as a condition for Meadowlark We would also be willing to do like $1,000 annual fee to the City of Dunn for
your inspections department to do monitoring, if that would be the case. Then that way you know that it's handled in house.
If we're in violation, then of course we would be responsible for bringing it to the standards that are required That also
infuses funds back into the town regardless of what happens regarding the annexation, and you all would have control over
knowing that these monitoring visits have occurred because it's being handled maybe by somebody that rides by routinely
from the City of Dunn Council Member Maness responded that with all due respect Mr. Evans, we already have the
authority to monitor the buffer area anyway, so we'd be able to see what was going on out there. Mr. Evans replied right, I
think that you had mentioned earlier something about the ETJ and your enforcement within that ETJ as just a condition of if
it was the leisure of the board.
Attorney Pope advised that we will take a brief recess of this hearing for conditional use permit CU -01-18 for the applicant
and the property owner to confer.
Attorney Pope reconvened the hearing said that Mr Fox, has had the opportunity as Attorney for the applicant to consult
with the applicant and the property owner concerning the potential conditions.
Mr. Fox said Thank you, Mr. Pope, Mr. Mayor. Let's do the two straight forward and simple ones first The fifty foot
setbacks and the two rows of trees as described. Yes, of course we accept that The landscaping and maintenance agreement
Yes, we would consent to that, but we would like to ask for a modification of that in that what you ask for as a standard for
397
the residential lots, we would like that to only apply to the exterior. In other words, the portion of the property that is public
facing. In other words what you can see on the buffer and what's on this side of the street In other words, if there's happens
to be a weed 14 inches tall inside the solar farm, you can't see it from the street We would like to have the regular
maintenance required on that because the higher scrutiny on the residential. Council Member Maness asked you said only the
portion that faces the street Mr. Evans clarified that it was the exterior perimeter. What you would see looking at the required
buffer from that portion out, that's the only modification- We think that meets the goal of what the neighbors have asked for.
What they see and what your intent is, but it doesn't impose the requirement on us and it may not be as realistic to achieve.
With the annexation, obviously with the condition legally annexation is a whole separate process that you and the town
council have to have a hearing and upon a petition from a landowner then you have to decide upon the advice of your
attorney whether the land meets the criteria that the state law says you can have annex. So, we're certainly going to submit
that voluntary petition to the Town so that you can go through that process. We can't obviously guarantee that you would do
that, but that's up to you. We're happy to submit the petition requesting that The only thing that we would ask on that would
be the timing of that That we would submit that petition within thirty days of the actual construction to begin on the solar
farm. Council Member Maness said the petition for voluntary annexation? Mr. Evans said Yes, the state legislature changed
the annexation laws a few ago, fairly dramatically. Essentially they removed involuntary annexation in the state of North
Carolina. So, almost all annexations have to be voluntary. The way that that's normally processed is, you have someone
request to be annexed and that would be the petition I'm speaking of to be able to submit to. The state requires you to have a
hearing and determine that it is appropriate to be annexed. Then of course you, or whoever is on the city council at that time
would make that decision according to law. Mr. Willoughby said, "That's my concern." The economics don't really add up.
We volunteer to be annexed farmland and stuff for a solar farm going if the numbers work out So, I'd kind of Iike to make
sure I don't request an annexation now and have to pay taxes for two years before things are off the ground. Attorney Pope
said do you think that the petition for a voluntary annexation which requires the city to go through a process and agree to
annex them. There could be a reason why we would not want them to be annexed.
Attorney Pope said that Mr. Fox on behalf of Art amey for applicant and after conversation with the property owner have
confirmed that in the event that council wishes to post conditions on the granting of the permit, that they would accept the
conditions offifty foot front setbacks, that the exterior of the buffer would be two rows of trees rather than the minimum
required by city code, that the granting of the permit would be subject to the maintenance requirements for a less than one
acre parcel as determined by the city code for the exterior perimeter of the solar farm and the property owner and applicant
would agree to fele a petitionfar voluntary annexation within thirty days of the beginning ofconstruction.
Attorney Pope asked if there are any other conditions
Council Member Maness added a point of clarification on behalf of the applicant. Subject to voluntary application for
annexation being accepted and approved, I don't want them to fall back under what the town's requirement would be for the
interior. Attorney Pope said No. If you put the condition on the granting of the permit, they will have to comply with the
terms of the permit, regardless of what city code says. City Manager Neuschafer said the beginning of construction, could
that be the issuance of a building permit versus beginning construction. Does that mean site work beginning or actual
physical construction beginning? Mr. Fox the fust site work beginning and that way it does provide that we've cleared all
hurdles versus the actual pulling of the building permit There are still hurdles to go through before we can actually build a,
solar farm even if this body approves it What we want to do is make sure that in the event we fail at this hurdle, Mr.
