[00:00:05]
>> IT'S 9:00. IT'S THE MEETING OF
[ CALL TO ORDER]
THE COTTONWOOD BOARD OF SUPERVISORS HERE IN COTTONWOOD, ARIZONA.GOING TO CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER.
ALL ITEMS THAT ARE LISTED ARE POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
THE ORDER OF THE ITEMS MAY BE MODIFIED AT THE MEETING.
NOTE ONE OR MORE BOARD MEMBERS MAY ATTEND TELEPHONICALLY OR VIRTUALLY, IN THIS CASE, SUPERVISOR MALLORY.
BOARD MEMBERS ATTENDING TELEPHONICALLY OR VIRTUALLY WILL BE ANNOUNCED.
PURSUANT TO ARS 38-431.03A3, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MAY VOTE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF OBTAINING LEGAL ADVICE WITH RESPECT TO ANY ITEM LISTED ON THE AGENDA.
CITIZENS ARE ENCOURAGED TO WATCH THE MEETING VIRTUALLY AT WWW.YAVAPAIAZ.GOV\MEETING.
THE PUBLIC WILL HAVE PHYSICAL ACCESS TO THE MEETING LOCATION 15 MINUTES PRIOR TO THE MEETING.
WRITTEN COMMENTS ON CURRENT AGENDA ITEMS WILL BE RECEIVED BY THE CLERK OF THE BOARD'S OFFICE AT CLERKOFTHEBOARD.WEB@YAVAPAIAZ.GOV 24 HOURS PRIOR TO THE BOARD MEETING.
WITH THAT, I CALL MEETING TO ORDER AGAIN.
WE'LL HAVE AN INVOCATION BY MS. MICHAELS AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE BY MR. OBERG.
>> MY FATHER, WE ARE SO GRATEFUL FOR THIS INCREDIBLE STATE THAT WE LIVE IN FOR OUR COUNTY THAT IS THRIVING, THAT IS A MODEL FOR THE REST OF OUR OTHER 14 COUNTIES IN THE STATE IN SO VERY MANY WAYS.
ELECTIONS JUST BEING ONE OF THEM, BUT ALSO, OUR INNOVATIVE APPROACH TO MAKING SURE THAT CONSTITUENT SERVICES ARE MET ON A DAILY BASIS, AND WE'RE HERE TODAY WITH THAT IN MIND.
PLEASE GUIDE US IN OUR DECISIONS AS BOARD MEMBERS AND HELP US WORK EVER INCREASINGLY BETTER AND MORE EFFECTIVE WITH THE CITIZENS THAT WE SERVE.
>> PLEASE JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO OUR NATION'S FLAG.
>> THANK YOU TO SUPERVISOR OBERG AND SUPERVISOR MICHAELS.
TODAY IS JUNE 19TH, IT'S KNOWN AS JUNETEENTH.
IT IS THE DATE WE CELEBRATE THE ABOLISHMENT OF SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. IT SHOULD BE NOTED.
IT IS A FEDERAL HOLIDAY, SO DON'T GO TO THE BANK BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT OPEN.
>> ATTENDING VIRTUALLY, AND WE HAVE A QUORUM.
>> THANK YOU. WITH THAT, WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.
[ CONSENT AGENDA (Routine items that may all be approved by one motion.)]
AT THIS POINT IN TIME, I ONLY SEE ONE ITEM THAT'S BEING ACTUALLY PULLED OFF, AND THAT'S ITEM NUMBER 9.I'D MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
ALL ITEMS EXCEPT ITEM NUMBER 9.
>> I'LL SECOND IT. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR?
>> WITH THAT, WE'LL MOVE ON TO HEARINGS.
[1. Board of Supervisors - Hearing to consider an increase in the County’s 1979-80 Base Expenditure Limit pursuant to article IX, section 20, Constitution of Arizona.]
HEARING TO CONSIDER AN INCREASE IN THE COUNTY'S 1979, '80 BASE EXPENDITURE LIMIT PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 9, SECTION 20 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA.SINCE WE ARE GOING TO HAVE THIS HEARING, I'D LIKE MR. THOMPSON TO JUST REVIEW WHAT IT IS WE'RE ATTEMPTING TO ACCOMPLISH.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN, AND GOOD MORNING, AND VICE CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
MAURIE THOMPSON, COUNTY MANAGER.
AS THE CHAIRMAN JUST INDICATED, THIS IS OUR SECOND REQUIRED PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN INCREASE IN THE COUNTY'S 1979, '80 BASE EXPENDITURE LIMIT PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 9 SECTION 20 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA.
I WILL, AGAIN, FOR YOUR BENEFIT, AS WELL AS THE PUBLIC, RUN THROUGH THE INFORMATION I SHARED AT THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING AT OUR LAST MEETING.
THE COUNTY'S EXPENDITURE LIMIT IS THE AMOUNT OF
[00:05:02]
LOCAL REVENUES THAT THE COUNTY CAN SPEND IN A GIVEN FISCAL YEAR.EXPENDITURE LIMITS ARE CALCULATED USING FISCAL YEAR 1980, LOCAL REVENUES SPENT AS YOUR BASE LIMIT.
THE BASE LIMIT IS THEN ADJUSTED ANNUALLY BY AN AMOUNT DETERMINED BY THE STATE OF ARIZONA, AND THAT'S SPECIFICALLY, IN OUR CASE, THE ECONOMIC ESTIMATES COMMISSION.
COUNTIES CAN INCREASE THEIR BASE EXPENDITURE LIMIT WITH A TWO-THIRDS VOTE OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND APPROVAL OF A MAJORITY OF VOTERS AT A GENERAL ELECTION.
THIS, AS I INDICATED, IS THE SECOND AND FINAL PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER.
FOLLOWING THIS HEARING, IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT THE BOARD WILL CONVENE INTO A SPECIAL MEETING AND VOTE ON SUBMITTING TO THE VOTERS OF YAVAPAI COUNTY AT THE GENERAL ELECTION, WHICH WILL BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 5TH, 2024, THE QUESTION OF A PERMANENT ADJUSTMENT OF THE COUNTY'S 1979, 1980 BASE EXPENDITURE LIMIT, INCREASING IT BY $7.9 MILLION.
AS I'VE INDICATED, THIS EXPENDITURE LIMIT FOR US WAS ESTABLISHED IN 1979, '80.
I DO WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT THE BASE LIMIT IS ADJUSTED EACH YEAR BY AN AMOUNT DETERMINED BY THE STATE OF ARIZONA.
AGAIN, THAT ADJUSTED AMOUNT IS THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT THEN OF LOCAL REVENUES YOU CAN SPEND IN ANY GIVEN FISCAL YEAR.
THE ADJUSTMENTS, HOWEVER, MADE TO THE COUNTY'S BASE EXPENDITURE LIMIT BY THE STATE HAVE BEEN INSUFFICIENT TO ACCOUNT FOR INCREASED COST RESULTING FROM POPULATION GROWTH AND INFLATION.
THE COUNTY NEEDS TO INCREASE ITS BASE 1979, '80 EXPENDITURE LIMIT IN ORDER TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE NECESSARY SERVICES FOR PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE.
THE ALTERNATIVE THAT I POINTED OUT ON YOUR BRIEFING SHEET IN FRONT OF YOU THIS MORNING IS OBVIOUSLY NOT TO CHOOSE TO RAISE THE BASE EXPENDITURE LIMIT, AND CUT BACK ON THE PROVISION OF NECESSARY SERVICES AND THE MAINTENANCE OF ROADS AND COUNTY PROPERTY AND COUNTY ASSETS.
FINALLY, PURSUANT TO ARIZONA REVISED STATUTE 41-563.01, NOTICE THAT THIS PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN PUBLISHED ONCE A WEEK FOR TWO CONSECUTIVE WEEKS IN A NEWSPAPER OF GENERAL CIRCULATION IN YAVAPAI COUNTY.
THAT CONCLUDES MY REMARKS, CHAIRMAN.
>> WITH THAT, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISOR WILL CONVENE INTO A SPECIAL MEETING FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE COUNTY'S 1979, 1980 BASE EXPENDITURE LIMIT, AND FOLLOWING THE ACTION ITEMS, WE'LL RECONVENE INTO THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
>> CHAIRMAN, IF I MAY, WE MAY WANT TO ASK THE CLERK IF WE'VE RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM.
>> I WAS JUST GOING TO DO THAT.
>> DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR ANYTHING RECEIVED?
>> THE BOARD HAS RECEIVED ONE IN FAVOR AND ZERO OPPOSED ON THIS ITEM.
>> I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO READ THE LETTER CENSUS IN FAVOR.
THEREFORE, IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE PUBLIC THAT MIGHT MAKE COMMENT IN REGARDS TO THE RAISING OF THE EXPENDITURE? ANYBODY IN PRESCOTT?
>> BASICALLY, THIS IS A COURTESY HEARING, SO WE DON'T NEED TO VOTE ON IT.
WE WILL HAVE ONE OTHER HEARING IN REGARDS TO IT AND A VOTING MEASURE WILL TAKE PLACE, BUT THAT'LL BE IN JULY.
>> NO, THIS WAS THE FINAL PUBLIC HEARING ON THE MATTER.
>> I KNOW, BUT ARE WE GOING TO VOTE ON IT NOW? > YES, WE WILL GO INTO A SPECIAL MEETING NOW.
MARTIN'S GOING TO LEAD US TO THAT. THANK YOU.
>> YES, GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN,
[1. Board of Supervisors - Discussion and possible action regarding Resolution No. 2129 to permanently increase the County's 1979-1980 base expenditure limit. ]
VICE CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.MARTIN BRENNAN, ASSISTANT COUNTY MANAGER.
YOU WERE JUST ASKING ABOUT THE NEXT STEP IN THIS PROCESS.
THE BOARD HAS JUST CONCLUDED A SERIES OF PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE ISSUE OF A POSSIBLE ADJUSTMENT TO THE COUNTY'S BASE EXPENDITURE LIMIT AS DETAILED BY THE COUNTY MANAGER, MAURIE THOMPSON.
THE NEXT STEP IN THE PROCESS IS FOR THE BOARD TO IMMEDIATELY CONVENE INTO A SPECIAL MEETING, WHICH WE'VE JUST DONE TO CONSIDER TWO ACTION ITEMS. THE FIRST ACTION ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD IS RESOLUTION 2129, AND THAT RESOLUTION SPECIFICALLY PROVIDES FOR APPROVAL BY THIS BOARD OF A PROPOSED ADJUSTMENT TO THE BASE EXPENDITURE LIMIT OF $7.9 MILLION.
THAT MEASURE REQUIRES A TWO-THIRDS MAJORITY VOTE BY THE BOARD.
IT ALSO REQUIRES A ROLL CALL VOTE BECAUSE WHEN THIS IS COMPLETE, WE ARE REQUIRED TO THEN PUBLISH THE RESULT OF THE VOTE.
I THINK THE COUNTY MANAGER HAS DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB IN OUTLINING EXACTLY WHAT'S PROPOSED, BUT I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE BOARD MAY HAVE IN
[00:10:01]
ADVANCE OF TAKING A ROLL CALL VOTE ON RESOLUTION 2129.>> MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE RESOLUTION 2129.
>> NO, CHAIRMAN, BUT I SECOND THAT.
>> MS. MALLORY, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENT?
>> WITH THAT, WE HAVE A MOTION FROM MS. MICHAELS, AND I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION TO APPROVE.
CAN I HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE, PLEASE?
>> YES. I WOULD ONLY ADD THAT I DID HEAR SUPERVISOR OBERG SECOND THAT, SO HOWEVER THE RECORD WOULD LIKE TO REFLECT IT.
>> THE ITEM HAS PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
>> THANK YOU. WE WILL RECONVENE INTO THE REGULAR MEETING TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS THAT VOTE BEING UNANIMOUS.
>> EXCUSE ME, CHAIRMAN. I'M SORRY.
[2. Board of Supervisors - Discussion and possible action regarding Resolution No. 2134 to refer to the voters of Yavapai County at the general election on November 5, 2024, a ballot measure for a permanent adjustment increasing the County's 1979-1980 base expenditure limit. ]
I SLID IN A SECOND ACTION ITEM IN THE SPECIAL MEETING.WE HAVE RESOLUTION 2129, WHICH THE BOARD HAS JUST APPROVED, AND THERE IS A SECOND ACTION ITEM IN THE SPECIAL MEETING.
IT'S AGAIN, THE NEXT STEP IN THIS PROCESS.
THE BOARD HAS NOW AUTHORIZED THE ADJUSTMENT OF THE BASE EXPENDITURE LIMIT AS DETAILED IN THE RESOLUTION, RESOLUTION 2129.
THE NEXT STEP IN THE PROCESS THEN IS IN ORDER FOR AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE BASE EXPENDITURE LIMIT TO ACTUALLY GO FORWARD, IT NOT ONLY REQUIRES APPROVAL BY THIS BOARD, BUT IT REQUIRES APPROVAL BY A MAJORITY OF VOTERS AT THE GENERAL ELECTION ON NOVEMBER 5TH, 2024.
THE NEXT ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD IS RESOLUTION 2134.
THAT RESOLUTION CALLS FOR THE BOARD TO DIRECT THE ELECTIONS DIRECTOR FOR YAVAPAI COUNTY TO PLACE THIS ON THE BALLOT ON NOVEMBER 5TH.
IT ALSO DETAILS THE PRECISE BALLOT LANGUAGE THAT WILL BE INCLUDED AS PART OF WHAT'S BEEN IDENTIFIED NOW AS PROPOSITION 479.
IT'S A PROPOSAL SUBMITTED BY YAVAPAI COUNTY FOR A PERMANENT BASE ADJUSTMENT OF $7.9 MILLION.
THAT BALLOT LANGUAGE HAS BEEN DISTRIBUTED TO THE ELECTIONS DIRECTOR AND APPROVED AND DISTRIBUTED TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND APPROVED.
IT IS THE NEXT STEP REQUIRED OF THIS BOARD IN ORDER TO GO FORWARD WITH THIS PROCESS OF A PERMANENT EXPENDITURE BASE ADJUSTMENT.
>> MR. CHAIRMAN, IT IS A GREAT PLEASURE FOR ME TO OFFER A MOTION THAT WE MOVE FORWARD WITH RESOLUTION 2134 FOR APPROVAL.
>> SECOND THAT MOTION. ALL IN FAVOR.
DO WE NEED ROLL CALL ON THIS? NO.
NOW WE CAN RECONVENE, CORRECT?
>> ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> I'M GOING TO REMEMBER THIS WHEN I REVIEW NEXT WEEK'S AGENDA.
[LAUGHTER] WE'RE RECONVENING INTO THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, SO WE'RE NOW BACK TO ACTION ITEM NUMBER 1, WHICH IS DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING RESOLUTION 2129 TO PERMANENTLY INCREASE THE 1979, 1980 BASE EXPENDITURE LIMIT, WHICH I THINK WE'VE ALREADY DONE.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DISCUSSION POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING RESOLUTION 2134, WHICH WE'VE ALREADY TAKEN CARE OF AS WELL.
THEREFORE, ACTION ITEMS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED.
[1. Board of Supervisors - Courtesy Hearing to discuss the proposed Special District Fee Schedule for fiscal year 2024-2025. ]
ITEM NUMBER 1, A COURTESY HEARING TO DISCUSS THE PROPOSED SPECIAL DISTRICT FEE SCHEDULE FOR FISCAL YEAR '24/'25.>> ARE YOU GOING TO DO THIS ONE?
>> I AM. VICE CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, MARTIN BRENNAN, ASSISTANT COUNTY MANAGER.
I'M ACTUALLY FILLING IN FOR THE CLERK OF THE BOARD, WHO'S ATTENDING TRAINING IN PHOENIX.
SHE HAD ASKED ME TO PRESENT THIS ITEM, AND OBVIOUSLY, I'M HAPPY TO DO SO.
THIS IS A COURTESY HEARING, SO NO ACTION IS REQUIRED OF THE BOARD.
IT'S MERELY TO PROVIDE NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC AND AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
[00:15:02]
EVERY YEAR WE ARE REQUIRED TO REVISE OUR FEE SCHEDULE.IT'S THE FEES THAT WE CHARGE TO SPECIAL DISTRICTS IN ADVANCE IF THEY NEED TO UTILIZE ANY COUNTY SERVICES.
THE FEES ARE DETERMINED BY OUR FINANCE DEPARTMENT.
THEY GO THROUGH AND THEY CALCULATE THE WAGES, THE ASSOCIATED BENEFITS, AND THE COSTS.
THEN THEY PRODUCE THIS DETAILED SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL BY THE BOARD.
>> THE AMOUNTS ARE DETAILED IN THE ATTACHMENT TO THE AGENDA.
IF THE BOARD HAS ANY QUESTIONS, I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER THEM.
OTHERWISE, WE'D SEE IF WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT, AND THEN PROCEED TO THE NEXT HEARING WHICH WILL TAKE PLACE AT THE NEXT MEETING IN PRESCOTT.
>> I HAVE TWO QUICK QUESTIONS.
ONE IS THE FEE SCHEDULE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC BY CONTACTING THE CLERK OF THE BOARD, OR IS IT ONLINE?
>> IT WOULD BE AVAILABLE THROUGH THE CLERK OF THE BOARD AND ATTACHED TO THE AGENDA.
>> MR. CHAIRMAN, THE ONLY THING THAT I WOULD DIRECT TO MATTY IS A QUESTION OF WHETHER YOU, AFTER REVIEWING IT, FIND IT TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE TYPICAL FEE SCHEDULE CHANGES THAT WE SHOULD ANTICIPATE GIVEN INCREASES IN THE COST OF SERVICES.
>> I DO AND I GUESS I WOULD NOTE THAT THE FEES DID ON AVERAGE GO UP THIS YEAR BY ABOUT 11.9%, AND THERE WAS AN INCREASE IN COSTS AND WAGES THAT RESULTED IN THAT ADJUSTMENT.
I KNOW OUR FINANCE DIRECTOR SPENDS A GREAT DEAL OF TIME DIGGING THROUGH THE DETAIL TO MAKE SURE THAT THE AMOUNT CHARGED IS APPROPRIATE AND NOT IN EXCESS OF WHAT'S ACTUALLY INCURRED BY THE COUNTY TO PROVIDE THE REQUESTED SERVICES. I THINK THEY'RE APPROPRIATE.
>> I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT THE PUBLIC UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS WHAT IT COSTS US TO DO NORMAL DAILY BUSINESS, AND BREAK EVEN.
NOT MAKE A PROFIT BUT BREAK EVEN
>> IN STATUTORILY, WE CANNOT MAKE A PROFIT, AND WE DO NOT MAKE A PROFIT.
>> I THINK THAT'S SO IMPORTANT, MR. CHAIRMAN, TO UNDERSCORE WHY I RAISED IT.
IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THE SERVICE IS, WHETHER IT'S A LIBRARY SERVICES, WHETHER IT'S ADE FEE THAT'S ASSOCIATED WITH THE BUSINESS OF MAKING SURE THAT OUR CONSTITUENTS AND TAXPAYERS ARE PROPERLY SERVED AT THE LEVEL OF THEIR EXPECTATION.
IT'S THE COST OF DOING BUSINESS FOR THIS COUNTY, AND I THINK THERE'S A BIT OF CONFUSION IN THE MARKETPLACE ABOUT THAT.
WE'RE NOT A FOR-PROFIT ENTITY AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO MAKE THAT DISTINCTION.
IF THERE'S AN ENTITY OUT THERE THAT HAS A SHORTFALL, IT IS THE RESULT OF WHAT'S HAPPENING IN OUR ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT THAT THE COUNTY FINDS ITSELF IN AND THAT RESIDENTS AND TAXPAYERS FIND THEMSELVES IN.
THE MORE WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT AND EDUCATE ABOUT THAT, THE BETTER WE WILL BE PARTNERS TOGETHER TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR YAVAPAI COUNTY RESIDENTS ARE ABSOLUTELY INFORMED AND SERVED THE BEST THAT THEY CAN POSSIBLY BE. THANK YOU FOR THAT.
>> WE'VE ALREADY PASSED A RESOLUTION 2134.
>> RIGHT. THIS ONE IS JUST A COURTESY HEARING, SO THERE IS NO ACTION REQUIRED BY THE BOARD.
I'M NOT SURE IF THERE'S ANY PUBLIC COMMENT.
>> THE BOARD RECEIVED NO PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS ITEM.
>> IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT IN REGARDS TO THE FEE SCHEDULE? PRESCOTT?
[2. Development Services - Approve a non-transferrable Use Permit, for a period of ten (10) years, to allow the display and sale of portable buildings on 1.94-acres in the RCU-2A and R1-35 zoning districts, subject to the conditions of approval. Project Name: Nolan Portable Building Sales Use Permit; Property Owner: Fireproofing Pros Inc.; Applicant: Cynthia Nolan; APN: 405-15-015; PLA24-000020. The property is located in the community of Beaver Creek. (District 2 - Supervisor Gregory)]
APPROVE A NON-TRANSFERABLE USE PERMIT FOR A PERIOD OF 10 YEARS TO ALLOW THE DISPLAY AND SALE OF PORTABLE BUILDINGS ON 1.94 ACRES IN AN RCU 2A AND R 135 ZONING DISTRICT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.PROJECT NAME IS THE NOLAN PORTABLE BUILDING SALES USE PERMIT.
PROPERTY OWNER, FIREPROOFING PROS INCORPORATED.
THE APPLICANT IS CYNTHIA NOLAN, APN 40515-015 AND PLATTE PLA 24-000020.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE COMMUNITY OF BEAVER CREEK, AND THAT'S IN MR. GREGORY'S DISTRICT. GOOD MORNING.
>> GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
I'M STEPHANIE JOHNSON, PLANNER WITH YAVAPAI COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
I'M HERE TODAY TO PRESENT TO YOU MS. CYNTHIA NOLAN'S REQUEST FOR A USE PERMIT. THERE WE GO.
[00:20:04]
I DID SKIP THE IMPORTANT ONE.THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DID HEAR THIS MATTER ALREADY ON THURSDAY, MAY 16TH.
AFTER MUCH DISCUSSION, THEY UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THIS APPLICATION.
IN GENERAL, THE COMMISSION DISCUSSED TRAFFIC, PREVENTING ACCESS TO THE AIR STRIP, COMMENTS RECEIVED AND THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICES IN THIS AREA.
>> MAY I INTERJECT RIGHT THERE, BECAUSE THAT'S, OF COURSE, THE HEART OF A DECISION MAKING PROCESS, STEPHANIE? HOW DID THEY RESOLVE THAT? WHAT BROUGHT THEM TO THE UNANIMOUS, GIVEN SOME OF THE CHALLENGES THAT ARE REAL?
>> MS. CYNTHIA NOLAN WAS ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT SHE HAD ADEQUATE MEASURES IN PLACE.
THE ACCESS TO THE AIRSTRIP WAS A BIG DISCUSSION, AND THERE WILL BE A GATE THAT WILL BE SECURED AND LOCKED, AND THERE WON'T BE ACCESS TO THE AIRSTRIP.
SHE DOES HAVE TWO DRIVEWAYS ON THE PROPERTY, AND SOME OF THESE ARE BETTER SHOWN IN SOME PICTURES.
THIS ONE, YOU CAN SEE THERE'S AN DRIVEWAY RIGHT HERE AND A DRIVEWAY RIGHT HERE.
SHE'S GOING TO MAINTAIN AN ENTRANCE AND AN EXIT ONLY SO THAT THERE WILL BE A SMOOTH FLOW THROUGH THE PROPERTY.
ONE OF THE OTHER ITEMS THAT WAS DISCUSSED, IT WAS THAT ACCESS FOR THE PROPERTY, HOW PEOPLE ARE GOING TO GET IN AND OUT, AND THEN THAT AIRSTRIP.
THOSE WERE THE MAIN CHALLENGES THERE.
THEY DISCUSSED THE NEED FOR SERVICES IN THE AREA AND BEING ABLE TO HAVE THIS TYPE OF SERVICE WOULD BE A BENEFICIAL SERVICE FOR THE COMMUNITY.
>> THIS IS A IDENTIFIED GROWTH AREA, IS IT NOT?
>> IT IS AN IDENTIFIED GROWTH AREA WITHIN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
>> I REALLY COMPLIMENT SUPERVISOR GREGORY IN SHEPHERDING HIS COMMUNITIES IN A WAY THAT REALLY SHOWS ALIGNMENT TO OUR UPDATED.
THIS IS WHERE WE WANT THE GROWTH THAT WE'RE HAVING.
>> INTO THAT PARKING LOT, IS IT A RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT, OR HAS IT GOT A LEFT TURN POCKET SOMEWHERE IN THAT VICINITY?
>> TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, IT'S RIGHT OR LEFT IN OR OUT.
>> THERE'S NO SIGNAGE TO INDICATE?
HOWEVER, THAT IS PART OF MS. NOLAN'S PROPOSAL IS THAT SHE'LL HAVE AN ENTRANCE SIGN AND THEN AN EXIT SIGN AS WELL ON THE PROPERTY.
>> OH, I'M MRS. CYNTHIA NOLAN.
>> WAS THERE A SPECIFIC QUESTION?
>> WHAT'S THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THIS PERMIT?
>> TO SELL AND DISPLAY PORTABLE BUILDINGS, SHEDS, GARAGES.
>> YOU'RE GOING TO CONTINUE THIS BUSINESS FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS?
>> WITH THAT, CLERK OF THE BOARD, WAS THERE ANY OPPOSED OR FAVOR FOR HER?
>> WE DID RECEIVE ONE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION FORM OPPOSED OF THIS ITEM, BUT NO OTHER COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED.
>> I SUBMITTED IN FAVOR OF IT.
>> HOW DO YOU PRONOUNCE YOUR LAST NAME?
>> PARDON. LET'S GET HER IN FRONT OF A MICROPHONE. THANK YOU.
>> CYNTHIA NOLAN CAME TO NUMEROUS ASSOCIATION MEETINGS AND WORKED WITH US ON A SERIES OF STIPULATIONS.
IT'S IMPORTANT TO US THAT IT NOT BE TRANSFERABLE TO SOMEBODY ELSE, AND IT'S NOT A GATEWAY TO COMMERCIAL.
WE ARE ASSURED THAT SHE'S GOING TO PROVIDE A SERVICE THAT IS NEAT AND CLEAN AND WILL BE INTERFERE WITH TRAFFIC VERY LITTLE.
WE THANKED HER FOR ALL HER WORK WITH US.
>> WITH THAT, I'D MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
>> I SECONDED IT AND I JUST APPLAUD THE MODEL THAT YOU ARE PUTTING OUT TO THE PUBLIC ABOUT HOW THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS IMPORTANT AND CAN HELP US GROW IN THE RIGHT WAYS AND HAVING THE ASSOCIATION,
[00:25:01]
WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT IS A MODEL FOR THE REST OF US TO FOLLOW. SO THANK YOU.>> WE HAVE A MOTION MADE AND SECONDED. ALL IN FAVOR?
[3. Development Services - Approve a rezoning from the R1-35 zoning district to the C2-35 zoning district, subject to the conditions of approval. Project Name: West/Navarro Beaver Creek Rd Rezoning; Property Owner: Mark & Rebecca West & Christopher & Lynne Navarro & Navarro Living Trust; Agent: Jason Riley, Beaver Creek Realty; APN: 405-14-035A & 405-14-022C; PLA24-000024. The parcels are located in the community of Beaver Creek. (District 2 - Supervisor Gregory)]
>> ITEM NUMBER 3, MR. GREGORY WOULD LIKE TO-
>> LISTEN TO THE PRESENTATION AND THEN PROBABLY MAKE A MOTION FOR SOMETHING ELSE.
>> THANK YOU AGAIN, CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
STEPHANIE JOHNSON, PLANNER OF YAVAPAI COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
I AM HERE TODAY TO PRESENT TO YOU A REZONING REQUEST FOR TWO PARCELS LOCATED ON BEAVER CREEK ROAD.
THIS MATTER WAS HEARD BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ON MAY 16TH.
AFTER MUCH DISCUSSION, THEY UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION.
IN GENERAL, THE COMMISSION DISCUSSED TRAFFIC, ACCESS, THE LIKELIHOOD OF THESE TWO PARCELS BEING DEVELOPED RESIDENTIALLY, THE CURRENT USE OF SURROUNDING PARCELS, COMMENTS RECEIVED BY THE COMMUNITY, AND NEED FOR SERVICES IN THIS AREA.
THEY DID UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS APPLICATION.
>> THANK YOU. I HAVE A GREEN SHEET ON THIS FROM JANET O'NEIL.
COMING BACK UP FROM BEAVER CREEK, YOU WANT TO SPEAK ON THIS ONE ALSO?
>> OUR ASSOCIATION REQUEST THAT YOU NOT APPROVE THIS REZONING.
IT'S DIFFICULT TO SEE THE BEAVER CREEK COMMUNITY AGAIN, MOCKED BY A SHODDY MAJOR ZONING CHANGE REQUEST FOR ACREAGE ALONG THE MAJOR ROAD IN OUR AREA.
THE POTENTIAL NEW OWNERS AND THEIR REPRESENTATIVE STARTED BY WAVING THE CARROT OF A GROCERY STORE.
THIS TRICK HAS BEEN PULLED TWICE BEFORE ON OUR COMMUNITY.
NOTHING IS STOPPING A LEGITIMATE GROCERY OR HARDWARE STORE FROM COMING IN SHOULD THE OWNERS WISH TO DO SO.
SNAP FITNESS WOULD BE APPRECIATED BY MANY RESIDENTS.
COMMERCIAL ACREAGE IS PLENTIFUL TO BUILD SUCH.
WE HOPE TO NOT HAVE THE TRAFFIC CONGESTION OF MANY TOWNS AND CITIES IN YAVAPAI COUNTY WITH ALL THE ACREAGE ALONG THE MAIN ROUTE BEING USED FOR COMMERCIAL.
IT IS POSSIBLE WITH GOOD PLANNING TO USE SIDE STREETS AND KEEP THE MORE RURAL VIEW SHREDS AND TRAFFIC LESS CONGESTED.
AT THE MOMENT, ALREADY ZONED VACANT COMMERCIAL OWN AGE IS PLENTIFUL, INCLUDING A FLAT FOUR ACRE PARCEL.
WE INDEED FOUND NUMEROUS ONE ACRE PARCELS THAT THE SNAP FITNESS COULD POTENTIALLY BE BUILT ON.
IT DOESN'T TAKE A MAJOR AMOUNT OF ROOM.
PLEASE DO NOT GIVE THE TWO PLANNED PURCHASERS OF THE PROPERTY THE RIGHT TO DO ANYTHING LISTED FOR C1 AND C2 ZONING.
I HOPE THAT SOMETHING LIKE THAT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN IN THE TOWNS, CITIES, AND COMMUNITIES THAT BOARD MEMBERS LIVE IN.
IF THE BOARD PLANS TO GRANT THE REZONING REQUEST, PLEASE HOLD THE RECIPIENTS TO HAVING AN OPERATIONAL SNAP FITNESS ON THE PROPERTY IN THREE YEARS OR LOSE THE ZONING.
THE THREE YEAR DEADLINE HAS BEEN OPENLY PROMISED BY CRAIG EAGLE AND STEEL SACKS TO BOTH THE YAVAPAI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND RESIDENTS.
THIS PROPERTY SOMEDAY BECOMES COMMERCIAL, WE'D LIKE TO SEE IT BE BENEFICIAL TO THE COMMUNITY, AND THE COMMUNITY HAVE REAL INPUT IN IT.
THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERING OUR NEEDS.
>> THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN REGARDS TO THIS?
>> THE BOARD DID RECEIVE EIGHT IN FAVOR AND ONE ADDITIONAL OPPOSED.
EIGHT IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED AND ANOTHER LADY WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK.
>> THIS IS AN ADDITIONAL GREEN SHEET.
WE HAVE ONE THAT WISHES NOT TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE ISSUE AND ONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE ISSUE.
>> HELLO, CHAIRMAN, VICE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
>> NAME AND, WHERE DO YOU LIVE?
>> JAMIE DELION. I LIVE HERE IN COTTONWOOD, ARIZONA.
I'M A REALTOR WITH BEAVER CREEK REALTY, REPRESENTING THE CURRENT OWNERS IN THE PROPERTIES IN QUESTION.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE A COUPLE REMARKS REGARDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND HOW I SEE THIS PERSPECTIVE REZONING ACTUALLY FITTING INTO THE FUTURE USE IN THIS AREA.
[00:30:02]
THE INTRODUCTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAKES ITS PURPOSE CLEAR.TO QUOTE, IT PROVIDES THE BASIS FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, REDEVELOPMENT, AND PRESERVATION WHILE SUPPORTING THE FUTURE VISION DESIRED BY COUNTY RESIDENTS.
UNDER STATE LAW, MANY ACTIONS ON PRIVATE LAND DEVELOPMENT, SUCH AS REZONING, SUBDIVISIONS, MASTER PLANS, PUBLIC AGENCY PROJECTS, AND OTHER DECISIONS MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THE GOALS AND POLICIES SET FORTH SHALL BE APPLIED IN A MANNER TO ENSURE THEIR CONFORMANCE AND ENACT THE LONG TERM VISION OF YAVAPAI COUNTY.
IT GOES ON TO STATE, THAT SEVERAL OF THE LONG STANDING GOALS FOR AN ALL ENCOMPASSING COUNTY INCLUDE BUT AREN'T LIMITED TO ENSURING HEALTHY COMMUNITIES AND QUALITY OF LIFE, ENCOURAGING RESPONSIBLE AND BALANCED GROWTH, AND PROMOTING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
>> PER THE MAP THAT IS REFERRED TO, LATER, MAYBE BY STEPHANIE, NEARLY ALL OF THE FUTURE PROPOSED LAND USE IN THE BEAVER CREEK AND LAKE MONTEZUMA AREA IS CURRENTLY DESIGNATED AS RESIDENTIAL.
IT SHOWS EXTREMELY LIMITED COMMERCIAL USE IN THE AREA, AND THE STATEMENT ALSO NOTES THAT THE PROPERTY IS WITHIN ONE OF THE 15 DESIGNATED GROWTH AREAS IN YAVAPAI COUNTY.
THE BEAVER CREEK GROWTH AREA IS DESCRIBED AS A SMALLER GROWTH AREA ALONG I17.
ACCEPTABLE FUTURE GROWTH RULE REQUIRE IMPROVING THE UTILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE TO MAINTAIN AND IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE.
THE AREA IS MOSTLY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL WITH LOCAL COMMERCIAL SERVICES FOR ITS RESIDENTS.
ONE OF THOSE LONG STANDING GOALS THAT I'D LIKE TO REFER BACK TO IS RESPONSIBLE AND BALANCED GROWTH.
AS COMMUNITIES GROW, THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICES AND AMENITIES GROWS AS WELL.
IF THE ENTIRETY OF THE AREA IS ONLY RESIDENTIAL GROWTH, HOW ARE THE NEEDS OF THOSE POTENTIAL RESIDENTS GOING TO BE MET? ARE THEY BEING OUTSOURCED TO OTHER COMMUNITIES? WILL SOMEONE NEARBY HAVE TO HAVE A PLACE TO CONDUCT THEIR BUSINESSES LOCALLY AND LEGALLY? LAND USE GOAL 2, POLICY 2B IS TO ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPMENT AND PRESERVATION OF LOCALLY OWNED BUSINESSES.
GOAL 3, POLICY 3C IS TO DIRECT COMMERCIAL PROJECTS TOWARDS DESIGNATED GROWTH AREAS TO PROVIDE EMPLOYMENT AND SHOPPING OPPORTUNITIES.
THE GROWTH AREA DESCRIPTION ALSO STATES THAT THERE IS A NEED TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE.
IF THE POPULATION IS GOING TO GROW, THERE IS GOING TO BE A NEED FOR SAFE, CLEAN, HEALTHY PUBLIC SPACES IN RIMROCK.
IT IS MY HOPE THAT THE BOARD WILL SEE FIT TO GRANT THIS REASONING REQUEST AND ALLOW THE COMMUNITY OF RIMROCK AND BEAVER CREEK TO HAVE INCREASED ACCESS TO SERVICES AND SPACES THAT ENSURE A HEALTHY COMMUNITY AND ENHANCE THE OVERALL QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ITS CITIZENS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
>> WELL, SAYS HERE I WISH TO SPEAK, AND THEN IT SAYS I DON'T WANT TO.
>> I KNOW. I KNOW, WHEN I HANDED THE PAPER I SAID, FORGET IT.
BUT I DO WANT TO SAY THAT I'M IN FAVOR.
TO ME, THIS WOULD BE SUCH AN ASSET TO THE COMMUNITY WHERE THEY'RE DISCUSSING HAVING IT.
WE DON'T NEED ANOTHER DOLLAR STORE.
A HEALTHY SNAP FITNESS, WHICH IS FAMILY ORIENTED, IS WHAT WE NEED. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. ANY COMMENT, MR. GREGORY?
>> WELL, I THINK IT'S A GOOD BUSINESS TO HAVE IN THAT AREA.
MY ONE CONCERN IS IT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BECAUSE IT WAS DESIGNATED RESIDENTIAL, NOT BUSINESS.
I THINK THIS SHOULD SIT BETTER AS A USE PERMIT VERSUS A ZONING CHANGE.
MR. THOMPSON, WOULD THAT BE MORE APPROPRIATE AFTER WE LOOK AT THIS? OR MR. BRENNAN?
>> YES. CHAIRMAN, VICE CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, SUPERVISOR GREGORY.
IN ALL RESPECTS, AND THE LAST SPEAKER DID A GREAT JOB OF CITING SOME OVERARCHING GOALS AND PRINCIPLES THAT DRIVE DEVELOPMENT IN GENERAL AND YAVAPAI COUNTY.
THERE ARE ALSO SPECIFIC PROVISIONS THAT APPLY TO THIS PARCEL.
IT WOULD SEEM THAT IT'S NOT COMPLETELY CONSISTENT WITH AN INCONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN RELATION TO THOSE SPECIFIC PROVISIONS.
I THINK A USE PERMIT MAY BE MORE APPROPRIATE FOR THIS TYPE OF USE IN THAT AREA.
>> MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I MAY TO TAG ON TO COUNSEL, STEPHANIE, HOW DID THE COMMISSION WRESTLE WITH THIS AND NOT ACTUALLY RAISE WHAT I THINK IS A VERY GOOD IDEA, A SPECIAL USE PERMIT?
>> THIS CAME UP AFTER CONSULTATION WITH LEGAL COUNSEL AFTER PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
IT WAS NOT EVEN SOMETHING THAT WE CAUGHT WITHIN THE OFFICE.
[00:35:05]
AFTER REVIEWING WITH LEGAL COUNSEL [OVERLAPPING]>> IT WASN'T PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED AND OR CONSIDERED?
>> CORRECT. THIS IS THE FIRST DISCUSSION OF THE POTENTIAL NONCONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THE REQUEST FOR A REZONING IS NOT IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE MAP.
THE LAND USE MAP, AS SHOWN UP HERE, THAT ORANGE AREA, IS DESIGNATED AS RESIDENTIAL.
THAT IS A MAJORITY OF THAT ENTIRE AREA.
THERE IS VERY LITTLE THAT IS INDICATED AS COMMERCIAL.
IN GENERAL, DESIGNATED AS A RESIDENTIAL AREA.
HOWEVER, THE COMPREHENSIVE GROWTH PLAN AREA DOES SPECIFICALLY INCLUDE BEAVER CREEK AS PART OF THAT GROWTH AREA FOR THE COUNTY.
IN THE GROWTH AREA MAP, WE ACTUALLY SEEM TO HAVE SOME CONFLICT WITHIN OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH ITSELF.
MS. [INAUDIBLE] HAD READ INTO THE RECORD THE DESCRIPTION OF THE BEAVER CREEK GROWTH AREA, AND SHE DID READ IT IN ACCURATELY, THAT IT'S THE SMALLER GROWTH AREA LOCATED IN THE NORTHEASTERN YAVAPAI COUNTY AND IS FOCUSED ALONG I17.
ACCEPTABLE FUTURE GROWTH WILL REQUIRE IMPROVING THE UTILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE TO MAINTAIN AND IMPROVE QUALITY OF LIFE.
THOSE WERE ALL EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
EVEN THOUGH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATES IT AS A GROWTH AREA, WHEN I ZEROED IN ON THE MAP, THIS RIGHT HERE IS THE Y OF BEAVER CREEK ROAD AND LAKE MONTEZUMA ROAD, AND THOSE PARCELS ARE LOCATED RIGHT THERE.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE MAP OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DON'T MATCH TOGETHER.
>> WITH THAT IN MIND [OVERLAPPING]
>> [INAUDIBLE] BEAVER CREEK IS A GROWTH AREA.
>> YEAH, I HEAR YOU, AND I SEE A BIT OF A CONUNDRUM.
I WONDER, SUPERVISOR GREGORY, HOW YOU WOULD FEEL ABOUT HAVING THE PROCESS FIXED FIRST, BECAUSE THE LAST THING I WANT TO DO IS OPEN A PANDORA'S BOX WITH INCONSISTENCIES, NO MATTER WHOSE FAULT IT IS, IT'S AN OVERSIGHT.
WE'RE EVOLVING OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND IT'S GOING ABSOLUTELY IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
IS THERE A WAY TO, IN A TIMELY MATTER, SO AS NOT TO DISADVANTAGE THE APPLICANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE CLEAR AND CLEAN WITH OUR PROCESSES BEFORE WE MAKE A DECISION HERE?
>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO REFER BACK TO P&Z IN CONSIDERATION OF A USE PERMIT.
>> DEVELOPMENT SERVICES APPROVE A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE,
[4. Development Services - Approve a text amendment to the Zoning Ordinance Section 301 to amend the definitions of Attached Building, Detached Building, and Building Separation, to add a definition of Breezeway, and to amend Section 516.B in regard to minimum building spacing in the Density Regulations table. Project Name: Building Definitions – Sections 301 & 516 Zoning Ordinance Amendment; Applicant: Development Services Staff; PLA24-000028. (All Districts)]
SECTION 301 TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF DETACHED BUILDING, AND BUILDING SEPARATION, TO ADD A DEFINITION OF BREEZEWAY, AND TO AMEND SECTION 516 POINT B IN REGARD TO MINIMUM BUILDING SPACING IN THE DENSITY REGULATIONS TABLE, PROJECT NAME IS BUILDING DEFINITION, SECTION 301, 516 ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT.APPLICANT IS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF, PLA 24-000028, TO ALL DISTRICTS. GOOD MORNING.
>> THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN BROWN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
I'M SUSAN ABER, PLANNER WITH THE YAVAPAI COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
THERE WAS A UNANIMOUS APPROVAL OR RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
IF YOU'D LIKE ME TO CONTINUE, THIS ZONING ORDINANCE WILL COVER ALL DISTRICTS.