Willoughby is not annexing farm land in if that's not what he wants to do.
Attorney Pope asked if there are any other conditions that council would like to ask the applicant to consider whether or not
they would be willing to accept as apart of granting of the permit.
Attorney Pope asked if there are any other questions from the council for the applicant or any other opponens or proponent
of the application
With no further testimony, a motion was made by Council Member McNeill and seconded by Council Member Maness to
close the public hearing for CU -01-18 at 8:52 p.m. Motion unanimously approved.
Minutes — Council considered approval of the minutes of the April 10, 2018 City Council Meeting
Temporary Blocking of Street —KeIlie's Krew Rum for a Cure
Motion by Council Member Tumage and seconded by Council Member Maness to approve all consent items. Motion
unanimously approved.
ITEMS FOR DECISION
Consideration of Ordinance to Demolish Storage Building
1002/1004 E. Edgerton St
PIN# 1517-95-5410.000
Chief Building Inspector Steven King has conducted an inspection at 1002/1004 E. Edgerton St and based upon his
observations, the storage building failed to comply with the minimum standards of fitness established by the Minimum
Housing Code of the City of Dunn. The Building Inspector also found the storage building dangerous or prejudicial to the
public health or public safety and is a nuisance in violation of G.S. §160A-193.
The owner of the property has failed to comply with the Building Inspector's order and according to N.C.G.S. § 160A-443,
the City Council has the power to proceed with the demolition of this property.
After lengthy discussion regarding the storage building in question, Mayor Harris suggested deferring action on this matter
and placing it on the calendar for June, 2018. It was noted that this case started on January 19, 2018 where it was inspected
and condemned. Notice was sent and nobody came to the hearing. In February, 2018 an Order after Hearing was mailed to
Spoyle Properties, LLC giving them sixty days to repair or demolish it and a letter went out on how to appeal it There was
no appeal filed within that sixty day time period and there no work done within that sixty day time period.
M
Chief Building Inspector Steven King advised council that it looks very similar today. It was condemned because the roof
leaks, rotten OSB on the outside, and there is a man living in it being charged rent It is not a legal residence_
It was noted that we have a minimum housing code, and there are standards for anybody's housing whether they choose to
live in it or not We do have the authority to regulate that and that's what we're doing. We don't allow people to live in
conditions like this, it's not safe. It's unsafe for human habitation. It's not designed to be a living quarters.
Mayor Harris deferred action for thirty -days.
Conditional Use Permit, CU -01-18
Cubera Solar, LLC (applicant)
The Willoughby, LLC (owner)
1000 Block of Meadowlark Road
PIN# 1517-65-0443.000
Motion by Council Member Turnage and seconded by Council Member Maness to approve CU -01-18 based on the
application and the evidence presented by the experts, the owner and the concerned public and if the findings that we have
listed here and to the agreed upon conditions:
1. Fifty (50) foot front setbacks.
2. The exterior of the buffer would be two (2) rows of trees rather than the minimum required by city code.
3. The granting of the permit would be subject to the maintenance requirements for a less than one acre parcel as
determined by city code for the exterior perimeter of the solar farn.
4. The property owner and applicant would agree to file a petition for a voluntary annexation within thirty (30) days of
the beginning of construction.
Yeas Nays
Maness McNeill
McLean
Tart
Tumage
Barfield
Motion carried 5-1 to approve_
Authorization and Execution of
2018 Community Waste Reduction
& Recycling Grant Program
The Parks and Recreation Department has been awarded a 2018 Community Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant from the
N.C. Department of Environmental Quality. This grant will provide both marketing materials and recycling receptacles for
the parks and facilities.
Parks and Recreation Director Brian McNeill requested the authorization to move forward and act upon the giant once the
contract is submitted, which should be received later in May.
Motion by Council Member Maness and seconded by Council Member Barfield to authorize the execution of the grant
contract by the City Manager and City Attorney. Motion unanimously approved. (A copy of the contract is incorporated
into these minutes as Attachment #2).
Impact Fee Study
At the recent budget retreat, conversation was held concerning HB -436 that determines how much municipalities can charge
on water/sewer impact fees. With the new law, a System Development Fee Analysis must be performed_ City Staff contacted
two (2) firms and only one (1) responded. Envrolink has presented a proposal with a cost of $20,000. Without the System
Development Fee Analysis, the City will no longer be able to charge impact fees.