THE AMENDMENT WAS FIRST DISCUSSED AT JOINT SESSION LAST OCTOBER, AND THERE HAVE BEEN TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS, ONE IN COTTONWOOD, AND ONE IN PRESCOTT FOR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
>> DO WE HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR GREEN SHEETS IN REGARDS TO THIS ISSUE?
>> THE BOARD HAS NOT RECEIVED EITHER FOR THIS ISSUE.
>> I MAKE A MOTION TO GO AHEAD AND GIVE THIS TO YOU TO REDEFINE.
[00:40:08]
LET ME ASK A QUESTION BEFORE I DO THIS.OKAY. YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE THIS BACK AND REDEFINE THOSE SECTIONS IN PLANNING AND ZONING, THAT WILL APPLY TO THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION, CORRECT?
>> THERE ARE SEVERAL DEFINITIONS THAT WOULD BE AMENDED IF YOU WERE TO APPROVE THE TEXT AMENDMENT.
>> SECONDED BY MS. MICHAELS. ALL IN FAVOR?
>> DISCUSSION IN A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING ORDINANCE.
[5. Development Services - Discussion of a text amendment to the Planning & Zoning Ordinance Section 501 Accessory Uses and Structures to add small-scale solar equipment usage standards, and to add a new Section 608 Solar Facilities with requirements, standards, and procedures to establish utility-scale solar facilities. Project Name: Solar Facilities – Sections 501 & 608 Zoning Ordinance Amendment; Applicant: Development Services Staff; PLA24-000042. (All Districts)]
SECTION 501, THE ACCESSORY USES INSTRUCTURES TO ADD SMALL SCALE SOLAR EQUIPMENT USAGE STANDARDS AND TO ADD A NEW SECTION, 608, SOLAR FACILITIES WITH REQUIREMENTS, STANDARDS, AND PROCEDURES, TO ESTABLISH UTILITY SCALE SOLAR FACILITIES.THIS IS LARGE SCALE FACILITIES.
PROJECT NAMED SOLAR FACILITIES, SECTION 501 AND 608, ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, APPLICANTS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, AND THIS IS IN PLA 24-000042, AND IS IN ALL DISTRICTS.
I HAVE ONE GREEN SHEET ON THIS.
>> MR. BLAKE. GOOD MORNING, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
I'M THE PLANNING MANAGER WITH YAVAPAI COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
I'M GOING TO PROVIDE A FEW COMMENTS BEFORE I JUMP INTO THE OUTLINE PRESENTATION OF THE ORDINANCE.
I'M HERE TODAY TO PRESENT THE BOARD WITH THE POWERPOINT OUTLINE OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT.
THE PURPOSE IS TO SOLICIT YOUR FEEDBACK AND INPUT, ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE, AND TO PROVIDE THE PUBLIC WITH THE FIRST OF FOUR OPPORTUNITIES TO PROVIDE COMMENT AT A PUBLIC MEETING.
NO OFFICIAL ACTION IS SOUGHT OR REQUIRED AT TODAY'S MEETING.
AS TIME ALLOWS, WE WILL ALSO HIGHLIGHT SUBSTANTIVE COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS RECEIVED INTERNALLY, FROM OTHER AGENCIES, AND THE PUBLIC THUS FAR.
TO THE EXTENT THAT WE CAN DO THAT TODAY, DEPENDS ON HOW QUICKLY WE GET THROUGH THE OUTLINE PRESENTATION WHILE AFFORDING TIME FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
WITH INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC AND FURTHER DIRECTION FROM THE BOARD.
THE DRAFT AMENDMENT PRESENTED TODAY WILL BE REVISED.
PRESENTED IN SIMILAR FASHION FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, AT PUBLIC MEETINGS ADVERTISED AND SCHEDULED FOR JULY 18TH AT THE COTTONWOOD OFFICE AT SIXTH STREET IN AUGUST 8TH AT THE PRESCOTT LOCATION.
AS BACKGROUND, THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE AMENDMENT WAS INITIATED AT THE JOINT SESSION ON MARCH 14TH, 2024, AT WHICH TIME STAFF WAS GIVEN DIRECTION TO PURSUE THIS PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT.
ON MAY 15TH, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WAS SENT OUT TO VARIOUS REVIEWING AGENCIES THROUGHOUT YAVAPAI COUNTY, INCLUDING MUNICIPALITIES, MAJOR HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATIONS, FIRE DISTRICTS, COMMUNITY ASSOCIATIONS, AND INTERNAL UNIT REVIEWERS.
WE HAVEN'T YET HEARD FROM EVERYBODY THAT WE NEED TO, AND WE WILL BE ACTIVELY SEEKING PUBLIC COMMENT RIGHT UP UNTIL THE LAST PUBLIC MEETING SCHEDULED BEFORE THE BOARD FOR FINAL CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON SEPTEMBER 4TH.
THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND ASSOCIATED UPCOMING PUBLIC MEETINGS, INCLUDING TODAY'S MEETING.
WERE ADVERTISED ON DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, PLANNING AND ZONING CASES WEBPAGE, AND IN AREA NEWSPAPERS, EMAIL BLAST, USE OF FACEBOOK, AND THE MAINE COUNTY WEB PAGE WEBSITE, ALL PROVIDE LINKS TO THE DRAFT AMENDMENT AS CURRENTLY PROPOSED.
AN ONLINE SURVEY IS ALSO BEING USED TO SOLICIT PUBLIC COMMENT AND TO CONDUCT A BASIC PUBLIC OPINION POLL FOR SUPPORT, OPPOSITION, OR NEUTRAL POSITION ON THE PROPOSED ADOPTION OF THE DRAFT AMENDMENT BY THE BOARD.
WITH THAT, I'LL JUMP INTO THE POWERPOINT.
>> I WOULD ONLY INTERRUPT JUST LONG ENOUGH TO ASK, BECAUSE I CARE ABOUT THE DEMOGRAPHICS.
THIS IS FOR THE FUTURE OF OUR COUNTY, AND THAT SUGGESTS THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE'RE REALLY REACHING A YOUNGER DEMOGRAPHIC WHO'S GOING TO CARRY THE BURDEN, OR THE CONSEQUENCES INTENDED OR OTHERWISE, OF OUR DECISIONS.
I'M WONDERING ABOUT THAT SOCIAL MEDIA AND WHETHER FACEBOOK IS PART OF IT AS WELL.
>> YES, WE HAVE BEEN USING FACEBOOK, AND WE'VE GOTTEN LOTS OF LIKES AND DISLIKES.
FACEBOOK IS CAN BE A POOR INDICATOR OF PUBLIC POSITION.
WE'RE NOT REALLY SURE WHAT DO THEY LIKE THE POST? DO THEY LIKE THE ORDINANCE? THE FACEBOOK POST ACTUALLY REDIRECTS THEM TO GO TO THE COUNTY WEBSITE AND UTILIZE THE SURVEY,
[00:45:02]
WHICH IS SET UP SO WE CAN MORE ACCURATELY DEPICT WHAT THE PUBLIC SENTIMENT IS.>> WE CAN DO A POLL ON FACEBOOK AND NOT LOSE FOLKS WHO ARE SAYING TO THEMSELVES, WELL, I'M NOT GOING TO DO THAT.
WE CAN SAY, HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT, AND FOR MORE INFORMATION GO TO.
BUT DO YOU LIKE THE IDEA OF HAVING HUGE, HOWEVER THE DESCRIPTORS WORK IN YOUR COMMUNITY, WHY OR WHY NOT EVEN? I MEAN, I THINK YOU COULD DRILL DOWN A BIT ON FACEBOOK.
>> ARE YOU FOLLOWING ESTABLISHED PROCESS AND PROCEDURE?
>> JUST TO BE CLEAR, SO THIS IS AN ORDINANCE THAT WOULD BE COUNTY WIDE, BUT SPECIFIC TO THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF THE COUNTY, THIS ISN'T OVERSIGHT FOR THE MUNICIPALITIES.
IT APPLIES TO ALL THE SUPERVISOR DISTRICTS.
>> SO THIS IS JUST A RECAP OF WHERE THIS PROCESS STARTED.
THERE WAS ACTUALLY TWO JOINT SESSIONS.
IT WAS AT THE SECOND ONE THAT WE WERE GIVEN DIRECTION TO ACTUALLY REALLY DO A MUCH MORE COMPREHENSIVE ORDINANCE AND THAT'S WHY IT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME TIME.
I'M GOING TO QUICKLY GO THROUGH THESE SLIDES BECAUSE THERE'S ACTUALLY ABOUT 45 SLIDES.
WE WANT TO AFFORD TIME FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
WE'D LIKE TO AFFORD TIME TO SUMMARIZE AND HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE KEY COMMENTS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED THUS FAR.
AGAIN, WE'RE GOING TO RECEIVE MORE COMMENTS RIGHT UP UNTIL THE FINAL HEARING BEFORE THE BOARD FOR FINAL CONSIDERATION AND ACTION.
SO THIS IS A HISTORY OF WHERE WE ARE.
OF COURSE, LIKE ANY GOOD ORDINANCE, YOU'D LIKE TO HAVE A BASIS IN YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR YOUR MASTER PLAN AND SO, OF COURSE, WE DO HAVE SOME STATEMENTS WITH RESPECT TO POLICY THAT WITHIN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT WAS ADOPTED LAST YEAR, GO ONE CREATE AN EFFICIENT PROCESS FOR HANDLING APPLICATIONS FOR A NEW UTILITY SCALE, SOLAR ENERGY PROJECTS.
THERE IT IS. THAT'S IMPORTANT GOAL TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF RENEWABLE ENERGY GENERATION SYSTEMS AND RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES.
THERE IS A BIT OF A DISTINCTION THERE.
OUR ORDINANCE ALREADY PROVIDES, AS THE BUY RIGHT FOR RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES TO CITE ROOFTOP AND GROUND BASED SOLAR REALLY FOR GENERATION DERIVED ON THE PREMISES FOR USE ON THE PROPERTY.
>> ONE QUESTION GOING BACK, MATT, THE WORD RENEWABLE.
>> A DISTINCTION IS THAT, SO RENEWABLE COULD APPLY TO GEOTHERMAL.
IT COULD APPLY TO WIND, WAVE ACTION.
IT COULD APPLY TO WATER POWER.
THIS ORDINANCE IS SPECIFIC TO SOLAR ENERGY.
GOING BACK WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS MORE OF A GUIDANCE DOCUMENT.
SO IT SAYS, SURE, THIS ELECTED BODY IT MAKES SENSE TO CONSIDER A VARIETY OF RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECTS, BUT THAT'S CREATED BY ORDINANCE.
SO CURRENTLY, RIGHT NOW, OUR ORDINANCE DOESN'T PROVIDE A BUY RIGHT USE FOR UTILITY SCALE SOLAR.
IF THEY WANTED TO DO THAT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME IN AND GET A USE PERMIT.
THE REALITY IS THOUGH WITH THIS ORDINANCE, YOU'D STILL HAVE TO GET A USE PERMIT.
THE BOARD STILL HAS THAT DISCRETION TO SAY NO OR YES TO A PROJECT.
I GUESS THE POINT BEING IS THAT THE IDEA WITH THE ORDINANCE IS TO ACTUALLY CREATE SOME PARAMETERS AND SOME GUARD RAILS.
BECAUSE WHEN YOU SAY UTILITY SCALE, WHAT YOU REALLY MEAN IS PROJECTS THAT HAVE THE POTENTIAL FOR REGIONAL IMPACTS BECAUSE OF THEIR SCALE AND SIZE.
IF A TYPICAL AVERAGE SIZE IS 2,500 ACRES, THERE'S MANY EXAMPLES OF INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS THAT ARE OVER 8,000 ACRES IN SIZE.
>> THIS DOES NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WIND GENERATED POWER, CURRENT?
>> IT DOES NOT. THAT IS NOT BEFORE THE BOARD AT THIS TIME.
IN FACT, THE PLANNING WOULD NEED TO RECEIVE YOUR DIRECTION TO ENTERTAIN DEVELOPMENT OF SUCH AN ORDINANCE.
OOPS, HOW DO YOU GO BACK ON THIS? THIS JUST COVERS THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PIECE, THE VARIOUS NEWSPAPERS AND SO WHEN THIS WAS ROLLED OUT ON MAY 15TH, IT WAS ROLLED OUT INTO THE NEWSPAPER SO THIS HAS BEEN OUT THERE FOR A WHILE NOW.
IT'S BEEN POSTED ON THE WEBSITE.
FACEBOOK IS ATTEMPTING TO REDIRECT PEOPLE TO SURVEY 123, BUT ACTUALLY, WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY COMMENTS YET AND, OF COURSE, WE'VE POSTED ON FACEBOOK.
WE'VE HAD POSITIVE LIKES. WE'VE HAD DISLIKES.
WE'VE HAD LOTS OF LAUGHING FACES AND I REALLY DON'T KNOW HOW TO INTERPRET THAT.
THIS IS SERIOUS BUSINESS. IT'S NOT FUNNY.
[00:50:05]
MOVING ON, REVIEW COMMENTS.OF COURSE, WE'VE HEARD, AND WE'RE WANTING TO HEAR FROM COUNTY DEPARTMENTS, PUBLIC ENTITIES, INDUSTRY GROUPS, COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS.
WE'VE HEARD FROM ALL OF THOSE GROUPS, BUT THERE'S STILL OTHERS THAT WE NEED TO HEAR FROM.
WE DID RECEIVE SUBSTANTIVE COMMENTS FROM ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT, THE COSANTI FOUNDATION, THE UPPER AQUA FRIA WATERSHED PARTNERSHIP, AND ARIZONA SOLAR ENERGY INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION, WHICH I WILL FOREVER MORE INDICATE AS ARISEIA, TO MAKE IT EASIER BECAUSE THEY PROVIDED A LOT OF COMMENTS.
>> JUST PAUSE LONG ENOUGH TO SAY WHAT WAS THE GIST OF THOSE COMMENTS, ESPECIALLY FROM FOLKS LIKE ARIZONA GAME AND FISH.
WE'RE AS BOARD MEMBERS, SOME OF US ARE VERY WORRIED ABOUT WILDLIFE CORRIDORS, AND SURELY THEY HAVE WEIGHED IN ON THAT.
>> YEAH, SO WITH THIS USE, BECAUSE OF THE SIZE, LOCATION IS SUCH AN IMPORTANT ISSUE AS IS VIEWSHED.
THERE'S IMPACTS TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
NOT EVERYBODY WANTS THIS NEXT TO A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEN THERE'S IMPACTS TO POTENTIAL HABITAT.
THIS IS A HUGE COUNTY, WHICH IS ENDOWED WITH AN INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF WILDLIFE RICHES.
WE ALSO HAVE A LOT OF MOBILE WILDLIFE, LIKE PRONGHORN AND ANTELOPE, CARNIVORES, ETC.
A LOT OF THOSE ACTUALLY HAVE MIGRATORY ROUTES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN DISRUPTED, THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES TO ACTUALLY RECTIFY SOME OF THOSE MISSING GAPS OR WHERE ROUTES HAVE BEEN SEVERED BY HIGHWAYS, ETC.
ALL THIS IS TO SAY THAT IT REALLY IS IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE THE TOOLS AND THE CRITERIA WITHIN THE ORDINANCE SO THAT YOU, THE BOARD, CAN REALLY ASK AND ANSWER QUESTIONS AS THEY RELATE TO WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE LOCATION AND SITE.
IF THERE ARE SENSITIVE RECEPTORS, HEAL MONSTERS OR WHATEVER IT MAY BE, THAT YOU HAVE THE TOOLS WITHIN YOUR ORDINANCE TO ASK THE APPLICANT TO MITIGATE AND REDUCE ADVERSE IMPACTS.
WE DO PROPOSE TO ADDRESS SMALL SCALE SOLAR USE AND IN FACT, AGAIN, AS I STARTED, WE ACTUALLY, THE ORDINANCE ALREADY PROVIDES FOR THAT AS A BUY RIGHT USE.
YOU CAN PUT IT ON YOUR ROOFTOPS.
YOU CAN DO GROUND MOUNTED SOLAR ON YOUR PROPERTY, YOUR RESIDENTS.
BUT WE'VE HEARD THAT THERE WAS A NEED FOR GREATER CLARITY AND SOME GUIDANCE.
QUESTIONS KEEP COMING UP LIKE A BUILDING SAFETY.
WE WANTED TO AMEND THE PROVISION FOR SMALL SCALE SOLAR USE JUST TO PROVIDE SOME GREATER CLARITY.
JUMPING INTO THAT, SO PROPOSED ADDITION TO SECTION 501, ACCESSORY USES WOULD BE TO HOW SMALL SCALE SOLAR AS AN ACCESSORY USE, SIMILAR TO HOW MANY ORDINANCES IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS DO SO.
SMALL SCALE SOLAR USE IS ALLOWED IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS, AS I SAID, WITH STANDARDS FOR HEIGHT LIMITS AND PRINCIPLE SETBACKS.
WE ALREADY HAVE THAT IN PLACE.
BUT UNDER THE PROPOSED STANDARD SUMMARY, PV PANELS SO WHAT WE'RE WANTING TO DO IS TO ACTUALLY PUT SOME HEIGHT LIMITS ON THE PANELS WHEN THEY'RE ON YOUR ROOFTOP AND FOR GROUND MOUNTED SOLAR.
WHAT WAS PROPOSED WAS 24 INCHES FOR PV PANELS ABOVE THE PEAK ROOF.
THESE WOULD BE PANELS THAT EXTEND ABOVE THE ROOF AS THEY'RE FIXED ON IT.
THEN FOR GROUND MOUNT PANELS TO NOT EXCEED THAT 10 FEET IN HEIGHT AND WOULD STILL MEET THE PRINCIPAL SETBACKS.
THAT'S ANOTHER KEY ITEM THAT'S ALREADY IN THE ORDINANCE.
UTILITY LINES SERVING GROUND MOUNTED SOLAR, PANELS MUST BE UNDERGROUND, PIPING, CONDUITS, ETC CONCEALED.
BATTERY STORAGE LIMITED TO 50 KW.
FOR THE MOST PART, WHEN WE GET IT.
NEXT, WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH THIS SECTION REALLY QUICKLY, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO JUMP INTO THE MEAT OF THE ORDINANCE, WHICH IS THE STANDALONE AMENDMENT, WHICH PROVIDES FOR UTILITY SCALE SOLAR.
I WILL JUST TREAT THE COMMENTS FOR THE SMALL SCALE NOW JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE QUICK, AND WE CAN GET THROUGH THEM QUICKLY.
ONE COMMENT WE RECEIVED, THEY WANT TO KNOW ARE THESE TYPICAL DIMENSIONS.
WE DID TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT THE INDUSTRY STANDARDS ARE.
ROOF MOUNTED CAN BE RAISED 24 INCHES ABOVE ROOF SURFACE, SO TYPICAL IS 2-8, SO WE COULD ACTUALLY REDUCE THAT IF WE WANTED TO.
THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A LOOK AT BUT THE PROPOSED MAXIMUM LIMIT WILL ACCOMMODATE THE TYPICAL MOUNTING AND THAT'S THE INTENTION HERE IS NOT TO BE PROHIBITED, BUT TO ALLOW THIS.
GROUND MOUNTED PANELS, A TYPICAL HEIGHT IS 8-20" AND PROPOSED CHANGE SHOWN IN BOLD.
[00:55:09]
THIS IS WHERE WE'RE ACTUALLY PROPOSING A CHANGE TO WHAT IS PRESENTED TODAY, AND THE ORDINANCE YOU HAVE, AND THE PUBLIC HAS THE GROUND MOUNTED PANELS WOULD NOT EXCEED 15 FEET IN TOTAL HEIGHT, AND MUST FOLLOW PRINCIPAL SETBACKS AS ALREADY PROVIDED FOR.>> NOW, WITH THE 15 FEET, THAT'S OPTIONAL TO US.
WE CAN PLAY WITH THE 15 FEET NUMBER, CORRECT? BECAUSE WHAT I'M THINKING IS MOST FENCES ARE USUALLY 6-8 FEET, AND YOU HEAR YOU'RE PUTTING THEM ABOVE THE FENCE LINE.
>> THAT'S EXACTLY WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY, MR. CHAIRMAN, IS TO SOLICIT YOUR INPUT IN FEEDBACK AND DIRECTION, SO YES.
>> WELL, I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE HIGHER THAN A NORMAL FENCE, WHICH IS USUALLY 6-8 FEET.
>> THAT'S EXACTLY THE FEEDBACK WE'RE LOOKING FOR SO WE'LL TAKE NOTE OF THAT AND TAKE A LOOK AT IT.
THEN WE HAD THE QUESTION WOULD THIS LIMIT THE USE OF BATTERIES AT SUBSTATIONS? NO, WE'RE NOT LOOKING TO LIMIT ANY OF THAT.
ANOTHER COMMENT, CONCEALING PIPING CONDUITS WOULD BE PROBLEMATIC.
THE RETROFITS, OUR RESPONSE CONCEALMENT OF COMPONENTS DOES NOT PREVENT THE SERVICING SO WE'RE NOT SO SURE THAT THAT COMMENT LIKE MEASURES UP THAT WE'RE NOT LOOKING TO DISCOURAGE THAT USE.
WHY WOULD THERE BE A CAP ON BATTERY STORAGE? THE BUILDING ORDINANCE ACTUALLY ALLOWS FOR.
WE LOOKED INTO THIS FURTHER, OUR BUILDING ORDINANCE SO NOT THE PLANNING AND ZONING ORDINANCE ALLOWS FOR 20 KW PER BATTERY, MAXIMUM OF 80 KW HOURS.
ACTUALLY, BASED ON THAT AND FURTHER RESEARCH, THE PROPOSED CHANGE WE WOULD MAKE IS FOR BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE ASSOCIATED WITH SMALL SCALE SOLAR WOULD BE LIMITED TO 80.
WE WOULD BUMP THAT UP TO MIRROR WHAT THE BUILDING CODE ACTUALLY ALREADY SAYS, WHICH IS 80 KW HOURS, SMALL SCALE FOR MULTI FAMILY, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL USE EXCEEDING 80.
WHERE YOU WANT TO GO OVER 80 FOR THESE USES, WHETHER AT YOUR BUSINESS OR YOUR HOME, THAT FOLLOWS A DIFFERENT SET OF STANDARDS, NOT OURS.
THAT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO SECTION 1206 OF THE 2018 INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE SO WE'RE PROPOSING TO BUMP THAT UP.
IF YOU WANT TO GO OVER, THERE IS A FEDERAL STANDARD FOR THAT.
AGAIN, THE IDEA IS WHAT WE'RE REALLY WANTING TO DO IS TO FACILITATE SMALL SCALE ON PEOPLE'S PROPERTIES.
>> DO WE HAVE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS AND OR STATEMENTS MADE BY THE PUBLIC IN REGARDS TO THESE ISSUES.
>> THESE WERE THE ONES THAT WE RECEIVED FOR SMALL SCALE SOLAR.
WE HAVE A SLEW OF COMMENTS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED REGARDING THE UTILITY SCALE SOLAR.
WHAT WHAT WE PRESENTED TO DO TODAY WAS TO SORT OF RUN THROUGH THE OUTLINE OF THE ORDINANCE AND THEN AT THE END, WE COULD GO INTO COMMENTS.
BUT, OF COURSE, THAT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD.
>> I THINK WE'RE GOING TO START GETTING INTO SOME DETAIL SO AT THAT, I'M GOING TO TAKE A TEN MINUTE BREAK TILL 10 AFTER 10.
>> MATT, I'D LIKE YOU TO KEEP IN MIND REVISITING HEIGHT WHEN YOU COME BACK.
ALL RIGHT. WE'RE BACK IN SESSION.
I'M SORRY, MATT. GO AHEAD. YOUR MIC TOO.
>> I'M BACK. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
IF I MAY, I JUST WOULD LIKE TO BACK UP BECAUSE SUPERVISOR MICHAEL DID HAVE THE QUESTION REGARDING ARIZONA FISH AND GAME AND COMMENTS AND I WOULD BE REMISS.
I DIDN'T NOTICE IT BEFORE BECAUSE I HAD MY BACK TO THE AUDIENCE, BUT WE DO HAVE TWO REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE ARIZONA FISH AND GAME TODAY AND THEY DID SUBMIT COMMENTS TO US AND THEY'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.
>> I DON'T HAVE THEIR COMMENTS, SO I THINK GOOD TO HAVE THEM COME UP AND LET US KNOW WHAT THEY HAVE.
>> I CONCUR. I'D LOVE TO HEAR FROM THEM.
I WORK WITH ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT, OUR HABITAT CONNECTIVITY AND WILDLIFE VEHICLE COLLISION MITIGATION GROUP.
I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND LET KELLY.
>> LET'S MAKE SURE THAT MIC IS ON.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. MY NAME IS KELLY WILF.
I'M WITH THE ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT OUT OF OUR MESA REGIONAL OFFICE, AND I'M ALSO REPRESENTING OUR OTHER REGIONAL OFFICE AS WELL BECAUSE WE SHARE THAT BOUNDARY INTO YAVAPAI COUNTY.
>> WELCOME AND THANK YOU FOR COMING OUT.
>> ONE OF OUR INTERESTS GAME AND FISH AS THESE SOLAR DEVELOPMENTS GO FORWARD,
[01:00:02]
WE'RE SEEING IN A LOT OF PARTS OF THE STATES, AND AS THEY GO IN, WE UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR SOLAR AND JUST TRYING TO ALSO CONSIDER WILDLIFE AND OTHER NATURAL RESOURCES AS THESE GO IN AND OUR COMMENTS ARE BASED MAINLY ON THOSE REGARDS.ONE OF THE THINGS THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T KNOW IS BASICALLY IN YAVAPAI COUNTY, ONE OF OUR LARGEST REMAINING HERDS OF PRONGHORN IN ARIZONA, THEY MOVE FROM UP AROUND FLAGSTAFF DOWN ALONG THROUGH ASH FORK, DOWN THE ROAD AND COME THROUGH ALL THE WAY TO THE CHINO VALLEY PRESCOTT AREA.
THEY HAVE THIS MIGRATION THEY MAKE EVERY YEAR. A LOT OF THEM DO.
WHAT WE SEE, AS DEVELOPMENT COMES FORWARD, FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT HAVE LIVED IN PRESCOTT VALLEY FOR A LONG TIME AND I ACTUALLY GREW UP IN PRESCOTT FOR PART OF MY LIFE IN PRESCOTT VALLEY, IS YOU SEE THOSE HERDS STARTING TO GET FRAGMENTED.
IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY AS PRESCOTT VALLEY, PRESCOTT IN VARIOUS GINO VALLEY AS THESE DEVELOPMENTS HAPPEN TO BE ABLE TO ALSO ACCOMMODATE WILDLIFE AND CONTINUE TO HAVE THAT RESOURCE THERE.
THAT'S WHERE A LOT OF OUR COMMENTS ARE.
>> JUST TO TAG ON TO THAT BECAUSE I COULD NOT PERSONALLY AGREE MORE WITH YOU.
I'VE WATCHED, AND I KNOW MY FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS HAVE, TOO, AS WE'VE DRIVEN ACROSS THE MOUNTAIN, THE DECREASE IN THE HERDS AND THE FRAGMENTATION, AND THAT BREAKS MY HEART TO SEE.
IN OTHER STATES, THEY ARE ACTUALLY MAKING WAYS FOR THE MIGRATORY PATH TO REMAIN INTACT AND I HOPE THAT OUR PLANNING FOLKS WILL TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHATEVER THE ASSISTED DEVICES ARE, BRIDGES, TUNNELS, A CHANGE IN THE COURSE OF THE FIELDS IF WE PUT ACRES AND ACRES OF SOLAR PANELS OR WHATEVER IT IS, WIND, I DON'T CARE, AWAY FOR OUR WILDLIFE TO NOT ONLY LIVE, BUT THRIVE.
THAT SHOULD BE PART OF THE LANGUAGE WITHIN THIS ORDINANCE AND I APPRECIATE WHAT I THINK I HEAR IS A RECOMMENDATION FOR THAT.
>> WELL, I THINK ONE OF ONE OF THE THINGS I WANT TO POINT OUT ESPECIALLY TO FISH AND GAME IS, I KNOW THAT YOU'RE FOLLOWING THE MIGRATION OF THE ANTELOPE HERD I THINK THAT'S ONE OF OUR MAJOR CONCERNS AS THE ANTELOPE AND EVENTUALLY, ELK AND THE DEER AND THOSE POPULATIONS.
>> BUT ALSO TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION AT ALL, JUST THE VERY NATURE OF WHAT IT APPEARS TO LOOK LIKE IN GRASSLAND AREAS.
DO YOU CONSIDER THE FACT THERE'S A POSSIBILITY OF FIRE DUE TO THESE TYPES OF FIELDS AND THINGS LIKE THAT? DO YOU TAKE THAT INTO YOUR CONSIDERATION WITH GAME FISH?
>> I CAN GO AHEAD AND TRY AND ANSWER THAT, MR. CHAIRMAN.
YES, WE TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION EVERYTHING THAT GOES INTO THE LANDSCAPE AS FAR AS WHERE THE CONNECTIVITY IS, WHAT TYPES OF ACTIVITY MIGHT HAPPEN ACROSS THAT LANDSCAPE DUE TO PREVIOUS FIRE, DUE TO CONCERNS FOR MORE FIRE AND, IT COMES DOWN TO DEALING WITH SOLAR, WHETHER TO BLADE UNDERNEATH THE PANELS OR NOT, AND THOSE TYPES OF FACTORS.
THOSE ARE GENERALLY. WE SPEAK TO ALL THOSE DIFFERENT FACTORS WHEN WE'RE COMMENTING ON THE SPECIFIC SITE FACILITIES THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED.
WITHIN THE GENERAL ORDINANCE INFORMATION, WE DID PROVIDE A LOT OF INFORMATION REGARDING HOW BIG A CORRIDOR SHOULD BE BASED ON OUR DATA AND WHAT WE'VE LEARNED IN OTHER COUNTIES AS WELL AS THIS ONE IN ALL OF OUR STUDIES, AND THAT'S WHERE JEFF COMES IN ON GATHERING ALL OF THAT DATA TO PROVIDE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS.
>> WELL, FOR OUR RATIFICATION, WHAT IS THE CORRIDOR, HOW BIG IS A QUARTER WIDTH OR WHATEVER PATHWAY?
>> IT'S A HARD QUESTION TO ANSWER BECAUSE A LOT OF TIMES IT HAS TO DO WITH HOW BIG OF AN AREA THOSE ANIMALS ARE TRAVELING THROUGH.
BUT IN GENERAL, OUR RECOMMENDATION BASED ON THE LATEST SCIENCE IS ABOUT A 1,300 FOOT CORRIDOR FOR PRONGHORN AND MULE DEER?
>> AGAIN, THAT'S BASED OFF OF WHAT WE HAVE FROM GPS MOVEMENT STUDIES AND SOME OF THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE IN OUR STATE AS WELL AS WYOMING AND OTHER STATES.
>> WELL, MATT, THIS IS A QUESTION FOR YOU.
IF IN FACT, WE SHOULD ADOPT AN ORDINANCE SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU'RE PRESENTING HERE, WOULD WE STILL BE GETTING COMMENTS FROM ARIZONA GAME AND FISH IN REGARDS TO THE LOCATION AND PROXIMITY OF THAT POSSIBLE COMMERCIAL VENTURE?
>> THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION FOR THEM IF THEY WOULD BE WILLING AND ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCESS WHEN WE ACTUALLY RECEIVE AN APPLICATION.
WE THE PLANNING UNIT WOULD CERTAINLY WELCOME
[01:05:02]
COMMENT FROM ANY INTERESTED MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC, CERTAINLY ARIZONA FISH AND GAME.>> WELL, WE CAN ASK FOR PUBLIC COMMENT, BUT IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY GET TO THE PEOPLE WE REALLY NEED TO MAKE THE COMMENTS.
IF YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN, AND GAME AND FISH HAPPENS TO BE ONE OF THEM.
>> I THINK WE'RE BECOMING PRETTY PROACTIVE IN OUR UNIT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE REACHING OUT OURSELVES AND NOT JUST SENDING AN EMAIL TO THE KEY PLAYERS.
>> WELL, THAT'S REALLY VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE OFTEN THOSE EMAILS GO OUT, AND YOU GUYS ARE SO BUSY AS OUR OTHER ENTITIES, AND WE DON'T GET THE INPUT MAYBE SOMETIMES THAT WE NEED.
IT'S CRITICALLY IMPORTANT AS WE GO FORWARD IN THIS SCALE THAT WE HEAR FROM YOU AND LISTEN TO WHAT YOU SAY.
I KNOW YOUR PLATES ARE VERY FULL, BUT THAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER MAKING THAT PART OF YOUR PARTNERSHIP WITH THE COUNTY.
>> YES, AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANTED TO OFFER WITHIN OUR RECOMMENDATIONS IS MAKING SURE THAT WE DO HAVE A PART IN THAT PROCESS, THAT WE DO HAVE A CHANCE TO REVIEW AND OFFER COMMENTS AS THOSE PROJECTS COME THROUGH.
>> NOW WE APPRECIATE THAT VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR COMING THIS MORNING.
>> I THINK THE IMPORTANT THING IS THAT WE HEAR FROM SUCH ENTITIES EARLY ON IN THE PROCESS WHEN WE'RE ACTUALLY CRAFTING THE ORDINANCE, NOT WHEN THE TRAIN HAS LEFT THE BUILDING, AND WE HAVE A BY RIGHT APPLICANT.
BEFORE WE CLOSE FOR A QUICK BREAK, CHAIRMAN BROWN, WANTED TO REVISIT THE HEIGHT LIMIT.
AGAIN, RIGHT NOW, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SMALL SCALE ON RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.
THIS IS REALLY FOR ONSITE GENERATION.
>> TAKE THEM SEPARATELY, MATT.
>> YES. I THINK THAT IT'S A GOOD POINT THAT THE IDEA THAT MAYBE WE CAN HAVE A DIFFERENT STANDARD IF YOU'RE DOING A GROUND MOUNTED SOLAR IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA, AND IT MAY DEPEND ON IF YOU'RE IN A DENSER RESIDENTIAL AREA.
MAYBE THERE'S A TIGHTER STANDARD BECAUSE NOW YOU'RE GETTING THE VIEW SHED OF EVERYONE'S BACKYARD VERSUS MAYBE AN RCU 2A.
THEN A DIFFERENT STANDARD MAYBE FOR A COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL.
AGAIN, WE'RE TALKING SMALL SCALE, BUT MAYBE TEASING A DIFFERENT STANDARD OUT DEPENDING ON WHAT DISTRICT AND LEVEL OF INTENSITY YOU'RE IN.
>> I LOVE THE BOARD TEASING OUT, IF I MAY, MR. CHAIRMAN.
>> I KNOW. [LAUGHTER] AS A LONG TERM PLANNER, I LOVE IT.
I WONDER IF WE COULD HEAR FROM OUR COMMISSIONER ON THIS WHO ALSO PERSONALLY IS INVOLVED AS AN ARCHITECT AND ALSO A FARMER CAN SPEAK TO THAT COMPETING INTEREST AND HOW DO WE THREAD THAT NEEDLE.
MR. RHODACIO, WOULD YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF?
>> THANK YOU. RENNIE RHODOCIO WITH PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER FOR YAVAPAI COUNTY AS WELL AS AN LOCAL ARCHITECT HERE IN TOWN.
I HAVE ACTUALLY QUITE A BIT OF EXPERIENCE WITH THIS, AND WE HAVE PROPERTY IN THE TOWN OF CLARKDALE.
BUT WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS ON THIS IS THE HEIGHT IN THE SENSE THAT ALL THE GROUND MOUNTED POSSIBILITIES ARE NOT NECESSARILY ON THE GROUND.
WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS THERE'S TRACKING DEVICES THAT ARE FOR RESIDENTIAL USE.
WE ON MY PROPERTY HAVE SIX OF THEM, AND SOME OF THEM EXTEND BEYOND 15 FEET, AND IT'S NOT INTENTIONAL, BUT IT'S JUST THE NATURE OF THE DEVICE.
THE TRACKER ITSELF MIGHT STAND EIGHT OR 10 FEET IN THE AIR, BECAUSE IT'S ON A POLE, AND THEN IT HAS A LARGE FRAME DEPENDING ON THE SIZE OF HOW MANY PANELS YOU MIGHT HAVE ON THE TRACKER.
THEN YOU HAVE THE TRACKING FRAME ON A POLE AND THEN YOU HAVE THE PANELS MOUNTED TO THAT, WHICH EXTEND BEYOND THE FRAME.
>> LET ME STOP YOU RIGHT THERE.
>> I'M NOT REALLY TOO CONCERNED ABOUT THE PERSON WHO IS PUTTING THIS UP IN HIS YARD.
I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE TO LOOK AT.
TO THAT COMMENT, TO PUT YOUR MIND AT EASE SOMEWHAT ON THAT, TRACKING DEVICES HAVE BECOME A LOT LESS POPULAR BECAUSE THE PRICE OF PANELS IS SO LOW TODAY THAT THEY DON'T NEED THE TRACKING DEVICE THAT INCREASES THE PANEL EFFICIENCY BY 30%.
YOU SEE LESS AND LESS TRACKERS, BUT THEY ARE OUT THERE.
[01:10:01]
IN YAVAPAI COUNTY, I KNOW THAT THERE ARE STILL MANY FAMILIES THAT LIVE OFF GRID, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT TRACKING DEVICES ARE NOT ESSENTIAL, BUT DESIRABLE.OFTEN THOUGH, IN THOSE SITUATIONS, THEY'RE CERTAINLY NOT IN A SUBDIVISION, AND THEY'LL HAVE ACREAGE SOMEWHERE OUT IN THE COUNTY AND THE VIEW SHARED IS NOT IMPACTED BY A NEIGHBOR NECESSARILY.
BUT I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT THERE ARE OTHER SYSTEMS THAT RAISE THE HEIGHT OF PANELS IN A RESIDENTIAL SITUATION.
>> I THINK THAT'S JUST PART OF THE PLANNING PROCESS, THE NOODLING.
WE HAVE TO THINK IT THROUGH, WE HAVE TO SPEAK TO IT AND THAT'S NOT TO OPEN A PANDORA'S BOX.
IN FACT, IT'S TO PUT GUARD RAILS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH OUR PLAN, BUT ALSO ENCOURAGE US TO REDUCE THE IMPACT ON ENERGY BY DOING OUR OWN AT HOME, AND MANY OF US ARE, AND I KNOW YOU ARE SMALL VITNER, AS WELL.
YOU'RE PRESERVING OPEN SPACE AS WELL AS PRODUCING A PRODUCT THAT IS ABSOLUTELY AG.
SOMEWHERE IN HERE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO START FIGURING OUT HOW TO TEASE OUT THOSE DISTINCTIONS, AND IT'S JUST IMPORTANT TO HAVE THAT ON THE RECORD AS WE GO FORWARD AND THINK ABOUT THIS.
>> THANK YOU. BUT I WOULD JUST ADD TO THAT, THAT AS MATT SAID, THERE MIGHT HAVE TO BE SEVERAL DIFFERENT CLASSIFICATIONS.
IF YOU'RE IN A SUBDIVISION, SIX FEET MIGHT BE ALL YOU NEED.
IF YOU HAVE CERTAIN AMOUNT OF ACREAGE OR WHERE YOU'RE NOT IN A VIEW SHED, IT MIGHT BE A HIGHER STANDARD.
>> WELL, ONE OF THE PROBLEMS WITH US HAVING TWO HIGHEST AVAILABILITY OF HEIGHT, IS THAT SOME PEOPLE WILL TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT, AND THEN THEY'LL SAY, WELL, MY HOA, IT SAYS CAN ONLY PUT IT UP SO HIGH.
THE PROBLEM IS, WE DON'T ENFORCE HOA RULES COVENANTS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN HELP THE PUBLIC WITH IN REGARDS TO THE HEIGHT WHEN WE GET THE COMPLAINTS FROM THE NEIGHBORS.
>> THANK YOU FOR THOSE COMMENTS, MATT BLAKE.
AGAIN, I GUESS I WOULD JUST POINT OUT THAT, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT HEIGHT LIMIT, KEEP IN MIND, TRY TO VISUALIZE THAT WITH THESE PANELS, WHETHER THEY'RE ON A TRACK OR ON THE GROUND MOUNTED SOLELY.
WE'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT THE UPPER EDGE OF THE PANEL BECAUSE THERE'S A PLANE BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE OUTWARD FACING TOWARDS THE SUNLIGHT.
WE'RE STILL ON COMMENTS REGARDING SMALL SCALE SOLAR.
LET'S SEE. I THINK WE ALREADY COVERED THAT ONE.
WE COVERED THE DIMENSIONS, BATTERY STORAGE. I'M I GOING IN THE RIGHT WAY? THE MOUSE WAS TOO TRIGGER HAPPY, SO I WENT TO THE KEYBOARD.
HERE WE GO. INTERNATIONAL FIRE.
NOW WE GET TO THE REALLY THE MEAT OF THE PRESENTATION TODAY.
WE'RE MOVING ON BEYOND THE PROPOSAL TO AUGMENT WHAT THE ORDINANCE ALREADY SAYS WITH RESPECT TO SMALL SCALE SOLAR AS AN ACCESSORY USE.
NOW WE'RE GETTING INTO WHAT REALLY IS A STANDALONE ORDINANCE OR AMENDMENT TO THE CODE, WHICH IS THE UTILITY SCALE SOLAR USE.
THESE ARE YOUR UTILITY SCALE SOLAR FACILITIES THAT WOULD BE GENERATING PROPERTY POWER THAT WOULD GO INTO THE STATEWIDE GRID.
THIS IS A PROPOSED ADDITION TO SECTION, THIS WOULD BE SECTION 608, SOLAR FACILITIES.
YOU'LL NOTICE ON THE UPPER LEFT, WE PROVIDED REVIEW PAGES.
IN YOUR PACKETS, AND OF COURSE, ONLINE, WE HAVE THE CURRENT DRAFT AS CURRENTLY PROPOSED.
OF COURSE, WE'RE GOING TO BE REVISING IT BASED ON WHAT WE HEAR TODAY AND WHAT WE HEAR FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.
BUT IF YOU WANT TO FOLLOW ALONG BECAUSE THIS IS REALLY JUST AN OUTLINE, THE PAGES ARE ON THE UPPER LEFT.
WE'RE GOING TO COVER THE MAIN SECTIONS.
I'M GOING TO TRY TO GO QUICKLY BECAUSE IT'S 45 SLIDES.
PLEASE STOP ME AND I'LL TRY TO PAUSE BEFORE I MOVE TO THE NEXT SLIDE AND MAKE EYE CONTACT TO GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY.
THERE'S WHY ARE WE DOING THIS? WHAT ARE THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES? WHO ARE WE TRYING TO SERVE THE PUBLIC GOOD, PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY? THOSE SORTS OF THINGS.
BECAUSE THIS IS FAIRLY TECHNICAL, WE HAVE A WHOLE DEFINITION SECTION THAT WE GET INTO.