There was discussion on the pros and cons of spending $20,000 for the analysis versus the impact fees that have actually been
received City Manager Neuschafer advised the council that the fees have already been struck from the proposed fee schedule
for the next year, so once July hits there will no longer be the fee.
Mayor Harris deferred this matter to bring back after researching what happened in Angier.
Budget Amendment — BA414
CALEA Accreditation
At the recent budget retreat, Police Chief Chuck West discussed the process by which the Dunn Police Department can be
nationally accredited. The process starts with an Enrollment Fee ($11,450) to the Commission on Accreditation for Law
Enforcement Agencies.
Police Chief Chuck West advised that we have already been working on policy reviews and evidence areas, which were the
main focus of the accreditation lecture that we received That we were storing our evidence and propagating policy
procedures in place to maintain integrity, accountability and transparency and follow a standard group of policy and
procedures that are nationally recognized. The approval of this budget amendment would mean we could go ahead and enroll
and immediately start working on it Our goal is to have it completed in less than twenty-four months to reach the first stage
of accreditation.
399
Motion by Council Member Maness and seconded by Council Member Barfield to approve Budget Amendment #14 for
CALEA Enrollment Fee. Motion unanimously approved. (A copy of Budget Amendments (BA#74) is incorporated into
these minutes as Attachment #3).
AND/OR DECISION
Set Date for Budget Work Session
The Council is being asked to set a Budget Work Session for Tuesday, May 15, 2018. Suggested time to begin the meeting is
9:00 a.m.
Motion by Council Member McLean and seconded by Council Member McNeill to set a Special Call MeetingBudget Work
Session date for Tuesday, May 15, 2018 beginning at 9:00 a.m. Motion unanimously approved.
Financial Report
Finance Director Stephens provided the following financial report for the period ending March 31, 2018:
• The City as of March 31, 2018 had $4,722,220 in cash in the General Fund and $2,769,399 in the Water and
Sewer Fund. In March 2017 the City had $4,274,086 in the General Fund and $2,692,285 in the Water and
Sewer Fund.
• Property Tax collections through March were $3,771,250 or 9826% of budget Last year property tax
collections through March were $3,775,349 or 98.83% ofbudget
• Sales Tax Revenue is $1,428,364 or 74.20% of budget Benchmark for the month 66.67% of budget
• Utilities Sales Tax is $540,123 or 72.68% of budget Benchmark for this month is 75.00% of budget.
• Building Permit Fees were $67,440 or 103.75% of budget Benchmark for this month is 75.00% of budget
• Water and Sewer Revenues were $3,370,855 or 71.10% of budget Benchmark for this month is 75.00% of
budget
• Expenditures were 70.94% of budget in the general fiord and 71.22% of budget in the water and sewer fiord.
The benchmark for this period is 75.00% of budget.
Motion by Council Member Maness and seconded by Council Member Barfield to accept the Financial Report Motion
carried unanimously.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
Tax Report
Planning & Inspections Report
Public Works Report
Recreation Report
Library Report
Police Report
Motion by Council Member McNeill and seconded by Council Member McLean to accept the Administrative Reports.
Motion unanimously approved.
City Manager's Report
City Manager Neuschafer advised council that we have engaged Mr. Dervin R. Spell to be our next Planning & Inspections
Director. He will start the 1601 of May. He comes to us from the Town of Selma with over ten years of planning experience,
a Masters in Planning. He is a Certified PIanner and Certified Flood Plain Manager as well, so he's very well qualified.
Clinton Avenue sewer repairs are proceeding. The pipes are connected and we're backfilling now. We're hoping that they'll
be paving Friday.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
The following announcements and/or comments were made.
Mayor Harris:
➢ Dunn Community Clean Up Day will be held on Saturday, May 12, 2018. Volunteers are asked to meet at the Dunn
Area Chamber of Commerce office located at the General William C. Lee Airborne Museum at 9:00 a.m
➢ Boogie on Broad will be held on Thursday, May 17, 2018 from 6-9 p.m. in Downtown Dunn.
City offices will be closed on Monday, May 28, 2018 in observance of Memorial Day.
➢ The next regular City Council Meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, June 12, 2018 @ 7:00 pm.
Motion by Council Member McNeill and seconded by Council Member Maness to adjourn the meeting at 9:20 pm. Motion
unanimously approved.
Attest
MA_j.y-,Q• D -i AXC.�
Melissa R. Matti, CMC
Deputy City Clerk
`stn n rnq,1
G1TY OF�Gy =.
::GpRP07{yT� Z
SEAL
�''�.rH CARfl�:�`'•
'�nnrrn��
ior
Iit.
c