[01:15:03]
THEN A LOT OF THE ORDINANCE, MANY SECTIONS ARE HOUSED WITHIN THE GENERAL PROVISIONS, AND THAT, AGAIN, THIS IS AS A USE PERMIT.THIS USE WOULD REQUIRE A USE PERMIT, SPECIFIC TO THE RCU2 ZONE.
YOU MAY ASK WHY NOT AN INDUSTRIAL ZONE AND I THINK THE SHORT ANSWER IS THAT IF YOU LOOK AT THE COM PLAN IN OUR ZONING, WE ACTUALLY HAVE PRETTY SMALL AREAS, SURPRISINGLY, SO, DESIGNATED TO INDUSTRIAL USES.
INDUSTRIAL USES ARE REALLY MEANT FOR A WIDE VARIETY OF USES, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, HEAVY INDUSTRIAL, MANUFACTURING, ETC.
I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO SEE THOSE AREAS AS IS FOR UTILITY SCALE.
AGAIN, WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A PROJECT THAT COULD BE 3,000 ACRES, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AN AREA THAT WILL BE UNDER INTENSIVE COVERAGE THAT IS PROBABLY GREATER IN AN AREA THAN MANY OF OUR CITIES.
DO WE WANT TO LIMIT THE SIZE? YOU SAID 3,000 ACRES.
DO WE WANT IT TO BE LESS OR MORE? WHAT ARE OTHER COUNTIES DOING IN REGARDS TO THAT?
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT, CHAIRMAN BROWN, AND WE DID TAKE A LOOK AT THAT AND LOOKING, HOW IS IT PERMITTED, ALLOWED FOR IN OTHER COMMUNITIES AND COUNTIES? WE EVEN LOOKED OUTSIDE OF ARIZONA.
IT'S ALSO, THIS IS REALLY A BALANCING ACT.
THAT'S WHAT WE TRY TO DO, AND PLANNING IS BRING A BALANCE BETWEEN COMPETING INTERESTS.
WE REALLY WANT TO CREATE A MODEL ORDINANCE.
ON THE ONE HAND, WE WANT TO BE RESPONSIVE TO CREATING AN ORDINANCE THAT IS GOING TO ALLOW THESE PROJECTS TO MOVE FORWARD AND BE PROFITABLE.
ON THE OTHER HAND, WE WANT TO BE PROTECTIVE OF THE ENVIRONMENT.
WHAT WE HEAR, THE INDUSTRY STANDARD IS ABOUT 2,500 ACRES FOR A UTILITY SCALE SOLAR.
BUT AGAIN, WE'RE ALREADY SEE SEEING EXAMPLES IN ARIZONA WHERE THEY'RE 8,000 FEET.
REALLY WHAT I'M SAYING IS THE DISCRETION LIES WITH YOU, THE BOARD TO DETERMINE THAT NUMBER.
A SINGLE PROJECT COULD BE THAT SIZE, AND I THINK THEY WILL ONLY GET BIGGER IN SOME AREAS.
>> I REALLY NEED TO SEE A CHART OF THE SIZE RANGES, AS WELL AS WHAT IS THE LANDSCAPE THAT THEY HAVE BEEN PUT ON? WHAT ARE OUR COMPARABLES HERE, MATT? THERE ARE SOME AREAS WHERE THE TOPOGRAPHY LENDS ITSELF TO THAT, THE WEST SIDE OF WHERE AM I THINKING? IS IT LA PAZ? WHERE SAND?
>> I THINK YOU NAILED IT, YES.
>> THAT COULD BE A REALLY INAPPROPRIATE FIT.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE APPETITE FOR IT WOULD BE, BUT WE HAVE TO, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS, LOOK AT THE LANDSCAPE, THE AVAILABILITY OF WHAT IS OUT THERE? WHAT IS IT? IS IT FARM LAND? IS IT A POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT? IS IT A PROPER USE AS FAR AS WE KNOW, WITH THE SCIENCE THAT WE HAVE TODAY, IS THIS THE MORE IDEAL PLACEMENT?
>> WITH THE COUNTY OF THE SIZE OF MASSACHUSETTS AS WE ARE, AND YAVAPAI COUNTY, I'D LIKE TO THINK THAT THE COUNTY IS LARGE ENOUGH TO IDENTIFY AREAS THAT ARE APPROPRIATE.
SOME MASTER PLANS AND COMPREHENSIVE PLANS, ACTUALLY, DO THAT AT THE PLANNING STAGE.
IT'S, ACTUALLY, THE COUNTY THAT'S DRIVING THE PROCESS OF WHERE WE WILL ALLOW AND WHERE ARE WE SINGLING THE MARKET TO LOOK.
IN THIS CASE, WE'RE RESPONDING TO PEOPLE KNOCKING AT OUR DOOR, AND YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT THAT WE HAVE A VARIETY OF ECOSYSTEMS IN THE COUNTY AND BIOMES, AND SOME MAY BE APPROPRIATE FOR SOLAR, AND SOME MAY NOT BE.
>> WE HAVE EIGHT ECOSYSTEMS. IT WOULD SEEM TO ME THAT THE COUNTY SHOULD DRIVE THAT, AND CAN WE HAVE THAT IN CONSIDERATION WHEN YOU BRING IT FORWARD AS YOU MOVE ALONG IN THIS PROCESS?
>> IF YOU'LL ALLOW ME AS WE GET DEEPER INTO THE OUTLINE, I'M GOING TO PRESENT VARIOUS CRITERIA THAT YOU'LL HAVE AT YOUR DISCRETION, SOME OF WHICH ARE, THERE'S POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE CRITERIA, AND THE NEGATIVE CRITERIA ARE ONES THAT ARE DISQUALIFYING.
IF YOU'RE PROPOSING IT IN THIS TYPE OF SITE, WELL, UNDER THE ORDINANCE, YOU WOULD NEED A WAIVER FROM THIS BOARD IN ORDER TO MOVE FORWARD AT THAT TYPE OF SITE.
BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY NAME SPECIFIC TYPES OF HABITAT IF WE WANTED TO DO THAT.
GETTING BACK TO INDUSTRIAL USES, THE SCALE JUST OVERWHELMS OUR INDUSTRIAL ZONE, SO REALLY, THIS IS AN RCU2. AS A USE PERMIT.
IT'S NOT A BUY RIGHT USE, AS I UNDERSTAND IT.
FOR TERMS OF USE BECAUSE THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ONE, 30 YEARS, THAT'S HOW LONG THIS USE, IF APPROVED, IF I WAS TO GET A USE PERMIT, THAT WOULD BE GOOD FOR 30 YEARS.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HEARD FROM THE INDUSTRY.
[01:20:02]
YOU HAVE DISCRETION.SOME MUNICIPALITIES CALL FOR 20 OR 25, AND THEN WE ALLOW FOR A 10-YEAR EXTENSION.
IT COULD BE, YOU MAY ASK, WHY NOT A COUPLE FIVE YEAR EXTENSIONS.
WHAT WE'RE JUST TRYING TO DO IS TO FOLLOW WHERE THE INDUSTRY IS TODAY.
AS WE KEEP READING, THAT THESE PANELS ARE BECOMING MORE EFFICIENT, AND MORE LONG LASTING THAN YESTER YEARS PRODUCT, AND SO WE WOULD EXPECT TO SEE THESE OUT ON THE LANDSCAPE A LOT LONGER.
WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE THAT REALITY ON THE GROUND.
>> I APPRECIATE THAT. JUST ONE MORE COMMENT, AND I'M SORRY TO HAVE TO KEEP INTERRUPTING YOU ON THAT, BUT IT'S NOT SO MUCH THE PRODUCT ITSELF AND HOW WONDERFUL IT IS.
IT IS THE BUSINESS THAT OWNS IT, AND IT'S PUTTING IT IN THERE.
IF THEY'RE NOT MANAGING IT WELL AND MAINTAINING IT IN A WAY THAT IT'S GOING TO NOT NEED TO BE DECOMMISSIONED BEFORE THIS TIME PERIOD.
GREAT. BUT WE DON'T HAVE A CONTROL OF THAT.
WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT WHO'S BRINGING IT TO US AND WHAT THEIR QUALITY STANDARDS OR LEADERSHIP OR MANAGEMENT OF THE COMPANY EVEN IS.
SOMEWHERE IN THERE, I WOULD THINK YOU'D HAVE TO HAVE A REVIEW ALONG THE WAY OF THAT 30 YEARS.
>> SUPERVISOR MICHAELS, I PROMISE YOU, WE WILL GET THERE.
BUT IT IS AN IMPORTANT POINT TO MAKE THAT THE APPLICANT THAT COMES FORWARD TO TODAY FOR A PROJECT MAY NOT BE THE COMPANY THAT, ACTUALLY, OWNS IT.
BUT YES, WE HAVE SUBSTANTIAL PROVISIONS REQUIRING A MAINTENANCE BECAUSE IT IS ALL ABOUT MAINTENANCE AND HOW THAT LOOKS, AND WHAT TOOLS THAT THIS BOARD HAS, IF YOU HAVE AN APPLICANT OR AN OPERATOR THAT'S NOT PERFORMING PER THE ORDINANCE AND PER THE DEVELOPER AGREEMENT.
OF COURSE, AS WITH ANY USE PERMIT, WE HAVE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION, THE PRELIMINARY MEETING, PRE-APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS, CONCEPT PLAN.
THEN WE GO WELL BEYOND WHAT A NORMAL USE PERMIT WOULD ENTAIL BECAUSE THIS IS A VERY DIFFERENT TYPE OF LAND USE THAT CAN BE MUCH MORE IMPACTFUL.
>> NOW, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COMMERCIAL AGAIN, PRIMARILY, WHAT IS THE INDUSTRY STANDARD FOR WHERE BREAK EVEN IS? IS 2,000 ACRES, 3,000, 4,000, 5,000, WHAT IS THAT? BECAUSE MAYBE WE ONLY WANT TO HAVE A LIMIT UP TO A CERTAIN POINT WHERE YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH SOME OF THE PORTION OR PROCESS TO ASK FOR MORE.
>> WE'VE DONE A LOT OF READING AND RESEARCH, AND WE'VE LOOKED AT OTHER ORDINANCES AND TALKED TO PEOPLE.
BUT ALSO IMPORTANTLY, WE'VE TALKED AT THE PROFESSIONALS REPRESENTING THE INDUSTRY.
THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC PORTION TODAY AND AT FUTURE HEARINGS WHERE I'M ABSOLUTELY SURE THEY'RE PAYING ATTENTION AND FOLLOWING ALONG TODAY, THAT I WOULD HOPE THAT THEY WOULD SPEAK TO WHAT THEY BELIEVE THEIR NEEDS ARE.
WE HAVE TWO NUMBERS, THE NUMBER IS, HOW MANY ACRES PER PROJECT, AND THAT'S 3,000.
NOW, IT'S IMPORTANT TO KEEP IN MIND THAT ONCE YOU START ADDING IN ALL OUR SETBACKS AND LANDSCAPING AND BUFFERS AND THE REALITY THAT IT'S HARD TO FIND A PROPERTY OF THAT SITE THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAVE CULTURAL OR ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES.
YOU HEARD TODAY A QUARTER OF A MILE FOR A MIGRATORY CORRIDOR.
IF ALL THAT IS TO PLAY ON YOUR SITE, THEN YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO WANT TO COME FORWARD WITH A MUCH BIGGER SITE BECAUSE YOUR USABLE AREA, YOUR PROJECT AREA, WHERE THE FOOTPRINT IS, IS GOING TO BE MUCH SMALLER THAN YOUR OVERALL PROJECT AREA.
THOSE ARE IMPORTANT THINGS AN APPLICANT WOULD NEED TO THINK ABOUT.
THEN IF THE AVERAGE SIZE IS 2,500-3,000 ACRES, THEN IF OUR CAP IS AT 8,000 ACRES, FOR ALL PROJECTS, AND THAT'S SOMETHING YOU CAN REVISIT.
THIS IS NEW TO US. IT'S NEW TO ME, IT'S NEW TO YOU, IT'S NEW TO THE COUNTY.
I THINK THE THOUGHT PROCESS COMING OUT OF THE JOINT SESSION WAS, LET'S WAIT AND SEE.
PILOT, MAYBE THIS BOARD APPROVES THE ORDINANCE AND SOME PROJECTS WIND UP GETTING APPROVED.
IF ALL GOES WELL, THEN MAYBE YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVISIT THE ORDINANCE AND INCREASE THE CAP, BECAUSE 3,000 ACRES, SO THAT'S ONLY ABOUT THREE PROJECTS IF THE CUT OFF IS 8,000 ACRES.
>> ARE THESE ALSO GOING TO BE ENCLOSED IN FENCING?
>> FENCING, THERE'S PERIMETER FENCING.
THERE'S A WIDE ASSORTMENT OF FENCING.
THE NEEDS OF WILDLIFE IS AN IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION.
PROBABLY THE ORDINANCE IS GOING TO LOOK AT FENCING A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A SUBSTATION OR A BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM WHERE SECURITY IS MORE OF AN ISSUE.
THERE'S ALSO, LANDSCAPING TREATMENTS.
WE WANT ATTRACTIVE FENCING, BUT WE CERTAINLY NEED TO ALLOW AND CONSULTATION WITH ARIZONA EFFICIENT GAME IS ACTUALLY BAKED INTO THE ORDINANCE BECAUSE STUFF GETS STALE REAL QUICK.
IF THEY COME OUT WITH A NEW STANDARD, THEN WE WANT AN APPLICANT TO BE FOLLOWING WITH THAT CURRENT STANDARD.
MOVING ON AND GOING BACKWARDS.
[01:25:04]
UNDER THE SECTION FOR USE PERMITS, APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS, AND EACH OF THESE ARE BIG SUBSECTIONS, BUT WE HAVE THE REPORT.AN APPLICANT HAS TO FURNISH A REPORT.
THERE'S A DEVELOPMENT PLAN WE SIGN OFF ON.
THERE'S A WILDLIFE PROTECTION PLAN.
AS WITH WILDLIFE PROTECTION PLAN, CULTURAL RESOURCES PLAN, THESE ARE ALL GOING TO ACTUALLY BE INFORMED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PROCESS, WHERE BEFORE THEY SUBMIT AN APPLICATION, THEY'RE GOING TO BE REQUIRED TO CONDUCT A SITE INVESTIGATION THAT'S BASICALLY ASSESSING, WHAT ARE THE RESOURCES ON THE GROUND WILDLIFE, CULTURAL, ARCHAEOLOGICAL.
WHAT ARE THE EFFECTS ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES? IF YOU HAVE A NATIONAL MONUMENT ADJACENT.
YOU WOULDN'T WANT TO PUT THIS IN FRONT OF GRANITE MOUNTAIN.
WE'RE GOING TO REQUIRE THE APPLICANT TO DO THAT ANALYSIS FOR US.
WE DON'T HAVE THE STAFFING OR CAPACITY.
WE'RE GOING TO BE RELYING ON THEM TO BE FURNISHING THIS STUFF.
IN SOME CASES, IF THEY DO A DESKTOP STUDY AND YOU HAVE A PROPERTY WHERE THERE IS DOCUMENTATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES, THEN WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO REQUIRE A PHASE 3.
NOW THEY ACTUALLY HAVE TO GO ON THE GROUND AND QUALIFY AND REALLY QUANTIFY WHAT'S THERE, SO THAT WE'RE BEING PROTECTIVE OF THOSE RESOURCES IF THAT PROJECT MOVES FORWARD.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, WE ALREADY REQUIRE IT.
THE VISUAL IMPACT ANALYSIS THAT WAS LANGUAGE THAT ACTUALLY CAME FROM THE COCONINO MODEL.
GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF BUFFERS AND SETBACKS THAT WE'RE GOING TO REQUIRE, THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME FLEXIBILITY AND GIVE AND TAKE ON THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE NATURAL HABITAT AS A BUFFER.
IF I WAS A SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, I'D BE BURNING IT, I'D BE LANDSCAPING, PUTTING BIG TREES AND IRRIGATING IT.
SOME OF THIS MAY NOT BE NECESSARY, SO THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME DISCRETION THERE.
PUBLIC SAFETY, FIRE, EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT. THAT'S A BIG ISSUE.
WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM APS AND IN OUR RESEARCH IS THAT, GENERALLY, THE PANELS ARE NOT SO MUCH FLAMMABLE AS ALL THE ELECTRIC, LIKE THE WIRING, THE CONDUITS, THE WIRES, AND THINGS LIKE THIS.
THERE, AGAIN, IF YOU HAVE A PROJECT PROPOSED IN A FIRE PRONE AREA, WE KNOW, DESERT CHAPARRAL IS FIRE ADAPTED.
WE HAVE TO TAKE THOSE CONSIDERATIONS.
IF WE'RE NEAR HIGHWAY, A TRIP UP AND DOWN I-17, AND ANY OF US WILL KNOW WHEN THE TRAFFIC STOPS, THAT'S A FIRE PRONE AREA. IT GENERATES FIRE.
WE WANT TO THINK ABOUT APPROPRIATE LOCATION AND SIGHTING AND THEN BUFFERING FROM AREAS THAT ARE FIRE PRONE.
WE'RE STILL WAITING TO HEAR FROM PUBLIC WORKS, BUT WE HAVE A WHOLE ROBUST SECTION OF THE ORDINANCE THAT TALKS ABOUT THE ANALYSIS THAT AN APPLICANT NEEDS TO DO TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE NOT CREATING ADDITIONAL IMPACTS.
REALLY, THE IMPACTS ARE GOING TO HAPPEN.
THEY TEND TO BE A FAIRLY QUIET OPERATION ONCE THEY'RE BUILT DURING THE LIFETIME OF THE PROJECT.
IT'S REALLY THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE, WHERE WE'RE GOING TO SEE IMPACTS AND THEN THE DECOMMISSIONING.
AIRPORT STUDIES, IF NECESSARY, REALLY, THE LANGUAGE TALKS TO WHATEVER THE FAA STANDARDS MAY BE.
I THINK WHAT WE'RE STARTING TO FIND IS WE'RE PLAYING UP WITH WHERE THE INDUSTRY IS TODAY, THAT THESE TWO USES CAN BE COMPATIBLE.
THAT IS, PANELS APPROXIMATE TO AIRPORTS.
LAND USE IMPACTS AND MITIGATION.
IT'S GOING TO BE HARD TO IMAGINE THE PERFECT SITE, ANY SITE IS GOING TO HAVE RESOURCES THAT WE'RE GOING TO LOOK TO ASK THE APPLICANT TO ANALYZE AND MITIGATE TO REDUCE IMPACTS.
THE DECOMMISSIONING PLAN, THAT WAS REALLY THE GENESIS OF ALL THIS.
AGAIN, TODAY, AN APPLICANT COULD COME FORWARD RIGHT NOW FOR A USE PERMIT, BUT WE REALLY WANTED TO TEASE OUT THE DECOMMISSIONING SIDE OF THINGS.
ONE THING I'LL JUST NOTE THAT WAS SOMEWHAT DISHEARTENING IS THE REALIZATION THAT TODAY, RIGHT NOW, WHEN A SOLAR FACILITY DECOMMISSIONED, CERTAINLY, A LOT OF THE METALS AND MATERIALS LIKE THAT, THE COPPER AND STUFF THAT'S GOING TO BE RECYCLED, REPURPOSED.
BUT THE ACTUAL PANELS THEMSELVES, FROM WHAT I'M READING, AND I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR, OTHERWISE, FROM THE INDUSTRY, REALLY ONLY ABOUT 5% IS CURRENTLY RECYCLED BECAUSE IT'S JUST FAR CHEAPER TO INTUNE THAT IN THE LANDFILL THAN TO RECYCLE IT.
IT'S ONLY 5%. WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT THE APPLICANT, THE OPERATOR IS GOING TO BE REQUIRED TO INTUNE THAT INTO A SPECIAL CELL IN A LANDFILL.
THERE'S A LOT OF CHEMICALS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PANELS, CADMIUM, OTHER MATERIALS, LED.
BUT AGAIN, AS IT'S ENCASED IN GLASS OR PLEXIGLASS IN THAT COATING MATERIAL FOR THE LIFETIME OF THE PANELS, THAT THOSE CONTAMINANTS AREN'T REALLY MOBILIZED IN THE ENVIRONMENT.
>> THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENS WHEN IT'S NOT DECOMMISSIONED PROPERLY, AND THE ODOR OR WHOMEVER WALKS AWAY FROM IT, AND IT'S LEFT OUT THERE IN THE FIELD, AND THAT IS HAPPENING.
WE HAVE TO BE VERY DILIGENT BECAUSE WE'VE
[01:30:02]
GOT ENOUGH TOXIC MATERIALS IN OUR SOIL AND IN OUR WATER, AND WE REALLY NEED TO SPEAK TO IT DIRECTLY, I THINK, IN OUR ORDINANCE.>> I THINK WE DO THAT, BUT WE'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM YOU TO MAKE SURE WE'RE DOING ENOUGH.
>> MATT, WHAT WE REQUIRE A BOND WHICH WOULD COVER THE CLEANUP OF THE COST IF LET'S SAY THAT SOLAR COMPANY WENT BANKRUPT?
>> THAT COST WOULD COVER EVERYTHING TO BRING IT BACK TO ITS ORIGINAL STATE.
>> THIS IS ALL BEING SET UP AS A LEGAL DOCUMENT TO GIVE YOU THE COUNTY RECOURSE TO GO AFTER A NON-PERFORMING APPLICANT OR WHEN THINGS DON'T HAPPEN AS PROMISED.
>> WHO'S GOING TO DO THE ESTIMATE ON THE BONDING? WHO'S GOING TO ACTUALLY DO IT AND SAY, WHAT'S IT GOING TO COST 10 YEARS FROM NOW TO REMOVE ALL OF THIS EQUIPMENT?
>> THAT'S BAKED INTO THE PROCESS, AND APPLICANT'S GOING TO BE REQUIRED TO FURNISH THAT INFORMATION, AND THAT INFORMATION CAN BE CROSS EXAMINED.
I THINK ONCE I GET TO THAT SECTION, I'LL HAVE BETTER LANGUAGE THAN WHAT I HAVE IN MY MEMORY THAT CAN COVER IT.
WE'LL REVISIT THAT IN A MOMENT OR MAYBE A FEW MOMENTS.
WE'RE STILL ON THE USE PERMIT ASPECT OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE, SPECIAL LAND USE CONSIDERATIONS.
OF COURSE, THERE'S TRANSMISSION LINES, ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT.
THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS PRIOR TO ISSUING PERMITS, THAT STANDARD WAIVER REQUIREMENTS.
IT'S HARD TO IMAGINE, AGAIN, SCALE AND THE RESOURCES ON THE GROUND IN THIS TREMENDOUS COUNTY THAT WE HAVE THAT AN APPLICANT IS GOING TO BE AVAILABLE TO AVOID ANY ADVERSE IMPACTS OR TO MITIGATE AND REDUCE THEM.
THERE ARE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES.
FOR EXAMPLE, ON THE ONE HAND, WE REALLY WANT TO CITE THESE CLOSE TO HIGHWAYS AND HIGHWAY INTERCHANGES, AND TRANSMISSION LINES, AND SUBSTATIONS.
ON THE ONE HAND, WE WANT THEM NEAR THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT, BUT WE DON'T WANT THEM TOO CLOSE TO OUR HOUSES.
YOU MIGHT HAVE A PERFECT SITE, AND IT MIGHT BE PRIME PRONGHORN HABITAT.
THERE'S GOING TO BE A GIVE AND TAKE WITH THIS TYPE OF PROJECT.
THERE'S THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY AND THE APPLICANT.
IMPORTANT TO NOTE THERE IS AN ANNUAL COMPLIANCE REPORT.
THEY'RE GOING TO BE REPORTING TO US EVERY YEAR.
THAT'S OUR OPPORTUNITY TO SAY, WHAT ABOUT THIS? YOU DIDN'T COVER THAT.
WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE TO CREATE A TEMPLATE OF EVERYTHING THAT WE WANT TO SEE.
THERE WILL BE SOME WORK AHEAD OF US IF THIS ORDINANCE GETS APPROVED.
BUT THEN, IF SOMETHING ISN'T RIGHT AND YOU SEND THEM BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD TO FURNISH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, AGAIN, THIS IS WHERE YOU HAD THESE LEVERS IN THE ORDINANCE FOR RECOURSE AND INTERVENTION.
>> THAT CERTAINLY PUTS ME MUCH MORE AT EASE WITH THAT 30-YEAR WINDOW OF OPERATION. THANK YOU FOR THAT.
>> MANY OF US WILL BE GONE BY THEN, AND IT'LL PROBABLY BE A DIFFERENT OPERATOR, MAYBE NOT.
FIRE SAFETY EQUIPMENT PROVISION.
I WOULD JUST NOTE THAT APS ALSO HAS THEIR OWN PROVISIONS AND STANDARDS.
WE'RE NOT THE ONLY REGULATING ENTITY THAT IS INVOLVED IN THIS.
>> I DON'T BELIEVE WE'VE HEARD FROM THEM YET.
>> SRP. HAVE WE HEARD FROM THEM YET?
>> SO WE'LL MAKE A NO TO REACH BACK OUT.
BUT WE ACTUALLY MET WITH APS, BUT IT WAS AFTER WE COLLECTED THE COMMENT PERIOD.
SO AGAIN, THE COMMENTS ARE ONGOING, SO PROBABLY THE NEXT TIME YOU HEAR FROM US, YOU MIGHT GET TO HEAR ABOUT SOME OF THE THINGS THAT APS SAID.
WE DID SIT DOWN WITH THEM, BUT WE ASKED THEM TO FURNISH THEIR COMMENTS IN WRITTEN FORM SO WE CAN LOOK AT THEM.
AGAIN, THESE ARE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE ITEMS THAT ARE REQUIRED AS PART OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
SOME OF THESE TOPICS, I'M GOING TO TOUCH ON A BIT MORE IN DEPTH AS WE GO DEEPER INTO THE ORDINANCE.
THERE'S THE REVIEW AND RECALCULATION OF DECOMMISSIONING COST.
RECALCULATION, LET ME GET TO THAT BECAUSE I'VE GOT A GOOD SLIDE FOR THAT.
FINANCIAL ASSURANCE PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE, TERMINATION OF THE USE PERMIT, IF FINANCIAL ASSURANCE IS REVOKED.
AGAIN, THIS GOES TO YOUR LEVERS, WHERE THE COUNTY CAN INTERCEDE IF THERE'S AN ISSUE, THE LIABILITY INSURANCE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CARRY.
THIRD PARTY REVIEW AND MONITORING AT APPLICANTS COSTS.
THAT OLD PHRASE, WE'VE ALL HEARD THE FOLKS GUARDING THE HEN HOUSE.
SOME OF THESE THINGS, WE MIGHT ALL FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE IF IT'S AN INDEPENDENT EXPERT DOING FURNISHING CERTAIN REVIEWS.
90-DAY NOTICE FOR CHANGE OF OWNER OPERATOR.
WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO HAVE NOTICE IF SOMETHING CHANGES AND THE REQUIREMENT THAT NEW PARTIES, OF COURSE, ARE GOING TO BE OBLIGATED TO ALL OF THE SAME REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE ORDINANCE, THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT, ETC.
NOW WE GET TO THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, SECTION OF THE ORDINANCE.
THERE'S LOCATION CONSIDERATIONS, THERE'S DIMENSIONS.
[01:35:05]
THIS IS A SNAPSHOT, I'M NOT COVERING ANYTHING.I THINK WE'VE ALREADY SPOKEN AT LENGTH ABOUT THE MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT AREA.
THAT MEANS IF I'M A SMART APPLICANT AND I KNOW THAT I'VE PICKED A PROPERTY THAT HAS RESOURCES ON THE GROUND, I'M PROBABLY NOT GOING TO COME BEFORE YOU WITH A PROPERTY WITH A PROPOSAL THAT'S AT 3,000 ACRES.
I'M GOING TO COME TO YOU WITH A PROPERTY THAT'S MUCH BIGGER BECAUSE UNDOUBTEDLY, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO BE BUFFERING ACRES.
I'M GOING TO BE LOSING SOME OF THAT ACREAGE TO PROTECTIONS AND SCREENING AND WHATNOT.
REALLY, WE'RE JUST SAYING THE BUILDABLE AREA, THE FOOTPRINT OF THE IMPROVEMENTS, IS 3,000 ACRES, CUMULATIVE, 8,000.
THESE ARE NUMBERS I WOULD ASK YOU TO THINK ABOUT BECAUSE WE'RE LOOKING FOR YOUR FEEDBACK.
ARE THESE THE RIGHT NUMBERS? THAT DOESN'T NEED TO BE DECIDED HERE TODAY, BUT THEY'RE IMPORTANT NUMBERS, NONETHELESS.
WE CERTAINLY HEARD FROM INDUSTRY GROUPS THAT WANT TO KNOW WHY WE HAVE A GAP.
THERE CERTAINLY SEEMS TO BE A HECK OF A LOT MORE DEMAND OUT THERE THAN 8,000 ACRES, BUT THAT'S THEIR CONSIDERATION.
>> AGAIN, WE NEED THE VARIABLES TO BE INFORMED IN WHAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND, THE CONTEXT OF THAT WITH WHAT IS AVAILABLE, WHAT DOES THAT ENVIRONMENT LOOK LIKE? THAT SHOULD DRIVE SOME OF THE DECISION ABOUT HOW BIG, HOW MUCH.
>> WELL, IT'S INTERESTING, SUPERVISOR MICHAELS, BECAUSE THE INDUSTRY DEMAND IS SURGING RIGHT NOW.
COMING FROM NEW JERSEY, I REMEMBER A TIME WHERE OFFICERLY USE WAS SURGING AND THEY ALLOWED THAT USE AT EVERY INTERCHANGE, AND WE'RE STILL 25 YEARS LATER LOOKING AT ABANDONED OFFICE BUILDING.
YOU TRY TO MEET THE DEMAND AND MAYBE YOU OVERSHOOT.
IT'S REALLY LIKE THE MAMA BEARS PORRIDGE WITH THIS THING.
WHAT'S THE RIGHT FIT FOR YOU AT THIS TIME? YOU CAN ALWAYS REVISIT YOUR ORDINANCE.
THIS STUFF IS REALLY IMPORTANT AND, OF COURSE, OUR NEIGHBORS, THE MUNICIPALITIES, ARE IMPORTANT.
THIS WOULD REQUIRE MORE THAN ONE MILE FROM AN INCORPORATED TOWN OR CITY LIMITS, SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO PARK SOMETHING LIKE THIS NEXT TO MUNICIPALITY.
WHO KNOWS WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS WITH ANNEXATIONS? IT'S NOT JUST ACCOMMODATING THE ISSUES, BUT YOU HAVE TO THINK FORWARD ABOUT HOW OTHER LAND USES ARE GOING TO GROW AND EXPAND AND CHANGE OVER THEIR LIFETIME.
YOU WANT TO BE STRATEGIC ABOUT, SOME USES ARE JUST MORE IDEAL FOR RESIDENTIAL AND REALLY THINKING ABOUT PROPER LAND USE TAILORED TO THE PROPER SITE.
MORE THAN A MILE FROM AIRPORTS.
I THINK WE'VE HEARD SOME COMMENTS FROM ACA THAT MAYBE THE INDUSTRY HAS MOVED ON SINCE THEN AND THERE'S MORE OF AN APPETITE FOR LOCATING SOLAR PROXIMATE TO AIRPORTS.
THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING WE'LL LOOK AT.
AGAIN, THERE ARE FAA STANDARDS.
WE'RE NOT QUITE IN THIS ALONE, THERE ARE OTHER ENTITIES THAT REVIEW AND HAVE THEIR OWN REGULATIONS.
STILL IN PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, LOCATIONAL DIMENSIONS CONSIDERED PREFERRED SITES.
THIS IS WHERE THE BOARD HAS DISCRETION.
THIS ISN'T A HARD LINE IN THE SENSE THAT THESE ARE THINGS THAT ORDINANCE IS SAYING TO THE BOARD, WE WANT YOU TO THINK ABOUT THESE THINGS AS FAR AS THE TYPE OF SITES, BUT WHAT WE'RE NOT SAYING IS THEY HAVE TO MEET ALL OF THESE OR THREE OF THESE.
IT'S NOT LIKE A CHECKLIST TO CHECK OFF IN THAT SENSE, BUT THESE ARE THE TYPES OF SITES THAT WE CERTAINLY ARE ENCOURAGING OUR APPLICANTS TO LOOK FOR, AND THE BOARD TO BE THINKING ABOUT WHEN THEY COME FORWARD WITH THE SITE THAT MIGHT BE IN A DOUGHNUT HOLE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NATIONAL FOREST.
WHY DIDN'T YOU THINK ABOUT THIS LIST? CERTAINLY, PREVIOUSLY USED SITES THAT ARE CHALLENGING FOR REUSE, BROWNFIELDS, MINE SITES, WE'VE GOT A LOT OF THOSE, HIGHLY DISTURBED AND DEGRADED SITES.
NOT ALL GRASSLANDS ARE CREATED EQUAL, WE HAVE SOME WONDERFUL GRASSLANDS IN CHINO VALLEY.
WE HAVE OTHER AREAS THAT ARE PRETTY HAMPERED, NOT THE BEST SOILS ALREADY FRAGMENTED THAT MIGHT VERY WELL BE APPROPRIATE.
LOW RESOURCE VALUE, MEANING THERE'S CRITICAL HABITAT WHERE THE BALD EAGLE NEST IS.
THEN THERE'S A HABITAT THAT MAYBE IT'S A PLAIN THAT'S LARGELY DEVOID OF VEGETATION EXCEPT FOR CREOSOTE.
THAT'S WHERE WE ACTUALLY SEE A LOT OF THESE GOING AND THOSE TYPES OF, SOME PEOPLE MIGHT CHARACTERIZE IT AS A WASTE LAND, BUT I CERTAINLY WOULDN'T. IT'S ALL HABITAT.
LET'S SEE. THE ABILITY TO RETAIN TRADITIONAL USES.
WE'RE SEEING A LOT NOW IN THE MARKETPLACE OF THINGS LIKE GRAZING AND HERBIVORY AND AGRICULTURE ACTUALLY HAPPENING IN CONCERT WITH SOLAR PANELS, INSTEAD OF PEOPLE GOING OUT AND BRUSH-HUGGING THE VEGETATION.
UNDER THE PANELS, YOU ACTUALLY HAVE DIFFERENT TYPES OF GRAZING.
ONE OF THE CONCERNS IS GOING TO BECOME BECAUSE WE ARE IN A FIRE PRONE STATE.
WE DON'T WANT TO BE ENCOURAGING FIRE UNDER THE PANELS OR IN OUR SOLAR FACILITIES.
IT'LL BE UP TO APS WE'RE WAITING TO HEAR BACK FROM, WHETHER OR NOT WE COULD EVEN ALLOW FOR NATURAL VEGETATION, WHICH WOULD BE THE IDEAL UNDER THE PANELS TO HAVE A MORE NATURALISTIC USE,
[01:40:01]
OR WHETHER IT'S JUST GOING TO BE SOMETHING LIKE CRUSH STONE AND MUCH MORE VISUALLY OF AN INDUSTRIAL NATURE.WAITING TO HEAR ON THAT FEEDBACK, MINIMIZING VISUAL IMPACTS.
AGAIN, PUTTING THIS UP AGAINST MINGUS MOUNTAIN OR GRANITE MOUNTAIN, YOU KNOW, MAY NOT BE THE BEST LOCATION FROM THE VISUAL STANDPOINT, THINGS WE TAKE PRIDE IN.
BUT NEAR HIGHWAYS, INDUSTRIAL AREAS, OTHER SOLAR FACILITIES LIKE USES, PUTTING THEM TOGETHER, SUBSTATIONS TRANSMISSION LINES, THESE ARE ALL GOOD AREAS TO CONSIDER WHEN REVIEWING AN APPLICATION.
RESTRICTED SITES. THESE ARE PROHIBITED.
THESE ARE THE DO-NOT-PASS GO LIST.
MAY BE THAT WE WANT TO TEASE THESE OUT, SO THEY'RE A LITTLE BIT MORE DESCRIPTIVE AND NOT SO BROAD UMBRELLA.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I WANT TO LOOK AT MORE, BUT FOR RESTRICTED SITES, HARMFUL TO IMPORTANT LOCAL COUNTY AND STATE RESOURCES.
I THINK WE COULD ALL COME UP WITH A LIST VERY QUICKLY OF WHAT THOSE SITES ARE, BUT WE MIGHT WANT TO TEASE THEM OUT.
SITES CONFLICTING WITH WILDLIFE VEGETATION AREAS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
WHAT THAT MEANS IS, WHEN THE APPLICANT DOES THEIR PRELIMINARY SITE INVESTIGATION AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PROCESS BEFORE THEY SUBMIT AN APPLICATION, THEY'RE GOING TO DO THAT DESKTOP STUDY.
THERE'S LOTS OF GOOD MAPPING AND DESIGNATIONS THAT THE STATE HAS ALREADY DONE FOR US THAT WE CAN LOOK TO SO THAT WE CAN DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT IS THIS SOME PRIME HABITAT FOR SOME ENDANGERED SPECIES OR IS IT JUST JUST HABITAT, BUT WE'VE GOT A LOT OF IT AND IT'S NOT CRITICAL? SCENIC SITES, VIEWSHEDS, UNIQUE TOPOGRAPHY.
WE'VE GOT A LOT OF TOPOGRAPHY, RIGHT UP TO SOMETHING LIKE 7,000 FEET STEEP SLOPES OFTEN AN ISSUE FOR MANY TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT.
HERITAGE OR CULTURAL SIGNIFICANT SITES.
WE HAVE SO MANY OF THESE IN THE COUNTY THAT HAVE BEEN MISTREATED IN THE PAST, AND WE WANT TO DO A BETTER JOB ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT THESE AREAS GET PROTECTED AS DEVELOPMENT MOVES FORWARD IN CERTAIN AREAS.
SITES REQUIRING SIGNIFICANT GRADING.
WE ACTUALLY GET INTO SPECIFICITY OF GRADING, NOT ANYTHING ABOVE 10%.
IS THAT THE RIGHT NUMBER? WE'LL LOOK FOR YOUR FEEDBACK, BUT THAT IS WHAT WE THINK TO BE THE INDUSTRY STANDARD.
AGAIN, WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE GOING TO ALLOW FOR GRASSES TO GROW OR IT'S GOING TO BE A MARTIAN LANDSCAPE OF CRUSHED STONE BECAUSE OF THE FIRE ISSUES AND JUST THE COST OF MAINTENANCE.
I DON'T THINK YOU WOULD WANT TO PUT THIS IN THE MIDDLE OF A FORESTED AREA BECAUSE THAT AREA IS GOING TO BE COMPLETELY CLEAR CUT AND DEVOID OF VEGETATION WHEN IT'S DONE.
THESE WILL BECOME INDUSTRIAL SITES, PROBABLY BEYOND 30 YEARS.
FLOODPLAINS, RIPARIAN AREAS, THAT'S A NO BRAINER, DON'T GO THERE.
WE'RE STILL ON PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.
SETBACKS. WE HAVE SETBACKS FROM DWELLINGS AND RESIDENTIAL AREAS, COMMERCIAL, PARKLAND, AREAS THAT ARE ZONED FOR THESE USES OR WHERE YOU HAVE OTHERWISE HAVE HOUSES.
INDUSTRIAL ZONING OF 500 FEET.
AGAIN, NOT BECAUSE THESE USES DON'T GO WELL TOGETHER, BUT WE MAY WANT TO GROW THAT INDUSTRIAL AREA.
IT MAY BE A TRANSFER STATION LIKE A WAREHOUSE, SO I DON'T WANT TO SEE STRATEGIC GROUND NECESSARILY FOR UTILITY SCALE SOLAR.
WE MAY HAVE OTHER BETTER USES FOR STRATEGIC PROPERTIES.
BODIES OF WATER, FEMA, FLOODPLAINS, ETC.
MIGRATORY WILDLIFE ASIDE, THIS TENDS TO BE THE HABITAT WHERE EVERYTHING WANTS TO BE, WHETHER IT'S MOVING THROUGH OR NESTING, YOUR SONGBIRDS AND STUFF.
ANYBODY WHO HIKES IN THESE AREAS SEES THE FOOTPRINTS.
RIPARIAN AREAS ARE THE LIFEBLOOD OF THE COUNTY.
WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THESE PROTECTED.
GRANITE MOUNTAIN WILDERNESS, A NATIONAL MONUMENT.
TO PARK SOMETHING LIKE THIS UP AGAINST THAT, WE WOULD RECOMMEND SOMETHING LIKE 1,000 FOOT BUFFER IN THOSE AREAS.
FEDERALLY MANAGED LANDS, 500 FEET, SO THERE IS A DISTINCTION.
>> YOU WANT TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE TO NOT JUST FEDERAL, BUT ALSO STATE LANDS.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT COMMENT.
THIS IS ONE WE'VE STRUGGLED FROM AND WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR FEEDBACK BECAUSE ON THE ONE HAND, PEOPLE RECREATE ON STATE LANDS, BUT AS WE JUST HEARD AT THE LAND USE LAW WORKSHOP LAST WEEK FROM A PANELIST OF STATE LAND SUPERVISORS IS THAT THEY ARE THE BIGGEST DEVELOPERS IN NEW JERSEY.
THAT'S HOW THEY SEE THEMSELVES.
WE'RE ALREADY SEEING, IN YAVAPAI AND ELSEWHERE IN THE STATE, THAT SOLAR FIELD DEVELOPERS ARE LEASING AND/OR ACQUIRING STATE LANDS FOR SOLAR.
THEY ARE VULNERABLE LANDS, THEY ARE A PURPOSED FOR DEVELOPMENT, UNLESS THEY'RE OTHERWISE PRESERVED, SUCH AS WHAT HAPPENED AT GLASSFORD HILL AND THE DELLS.
[01:45:01]
BUT WE SHOULD NOT LOOK AT THE STATE LANDS AS PUBLIC LANDS BECAUSE THE END USE IS QUITE DIFFERENT.THAT'S REALLY USING THEIR OWN DEFINITION THAT THEY'VE ASKED US TO USE.
BUT TO IDENTIFY, CERTAINLY WE HAVE STATE LANDS WITHIN YAVAPAI COUNTY.
WE'VE GOT 25% OF THE LAND AREA, WHICH IS A MASSIVE AMOUNT OF AREA.
I THINK SOME ARE APPROPRIATE FOR DEVELOPMENT TO BE SURE, I THINK OTHERS ARE CALLING OUT FOR PROTECTION, SO MAYBE WE DO WANT TO TEASE OUT SOME GREATER SENSITIVITY THAT DON'T TREAT ALL STATE LANDS EQUAL.
SOME OF THEM MAY HAVE A HIGHER PURPOSE AND A CONSERVATION VALUE.
>> PLEASE NOTE IT, AT LEAST FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, I ALSO JUST WANT TO KEEP OPEN THAT DEGREE OF BUFFER, 1,000 FEET, WHATEVER. I THINK WE HAVE TO LOOK AT BEING FLEXIBLE WITH THAT AS WELL.
IN SOME CASES, MAYBE THAT'S AN OKAY BUFFER.
IN OTHER CASES, MAYBE WE WANT TO REVISIT THAT AND SAY, IT'S NOT.
MAYBE WE WANT MORE THAN 1,000 WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT OPEN SPACES, RECREATIONAL FACILITIES, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE SOME PURVIEW ON THAT.
>> I AM OPEN TO THAT SUGGESTION.
STILL IN THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, UTILITY SCALE SOLAR.
SETBACKS ALSO INCLUDES RAVINES, CANYONS, WELL-DEFINED DRAINAGE FEATURES.
AGAIN, THESE ARE YOUR HIGHWAYS FOR WILDLIFE, ALSO FOR RECREATIONAL USES, AREAS THAT MAY ONE DAY BECOME PROTECTED 500 FEET.
ON THE ONE HAND, WE'RE SAYING, DON'T BUILD ON HILLSIDES AND STEEP SLOPES ABOVE A GRADE OF 10%, BUT WE ALSO WANT TO BUFFER THEM BECAUSE THAT TENDS TO BE AN AREA WHERE YOU HAVE A LOT OF WILDLIFE ACTIVITY.
IT'S NOT JUST THE HILL, BUT THE AREA IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO IT.
CULTURALLY SIGNIFICANT SITES, 500 FEET. IS THAT ADEQUATE? I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE BOARD ON THAT ONE.
AGAIN, THIS IS NOT SETTING STONE.
BUT WE DID LOOK AT LOTS OF OTHER ORDINANCES AND OTHER AREAS.
I CAN TELL YOU, A LOT OF THOUGHT WENT INTO THESE NUMBERS.
THIS IS ALMOST ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF THE ORDINANCE BEYOND THE DECOMMISSIONING PIECE.
STREETS RIGHT OF WAYS LINE, HIGHWAY, INTERSTATE, 300 FEET.
WE'VE HEARD FROM SOME OF THE INDUSTRY GROUPS THAT THEY WANTED 150.
WE STARTED OUT AT 500, WE'RE AT THREE.
I THINK WHAT'S COME TO LIGHT MORE RECENTLY IS JUST THE GREATER AWARENESS OF, ON THE ONE HAND, YOU MIGHT WANT THESE NEAR HIGHWAYS, BUT THEY CAN BE THE VISUAL GATEWAY INTO THE COUNTY.
AT THE SAME TIME, THEY SEEM TO BE FIRE PRONE AREAS.
LOOK AT ALL THE FIRES WE'RE HAVING ACROSS THE HIGHWAYS AND THE POTENTIAL DANGER TO HEALTH AND SAFETY.
WE SEE THAT AT 17, A GOOD DEAL.
I WONDER ABOUT WHETHER THAT'S ENOUGH OR NOT.
>> THAT MIGHT BE AN AREA WHERE WE WANT TO HEAR FROM APS AND A PRESUMPTIVE APPLICANTS OR THE INDUSTRIES, THE GROUPS THAT MIGHT WANT TO PROVIDE COMMENT.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT NUMBER IS, BUT 300 SHOULD BE THE MINIMUM FROM MY STANDPOINT. LET'S SEE.
FRONT, REAR SIDE, EXTERIOR, 100 FEET.
THIS MIGHT BE FROM A DIRT ROAD, 100 FEET.
YOUR HEIGHT LIMITS, WE TALKED ABOUT, AGAIN, INDUSTRIAL SCALES SOLAR, 15 FEET.
ALL OTHER STRUCTURES, MAXIMUM HEIGHT.
THESE ARE YOUR ACCESSORY BUILDINGS AND WHATNOT, YOUR STORAGE SHEDS, EQUIPMENT HOUSES, YOUR GUARD HOUSE.
THERE PROBABLY WILL BE PEOPLE PRESENT ON THE LAND WITH PROJECTS OF THIS SIZE.
SOMEBODY PROBABLY IS UNDOUBTEDLY GOING TO BE LIVING OUT THERE FOR SECURITY PURPOSES, WHICH IS ACTUALLY A GOOD THING, I THINK.
SO 35 FEET COMMENSURATE WITH OUR ORDINANCE PERFORMANCE STANDARD CONTINUED.
ALMOST DONE WITH THIS SECTION.
THERE'S PROBABLY A GIVE OR TAKE HERE.
IF I HAVE A PROJECT THAT I'VE GOT A RIVER COURSE THAT RUNS THROUGH IT, AND I'VE GOT 500 FEET FROM EITHER EDGE, I MAY HAVE MORE THAN ADEQUATELY PROVIDED A MUCH BIGGER BUFFER, EXCEPT ANTELOPE USED DIFFERENT TYPES OF HABITAT SO IT DEPENDS.
I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS THE RIGHT NUMBER.
TODAY, WE HEARD SOME TESTIMONY THAT MAYBE IT'S NOT ENOUGH AT LEAST WHERE CRITICAL PRONGHORN AND ELK ARE CONCERNED.
THAT'S WHY WE'RE GOING TO REQUIRE THEM TO CONSULT WITH GAME AND FISH, BECAUSE IF THEY COME OUT AND THEY SAY SOMETHING STRONGLY OF CONCERN THAT THAT'S GOING TO HAVE WEIGHT ON YOUR DELIBERATION.
GROUND COVER VEGETATION PRESERVATION OF COURSE, WE WANT THAT IN ALL THE LANDSCAPING AND ALL THE BUFFER AREAS.
WE DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT BEING BULLDOZE.
BUT WHAT HAPPENS UNDER THE ACTUAL PANELS IS STILL AN OPEN QUESTION FOR THIS ORDINANCE, WE'RE WAITING FOR FEEDBACK.
[01:50:01]
EROSION CONTROL, SEEDING, NATIVE RE-VEGETATION.OF COURSE, WE WANT TO USE NATIVE PLANTS.
IT'S ACTUALLY VERY HARD TO RESTORE DESERT LANDSCAPES TO THEIR FORMER ECOLOGICAL STATUS.
FACILITY DESIGN, MAINTENANCE, MINIMIZE GRADING.
ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS LOOK AT SOME OF THE DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE TAKING PLACE IN THE COUNTY TO REALIZE THAT GRADING HAS A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE VIEWSHED, AND WHAT HAPPENS AFTER.
WE WANT TO PRESERVE THE UNIQUE LANDSCAPES OF THE COUNTY.
NOW WE GET TO SCREENING, STILL IN PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, RELIEF FROM GROUND LEVEL VIEWING.
REALLY, IT'S HARD NOT TO MISS THESE FACILITIES, DEPENDING ON WHERE YOU ARE.
WE'VE GOT A HILLY LANDSCAPE AND THEY'RE BIG PRODUCTS.
REALLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS SCREENING AT THE GROUND LEVEL.
IF YOU'RE ON THE HIGHWAY, WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE MIX OF SCREENING? ARE WE TALKING ABOUT COMPLETELY SCREENING THEM OUT? WELL, MAYBE NOT. BUT IT'S NOT THE DOMINATING FEATURE WHEN YOU DRIVE ACROSS THE LANDSCAPE.
WE WANT TO PRESERVE EXISTING VEGETATION TO THE EXTENT THAT WE CAN, PARTICULARLY WOODY SPECIES, TOPOGRAPHY, OPEN SPACE.
OF COURSE, WE WANT A GOOD MIX OF VEGETATION.
WE DON'T WANT A MONO CROP OF SOMEBODY JUST WENT OUT AND PLANTED GRASSES AFTER THEY LEFT, AND THEN THEY BURNED.
BERMING CAN BE A VERY EFFECTIVE TOOL, SO THAT WOULD BE PART OF THE MIX.
IT'S ACTUALLY GOOD TO HAVE A MIX OF FENCING, OF BERMS AND WOODY SPECIES TO INTERRUPT THE MONOTONY OF YOUR SCREENING.
BES FACILITY THAT'S BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM FACILITIES AND SUBSTATIONS.
JUST KNOW THAT THESE ARE ALSO PART OF THE ORDINANCE.
TRY TO FIND ME A LARGE SCALE SOLAR TODAY THAT DOESN'T NEED THESE.
THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE ONE PARKED ON THEIR PROPERTY, AND THEN APS MIGHT HAVE ONE RIGHT AT THE DOORSTEP BECAUSE THERE'S A PARTNERSHIP THERE, INTER CONNECTIVITY THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN FOR THESE TO ACTUALLY WORK.
THESE FACILITIES CAN BE A LITTLE BIT MORE INTENSIVE VISUALLY AND OTHERWISE AND SO WE WANT TO HAVE THE PROPER SCREENING FOR THEM.
CERTAINLY SCREENING FOR DWELLINGS, 1,000 FEET FROM THE PROJECT BOUNDARY.
IF YOU HAVE A HOME 1,000 FEET AWAY, THIS BOARD'S PROBABLY GOING TO REQUIRE THAT APPLICANT TO DO SOMETHING SPECIAL SO THAT I DIDN'T JUST RUIN YOUR VIEW, AND ADDITIONAL SCREENING DETERMINED BY THE DIRECTOR.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, OUTDOOR STORAGE.
WE DON'T WANT THIS STUFF TO STAND OUT.
OF COURSE, LINES AND CONNECTION, COLLECTION LINES.
WE WANT TO SEE THE LINES UNDERGROUND WERE FEASIBLE, AND IT MAY NOT ALWAYS BE FEASIBLE.
BUT AGAIN, WE'RE TRYING TO CO-LOCATE FOR GREATER EFFICIENCIES, UTILIZING EXISTING LINES.
THERE'S ALSO OTHER STANDARDS WITH RESPECT TO AVIAN WILDLIFE THAT WE WANT TO BE COGNIZANT OF.
FINALLY, WE'VE LEFT THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.
WE HAVE A SITE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT, SO THAT'S ENTERED WITH THE COUNTY.
YOU'RE A PARTNER TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU CAN COMPEL AN APPLICANT AND OPERATOR TO PERFORM WHEN THEY'RE NOT PERFORMING, AND THAT YOU'RE VERY WELL AWARE OF WHAT'S HAPPENING OUT THERE.
THERE'S A PARTNERSHIP, SO IT'S NOT AN ABSENTEE LANDOWNER RELATIONSHIP.
THAT'S NOT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN HERE UNDER THE ORDINANCE, GRADING AND LANDSCAPING ONE YEAR FROM START OF CONSTRUCTION.
I THINK WE'VE HEARD SOME COMMENTS ABOUT WANTING THAT TO HAPPEN AND ALLOWING THAT TO HAPPEN IN PHASES OR LATER BECAUSE IT CAN TAKE A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF TIME FROM APPROVAL TO THEN GET YOUR STATE APPROVALS TO BUILD THE PROJECT OUT AND THEN GET IT UP AND RUNNING.
IT COULD POTENTIALLY BE UP TO THREE YEARS FOR SOME FACILITIES.
>> I THINK A COST ASSOCIATED WITH STAFF FOR MONITORING THIS SO THAT WE CAN STAY CURRENT, APPRISED AND THEY'RE READY TO REQUIRE CHANGES, SHOULD THEY BE NECESSARY.
OUT OF SIGHT OUT OF MIND WON'T WORK.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT SUPERVISOR MICHAELS.
IN CERTAIN AREAS LIKE WITH FIRE AND SAFETY, THERE WILL BE ANNUAL INSPECTIONS AND THERE IS THE COMPLIANCE REPORT THAT WILL BE FURNISHED BY AN OPERATOR EVERY YEAR.
WE REVIEW THAT IF SOMETHING SEEMS A MESS, WE CERTAINLY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO GO OUT THERE AND TAKE A LOOK AND FOLLOW UP.
OF COURSE, BERMS FENCING EVERYTHING.
REALLY, THE PANELS, YOU NAME IT.
EVERYTHING HAS TO BE IN A REPAIRED AND OPERABLE AESTHETIC CONDITION.
>> I JUST DON'T WANT THE FOX REPORTING THE HEALTH OF THE HENHOUSE, HE'S WATCHING.
THAT'S WHERE THERE MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT OF DISCONNECT THAT WE NEED TO THINK THAT THROUGH.
IF THEY'RE REPORTING TO US, EVERYTHING'S FINE, AND THE COMPLIANCE REPORT REFLECTS THAT BECAUSE THEY'RE GIVING IT TO US.
I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE MORE PROACTIVE INTERVENTION ON OUR PART,
[01:55:02]
JUST SO WE HAVE A COMFORT LEVEL FOR THE COUNTY THIS OPERATION IS GOING ACCORDING TO HOYLE.>> SUPERVISOR MICHAELS, IF YOU'RE SAYING THAT MAYBE WE WANT TO LOOK AT ADDING LANGUAGE TO THE ORDINANCE, SO MAYBE THE PLANNING UNIT OR OTHER MORE APPROPRIATE UNITS HAVE THE ABILITY TO INSPECT IT.
I THINK THAT'S IN THERE, WE WILL DOUBLE CHECK, BUT IF WE WANT TO CALL THAT OUT, CERTAINLY WE CAN.
OF COURSE, PROJECT, WE WANT TO MONITOR NOXIOUS WEEDS, PREVENTING SPREAD BECAUSE WHEN YOU DISTURB AN AREA OF HABITAT, YOU'VE NOW CREATED THE PERFECT CONDITIONS FOR THINGS LIKE EURASIAN THISTLE AND TAMARISK AND OTHER SPECIES TO INVADE AND THEN SPREAD UNDER OTHER PEOPLE'S PROPERTY RIGHTS, WHICH WE REALLY DON'T WANT TO HAVE HAPPEN.
THAT IS AN IMPORTANT CONCERN OF THIS ORDINANCE.
INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE CONTINUED, POST CONSTRUCTION, SO DISTURBED AREAS TO BE STABILIZED.
WHEN THE WIND PICKS UP, WE DON'T WANT THESE CLOUDS OF DUST AND DIRT.
THESE AREAS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE STABILIZED AND RESTORED.
AGAIN, THAT IS A TRICKY TASK TO DO WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT RESTORING DESERT HABITAT, BUT ROUTINE WEED CONTROL AND MOWING, GROUND COVER LANDSCAPING, MAINTAIN, REPLACED AND DEAD.
WE HAVE TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT THEY'RE FOLLOWING EPA STANDARDS AND USING LOW RISK HERBICIDES.
WE WANT TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT SPREAD.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RCU 2 DISTRICT.
WE HAVE TO BE AWARE OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO LIVESTOCK GRAZING THAT MAY UNDOUBTEDLY BE LOCATED BORDERING AND BUFFERING THESE OPERATIONS.
PROJECT OPERATOR RESPONSIBLE FOR NOXIOUS WEED MANAGEMENT.
CONTINUOUS FAILURE TO MAINTAIN A SITE OVER SIX MONTHS MAY RESULT IN USE PERMIT, TERMINATION, AND DECOMMISSIONING.
THAT'S PRETTY STRONG LANGUAGE AND WE ACTUALLY GET INTO THE DETAILS OF WHAT THAT PROCESS LOOKS LIKE AND HOW THAT PROCESS IS SET FORTH LATER IN THE ORDINANCE.
PUBLIC ROADS, IMPROVEMENTS, REPAIR, MAINTENANCE, AGAIN, MORE AT THE BEGINNING AND THE DECOMMISSIONING OF THE LIFETIME OF THE PROJECT.
PUBLIC WORKS HAS DISCRETION TO REQUIRE MITIGATION PLANS, DOCUMENTATION OF ROADS.
THERE'S A LOT OF ANALYSIS THAT'S GOING TO GET IN BEFORE EVEN APPLICATION, THE PRELIMINARY STUDIES AND ANALYSIS AT THE APPLICATION.
PUBLIC WORKS WOULD BE A PARTNER IN THAT PROCESS OF AN APPLICATION MOVING FORWARD.
THE FEEDBACK THAT THEY GET FROM DIFFERENT UNITS OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES WILL ABSOLUTELY INFORM WHAT SOME OF THESE AGREEMENTS AND REQUIREMENTS AND PLANS THAT WILL ULTIMATELY GET ADOPTED BY THE BOARD LOOK LIKE.
EVERY PROJECT IS GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT TO THAT EXTENT, BUT OTHER DEPARTMENTS WILL BE INVOLVED.
IDENTIFICATION OF PUBLIC ROADS FOR PROPOSED HAUL ROUTES, DAILY VEHICLE COUNTS.
PUBLIC WORKS MAY REQUIRE STUDIES, REPORTS FOR EXPECTED IMPACTS TO HAUL ROUTES.
APPLICANT RESPONSIBLE FOR COSTS OF BASELINE ROAD CONDITION STUDIES, PUT THAT COST ON THE APPLICANT.
PUBLIC WORKS TO PERIODICALLY INSPECT HAUL ROUTES APPLICANT, RESPONSIBLE FOR COSTS OF INSPECTION AND REPAIRS.
WE ARE INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS.
THEY HAVE TO OBLIGE AND IT'S ON THEIR DIME.
PUBLIC ROADS CONTINUED, MEET WITH PUBLIC WORKS AND FIRE DISTRICTS, GRADING, ROAD CONSTRUCTION, PERMITS ARE REQUIRED.
WE ALREADY HAVE THAT IN PLACE.
DUST MITIGATION CONTROLS REQUIRED, VERY IMPORTANT DURING CONSTRUCTION AND PROJECT CESSATION.
THESE ARE THINGS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT.
PUBLIC WORKS MAY ALSO REQUIRE THEIR OWN FINANCIAL ASSURANCE FOR FORESEEABLE COSTS, MINOR, MAJOR ARTERIAL ROADS TO BE DEDICATED PRIOR TO PERMIT USE, SO THAT MIGHT BE A ROAD THAT'S CRISS-CROSSING THE PROPERTY.
WE HAVE TO THINK TOWARDS THE FUTURE OF OTHER USES THAT MAY COME INTO BEING DURING THE LIFETIME OF THIS PROJECT.
CONSULTATION WITH THE FIRE DISTRICT ON WEIGHT CAPACITY, INTERNAL CIRCULATION.
YOU'RE GOING TO SEE FIRE DISTRICT AND PUBLIC SAFETY AS KNITTED AND THREAD THROUGHOUT THIS ORDINANCE.
THERE'S MANY SECTIONS THAT SPEAK TO THOSE ISSUES.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, I WON'T SPEND TOO MUCH TIME WITH THIS BECAUSE THESE ARE BASICALLY MIRRORING REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE ALREADY IN PLACE, AND WE WANT TO HEAR FROM THE FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT.
WE STILL HAVEN'T HEARD FROM EVERYBODY ON THIS.
SOME OF THIS LANGUAGE MAY CHANGE, BUT IT'S ESSENTIALLY TAILORED TO THAT, WHICH WE ALREADY REQUIRE.
NOW WE GET TO BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS. WELL, THEY'RE ACCESSORY TO SOLAR FACILITIES.
IF THE INTENT IS TO PROVIDE AND ALLOW FOR SOLAR FACILITIES, THEN YOU ALMOST HAVE TO ALSO PROVIDE SIMULTANEOUSLY FOR BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE.
SUBSTATIONS, THEY ARE AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE MIX AND OUR ABILITY TO MAKE THE MOST EFFICIENT COST EFFECTIVE USE OF THAT ENERGY AND PRODUCT.
BUT THE CONCERNS THAT TYPICALLY WE HAVE WITH THESE ARE NOISE,
[02:00:02]
SOME VIBRATION, VIEWSHED IMPACTS.PEOPLE ARE ALWAYS CONCERNED ABOUT THINGS BLOWING UP.
FIRE IS REALLY THE HAZARD HERE TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT, AND THE DESIRE TO NOT LOCATE THOSE CLOSE TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS, SENSITIVE RECEPTORS, ETC.
YOU WOULDN'T PUT IT NEXT TO A TOT LOT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
THEY HAVE TO BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY THAN THE SOLAR PANELS, ESSENTIALLY.
BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS CONTINUED SO THE CONFIGURATION, WE ADDRESSED THAT.
THE TYPICAL ENERGY STANDARDS THAT THIS ORDINANCE LOOKED TO, CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, OPERATION.
AGAIN, THESE ARE ALL THE DIFFERENT ISSUES THAT SPEAK TO THE LOCATION OF BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE AND HOW THEY'RE MANAGED AND OPERATED COMPLIANCE WITH FIRE ELECTRICAL BUILDING CODES.
WE ALREADY HAVE OTHER STANDARDS IN PLACE FOR A LOT OF THIS STUFF.
CURRENT NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION STANDARDS APPLICABLE.
CURRENT STANDARDS FOR EVALUATING RUNAWAY FIRE IN BES, THERE'S STANDARDS FOR THAT AS WELL.
WE TRIED TO THINK OF EVERYTHING WHEN WE CAST OUR NETS.
THERE'S ALWAYS THAT THING YOU DIDN'T THINK ABOUT.
SUBSTATIONS. AGAIN, ANOTHER USE THAT IS ACCESSORY TO FACILITY SCALE SOLAR.
LOCATION IS A CONSIDERATION, SO WE REALLY WANT TO AVOID PUTTING THESE NEXT TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS, SO WE DO HAVE A BUFFER.
SOMETIMES THIS IS DRIVEN BY THE BEST LOCATION.
BUT ESSENTIALLY, THIS FOLLOWS THE SAME CRITERIA AS A BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE FACILITY.
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND SAFETY, SOMETHING WE ALL WANT TO HEAR ABOUT.
ALLOWS FOR ACCESS FOR COUNTY THIRD PARTY INSPECTORS, COORDINATING AND CONTINUING EDUCATION WITH EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, FIRE DISTRICT, SHERIFF'S OFFICE.
THIS IS SOMETHING REQUIRED OF THE OPERATOR.
ALSO KNOW THAT APS HAS THEIR OWN REQUIREMENTS, AND THEY ACTUALLY WORK WITH AND DO TRAININGS, AS WE UNDERSTOOD FROM OUR FACE TO FACE MEETING THIS WEEK, THAT THEY ALSO DO THEIR OWN TRAINING IN FIRE DISTRICTS THAT ARE NOW SEEING THIS LAND USE COMING INTO FRUITION.
INFORMATION ON HOW TO SAFELY RESPOND TO EMERGENCIES AS PART OF THE TRAINING, PRE OPERATIONAL TRAINING SESSIONS.
WE WANT TO BE MAKING SURE THAT IF WE'RE PUTTING THESE OUT IN A RURAL AREA, DOES THAT FIRE DISTRICT HAVE THE EQUIPMENT, THE CAPACITY, AND THE TRAINING TO RESPOND IF THERE'S A CATASTROPHIC FIRE, WHICH AGAIN, WE DON'T HEAR THAT THOSE HAPPEN, BUT ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN.
IT'S AN IMPORTANT ISSUE SO WE HAVE TO HAVE FIRE SAFETY AND FIRE EVACUATION PLANS, ANNUAL FIRE SAFETY INSPECTIONS BY COUNTY STAFF, SEMI ANNUAL INSPECTIONS OF BATTERY BY OPERATOR WRITTEN REPORT, PROVISION OF SPECIALIZED BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM, FIRE SAFETY EQUIPMENT, OPERATOR MAY BE REQUIRED TO REIMBURSE THE COUNTY.
THAT'S WRITTEN INTO THE ORDINANCE.
FINALLY, DECOMMISSIONING RECLAMATION, WE HAVE THE DECOMMISSIONING PLAN.
WE BASICALLY HAVE THE OUTLINE OF A PLAN THAT'S FURNISHED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PROCESS OF AN APPLICATION, AND THEN THE ULTIMATE DECOMMISSIONING PLAN.
WHAT THAT ENTAILS IS THE APPLICANT, THE OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO REMOVE ALL THEIR IMPROVEMENTS, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, SOME OF WHICH ARE STAKED INTO THE GROUND.
UP TO A DEPTH OF 48 INCHES, REMOVING AND RECYCLING FENCE, PERIMETER FENCE MAY STAY WITH APPROVAL.
SOME OF THESE THINGS MAY BE APPROPRIATE AS A FUTURE APPLICANT, OR PROPERTY BUYER REPURPOSES THE GROUND FOR ANOTHER USE.
AGAIN, IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE AN INDUSTRIAL USE JUST TO BE WIDE EYED OF ONCE YOU'VE MADE THAT LEVEL OF CONNECTIVITY AND DISTURBANCE.
IT'S HARD TO IMAGINE WE'RE GOING TO RETURN THAT SITE FOR GRAZING.
SOME OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS CAN BE REPURPOSED.
>> COULD BE REGENERATIVE, BUT THAT'S ANOTHER SUBJECT.
WE ALSO HAVE TO HAVE A WAY TO MONITOR WHETHER THOSE SOLAR PANELS HAVE BEEN BROKEN OR CRUSHED.
IN THE DOING OF THAT, PUT TOXIC WASTE INTO OUR SOIL.
>> THE ORDINANCE ABSOLUTELY INCLUDES REQUIREMENTS FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF DAMAGE MATERIALS SPECIFIC TO SOLAR PANELS.
IT'S UP TO THEM TO DETERMINE HOW THEY RECYCLE IT.
THE STATE HAS ITS OWN STANDARDS ABOUT WHAT PART OF THE LANDFILL THAT THIS STUFF GOES IN.
BUT THESE ARE THINGS THAT WE'RE GOING TO REQUIRE THE APPLICANT, THE OPERATOR TO IDENTIFY FOR US IN THEIR ANNUAL REPORT.
>> IF WE'RE NOT SATISFIED, AND YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE, INCLUDING DEVELOPMENT SERVICES THAT'S GOING TO BE OUT THERE TO INSPECT.
DECOMMISSIONING PLAN, OF COURSE, LANDSCAPING, BERMING, FENCING, REPURPOSING STRUCTURES, GROUND COVER AND SCREENING, SOME OF THAT MAY STAY.
[02:05:03]
RECEDING, DISTURBED LAND WITH NATIVE VEGETATION, DISPOSAL, AND RECYCLING OF MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT MUST BE AT AN APPROVED LOCATION THAT COMPLIES WITH COUNTY, STATE, AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS.THIS IS A MOVING TARGET. THIS COULD CHANGE.
WE MIGHT SEE STATE OR FEDERAL REGULATIONS.
WOULDN'T THAT BE GREAT AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE? DECOMMISSIONING RECLAMATION CONTINUED.
WE HAVE, THERE'S GUARANTEED FUNDS.
FINANCIAL ASSURANCE OF ESTIMATED COST OF DECOMMISSIONING MAY INCLUDE SALVAGE VALUE, IF ALLOWED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
IF THE OVERALL VALUE IS GOING TO BE REDUCED BECAUSE THEY'VE CONVINCED YOU THAT SOME OF THIS STUFF IS GOING TO BE RECYCLED AND THEY'RE GOING TO RECOUP A VALUE FOR THAT, YOU HAVE THE DISCRETION TO REVISIT THAT NUMBER.
YOU'RE NOT REQUIRED. OTHER AUTHORITIES REQUIRING GUARANTEE, MAY BE UNDER SHARED FINANCIAL ASSURANCE WITH THE COUNTY NAMED AS PARTY.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? IF I'M AN OPERATOR, AN APPLICANT, AND I'VE LEASED STATE LAND, WELL GUESS WHAT? THE STATE WAS ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT THIS.
THEY HAVE THEIR OWN SLEW OF REQUIREMENTS WITH RESPECT TO DECOMMISSIONING, RECLAMATION, AND GUARANTEED FUNDS.
YOU MAY BE SATISFIED WITH SOME ASPECTS OF WHAT THEY REQUIRE AND SO YOU MAY CHOOSE TO NOT BE DUPLICATIVE.
BUT DO THEY COVER EVERYTHING THAT IS GOING TO BE OF INTEREST AND UNDER THE PURVIEW, THE COUNTY? MAYBE NOT.
JUST AS SOMETHING TO BE AWARE OF, THERE MAY BE OTHER AGENCIES INVOLVED WITH THE SAME HARD QUESTIONS ON THEIR MIND THAT THEY HAVE ALREADY COVERED.
AN APPLICANTS, PROBABLY, AND IN MANY CASES, THEY'RE GOING TO COME TO YOU AFTER THEY'VE ALREADY LEASED THE GROUND, MEANING THAT THAT GROUND UNDER THAT LEASE AGREEMENT IS ALREADY COVERED UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THAT AGREEMENT WITH THAT AGENCY, BE IT THE STATE LAND TRUST.
APPLICANT WILL HAVE TWO OPTIONS.
WE HAVE TWO OPTIONS IN THE ORDINANCE, FULL DECOMMISSIONING AT COST, TIERED SECURITIZATION, 10 PERCENT EACH YEAR FOR 10 YEARS.
THIS LANGUAGE, A LOT OF THIS IS INDUSTRY STANDARD, NOT SPECIFIC TO SOLAR, BUT WHAT WE TEND TO SEE FOR MAJOR OPERATIONS AND AGREEMENTS UNTIL THE 100 PERCENT ESTIMATED COST IS ACHIEVED.
ANY COMBINATION OF THE FOLLOWING MAY BE.
THERE'S DIFFERENT WAYS THAT THEY CAN SECURE THAT MONEY, AND FOR THEIR PROTECTION, WHETHER IT'S A TRUST FUND, A PAYMENT SURETY BOND WITH STANDBY TRUST FUND, A LETTER OF CREDIT.
WHAT I WILL SAY IS THAT, I'M NOT AN EXPERT AT SOLAR POWER.
WE'RE GETTING PRETTY GOOD ABOUT LEARNING ABOUT THE ORDINANCE IN THE INDUSTRY, BUT IN AN AREA LIKE THIS, IF YOU HAVE TECHNICAL QUESTIONS, LEGAL QUESTIONS.
THIS MIGHT BE A GOOD ONE FOR FINANCE.
I'LL JUST POINT THAT OUT OR DIRECT QUESTIONS TO APPLICANTS AS WELL.
>> THEY'RE BUILT IN ANYTHING IN REGARDS TO INFLATION?
>> I THINK THEY REVISIT THE COST.
THEY CAN REVISIT IT EVERY FIVE YEARS, AND SO THAT MAY COME INTO PLAY. NEXT SLIDE.
>> MAYBE WE COULD REVISIT IT IN A SHORTER DURATION.
THAT FLEXIBILITY MIGHT BE OF INTEREST.
>> THAT FIVE YEAR LIMIT IS SOMETHING THAT SEEMED TO BE, AND WE FOUND IN A LOT OF THE ORDINANCES THAT WE REVIEWED.
I THOUGHT THEY MIGHT BE ONTO SOMETHING, SO WE INCLUDED IT.
DECOMMISSION RECLAMATION INCLUDED COST ESTIMATE UPDATE.
ESTIMATED COSTS RECALCULATED BY THE FIVE YEAR MARK.
IF RECALCULATED COST GOES UP 2 PERCENT, AND I ASSUME THAT ACCOUNTS FOR INFLATION, DEPOSIT OF ADDITIONAL FUNDS IS REQUIRED.
IF RECALCULATED COST GOES DOWN, REDUCTION OF DEPOSIT MAY BE APPROVED.
ANY INCREASE OR DECREASE OF FUNDS WILL OCCUR WITHIN 90 DAYS.
THEY GOT A TIMELINE. THEY HAVE TO DELIVER.
SIMILARLY, READJUSTED EACH FIVE YEAR COST ESTIMATE UPDATE.
AMENDMENT TO A DECOMMISSIONING PLAN.
THEY MAY WANT TO AMEND THEIR PLAN 30 YEARS FROM NOW AND THE ORDINANCE PROVIDES FOR THAT AND YOUR DISCRETION TO SAY NO.
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MUST GIVE APPROVAL PRIOR TO THE START OF DECOMMISSIONING.
YOU'RE GOING TO GET NOTICE BEFORE THEY START DOING ANYTHING OR YOU SHOULD.
THEY CAN PURSUE AN AMENDMENT, BUT THAT REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING.
THEY WANT TO CHANGE SOMETHING OUT THERE, SOMETHING OF SUBSTANCE.
THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME BACK BEFORE YOU IN A PUBLIC VENUE.
APPLYING FOR AN AMENDMENT CANNOT INTERFERE WITH REQUIRED TIME FRAME FOR A DECOMMISSIONING.
STILL ON DECOMMISSIONING, PARTIAL DECOMMISSIONING.
THEY MAY FIND THAT, WELL, THAT FIELD WAS JUST NOT PRODUCTIVE. IT WAS A LOSS.
VERY ERODABLE SOILS, WHATEVER, THEY WANT TO GO TO A SMALLER OPERATION.
THAT CAN HAPPEN. WE WANT TO BE FLUID.
[02:10:01]
THERE'S A PROCESS EMBEDDED IN THE ORDINANCE FOR PARTIAL DECOMMISSIONING.THERE'S THE DATE OF COMMISSION.
OPERATOR TO PROVIDE WRITTEN NOTIFICATION OF PROPOSED DATE TO CEASE OPERATION.
THERE'S ABANDONMENT OF FACILITY.
WHAT HAPPENS IF EVERYTHING GOES WRONG? WE'VE SEEN EXAMPLES OF THAT.
FACILITIES NOT ACTIVE OR IN CONTINUOUS SERVICE FOR A SIX MONTH PERIOD.
SOMETHING'S NOT HAPPENING, AND IT'S BEEN SIX MONTHS, AND WE HAVEN'T HEARD FROM YOU.
SIX MONTH PERIOD WILL BE DECOMMISSIONED AT THE EXPENSE OF THE OWNER OPERATOR.
THAT'S THE LEGAL CONTROL THAT YOU HAVE AS THE COUNTY.
OPERATOR OR SUCCESSORS TO INITIATE CONTINUOUS DECOMMISSIONING WITHIN SIX MONTHS.
ONCE THEY PULL THE TRIGGER AND HAVE THAT FOR DECOMMISSIONING, THAT'S THEIR TIMELINE.
REMAINING SECURITIZATION OF FUNDS TO BE DISTRIBUTED TO OWNERS, OF COURSE, BY PERCENTAGE OF ACREAGE AND OWNERSHIP OF THE FACILITY.
ALMOST DONE. DECOMMISSIONING RECLAMATION CONTINUED.
THIS REALLY IS THE MEAT OF THE ORDINANCE.
DEFAULT DECOMMISSIONING AND RECLAMATION BY THE COUNTY.
THIS IS WHERE AN OPERATOR HAS NOT PERFORMED.
THEY HAVE ABANDONED. THEY HAVE LEFT THE STATE.
FAILURE TO DECOMMISSION THE FACILITY PER THE DECOMMISSIONING PLAN, IF REPOWERING OF A FACILITY IS NOT APPROVED, THE COUNTY HAS THE RIGHT, NOT THE OBLIGATION TO COMMENCE DECOMMISSIONING, RECLAMATION WITH FULL ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY.
COUNTY HAS RIGHT TO WITHDRAW SECURITIZATION FUNDS.
THIS IS HOW YOU RECOUP YOUR COSTS FOR HAVING TO STEP IN.
COUNTY HAS RIGHT TO EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS REMAINING ON THE PROPERTY.
ANY REMAINING SECURITIZATION OF FUNDS TO BE RETURNED TO CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER AT BY PERCENTAGE OF ACREAGE OWNERSHIP OF FACILITY.
OTHER RIGHTS, REMEDIES WILL NOT BE LIMITED BY THESE TERMS. THAT'S LEGAL LEASE RIGHT THERE, IF YOU DIDN'T NOTICE IT.
I JUST WALKED YOU THROUGH THE OUTLINE OF A 29 PAGE ORDINANCE.
AT THIS POINT, IF THE BOARD WOULD LIKE, THEY COULD TAKE A BREAK.
THE NEXT PART IS, AND IT'S CERTAINLY NOT AS LONG, IS TO JUST SUMMARIZE SOME OF THE MORE SUBSTANTIVE COMMENTS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED TO DATE FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, AND, OF COURSE, NOT TO DISMISS THAT WE HAVE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC HERE TODAY THAT I IMAGINE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AS WELL.
>> WE'RE GOING TO TAKE FIVE MINUTES.
>> CAN WE GO OVER THAT POLICY ONE MORE TIME?
>> AT THIS TIME, YOU HAVE THE CHOICE.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE, YOU COULD HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC FIRST, OR I CAN GO INTO MY SUMMARIES, TO THE POWERPOINT SUMMARY OF THE COMMENTS THAT WE RECEIVED ELECTRONICALLY OR WRITTEN COMMENTS.
>> WELL, WE ONLY HAVE TWO PEOPLE.
ONE DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK AND ONE WISHES TO SPEAK.
WHY DON'T WE HAVE MISS ADAM JOHNSON COME UP SINCE SHE'S HERE.
MISS JOHNSON. SORRY TO KEEP YOU SO LONG. THAT'S FINE.
>> GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN, SUPERVISORS.
ADAM JOHNSON, ON BEHALF OF THE ARIZONA SOLAR ENERGY INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION OR ARISEIA.
I WOULD HAVE BEEN HAPPY TO GO AFTER MATT, BECAUSE HE'S GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT SOME OF OUR COMMENTS AS WELL, BUT NOW IS A FINE TIME AS WELL.
WE DO HAVE WRITTEN COMMENTS THAT ARE IN YOUR MATERIALS TODAY, AND THEN I ALSO SUBSEQUENTLY EMAILED ALL OF YOU A COPY OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT THAT WE COMPLETED FOR YAVAPAI COUNTY BECAUSE IT WAS TOO LATE TO MAKE THE CUTOFF FOR THE MATERIALS.
YES. THAT LOOKS LIKE OUR LOGO. THANK YOU.
I AGREE WITH MATT, IT'S A TERRIBLY LONG NAME, AND THE ACRONYM IS MUCH EASIER.
I'M NOT GOING TO BELABOR THE COMMENTS THAT YOU ALREADY HAVE BEFORE YOU.
I THINK THIS HAS BEEN AN EXTREMELY COMPREHENSIVE OVERVIEW.
MATT'S DONE A GREAT JOB, I THINK OF EVEN REFLECTING SOME OF THE CHANGES ALREADY, WHICH IS VERY ENCOURAGING TO US.
I DID REACH OUT TO THE UTILITIES MID MEETING TO SAY, SRP, WHERE ARE YOU? THEY'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM YOU, AND ALSO TO FOLLOW UP.
I THINK IT WOULD ACTUALLY BE HELPFUL FOR APS TO ATTEND ONE OF THESE MEETINGS BECAUSE SOME OF THE COMMENTS YOU'VE MADE, I THINK WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HAVE THE UTILITY WEIGH IN DIRECTLY ON THEM, LIKE BATTERY FIRES AND THOSE KINDS OF THINGS, SETBACKS FROM HIGHWAYS.
I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE REALLY USEFUL TO HAVE THEM.
I JUST WANTED TO TOUCH ON A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT HAVE COME UP OVER THE COURSE OF THE MEETING THAT I THINK WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO DISCUSS THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS.
ONE OF THEM WAS THE HEIGHT OF GROUND MOUNTED PANELS.
WE TALKED ABOUT THAT A COUPLE OF TIMES. YES.
>> YES. THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO SPECIFY.
THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT YOU MIGHT HAVE AT A COMMERCIAL PROJECT VERSUS WHAT YOU HAVE AT A RESIDENTIAL PROJECT.
IT MIGHT MAKE SENSE TO HAVE THE ORDINANCE CALL THOSE OUT.
ONE THING I WOULD JUST LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED GROUND MOUNTED.
ACTUALLY, THIS PICTURE IS A WONDERFUL EXAMPLE.
IF YOU HAVE A PARKING STRUCTURE THAT PROVIDES SHADE FOR PARKING, AND IT HAS SOLAR ON IT, IT DOES NEED TO BE HIGHER BECAUSE MEDIUM DUTY DELIVERY TRUCKS HIT THEM AND DAMAGE THE PANELS.
[02:15:04]
WE HAVE EXAMPLES IN OTHER CITIES OF THAT HAPPENING REPEATEDLY.I'LL JUST WANT TO KEEP THAT IN MIND AS FAR AS THE HEIGHT GOES.
THEN I THINK ALMOST EVERYTHING ELSE.
I DO WANT TOUCH ON THE ABANDONMENT ISSUE AND I APOLOGIZE.
I WILL FOLLOW UP WITH YOU, BUT 12 MONTHS MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT MORE DOABLE THAN SIX MONTHS AS FAR AS DETERMINING A PROJECT TO BE ABANDONED BECAUSE THERE ARE SUPPLY CHAIN ISSUES THAT COULD RESULT IN A DELAY IN A PROJECT.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN THE PROJECT IS ABANDONED, BUT IT COULD TAKE LONGER THAN SIX MONTHS.
THAT WAS PART OF OUR COMMENTS IN MOHAVE COUNTY.
THEN I THINK THE ONLY OTHER THING THAT I WOULD JUST TOUCH ON IS I WOULD REALLY ENCOURAGE STAFF TO HOLD A WORKING SESSION WITH INDUSTRY AND THE UTILITIES WHERE WE CAN FLUSH OUT SOME OF THE MORE TECHNICAL DETAILS THAT WE'VE GONE THROUGH HERE TODAY, LIKE, HOW MANY FEET OF A SETBACK DO WE NEED FROM THE 20 DIFFERENT STRUCTURES THAT WE TALKED ABOUT? WHAT KIND OF ACREAGE ARE WE REALLY TALKING ABOUT? ARE PEOPLE GOING TO BE BUILDING PROJECTS IN A CORRIDOR AREA VERSUS ANOTHER THING? I THINK THAT THOSE ARE THINGS THAT IT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL TO HASH OUT IN A MORE IN THE WEEDS NITTY-GRITTY SESSION.
I THINK IT WAS VERY EFFECTIVE, AND SO I'D RECOMMEND DOING THAT HERE.
I WILL CONCLUDE MY COMMENTS UNLESS YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR ME.
>> ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? NO. ARE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS OVER THERE?
>> FOLLOW YOUR ADVICE, AND I DO THINK MATT WILL BE TOUCHING BASE WITH YOU FOLKS.
THERE'S ONE OTHER LADY THAT DOESN'T WISH TO SPEAK, AND THAT'S LAMA HAYBURN. ARE YOU HERE STILL LAMA?
WE'LL GET HER COMMENTS SOONER OR LATER I'M SURE.
> SHE STATES THAT SHE IS UNSURE HOW SHE FEELS ABOUT IT.
>> I DON'T KNOW QUITE WHAT THAT MEANS, THOUGH. WE'LL CONTACT HER.
>> SHE SAID HER QUESTION GOT ANSWERED. SHE DIDN'T NEED A STATEMENT.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. NOW I'M GOING TO COVER SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WE RECEIVED.
AGAIN, THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS ONGOING.
WE WANT TO HEAR FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.
THIS IS A SUMMARY OF THE COMMENTS.
GREATEST NUMBER OF REVIEW COMMENTS TENDED TO BE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ACREAGE CAPS.
NOT UNSURPRISINGLY, WE HAD A LOT OF QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THAT HERE TODAY.
REQUESTS TO ENSURE NATIVE VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE CORRIDORS AND CONNECTIVITY WOULD BE APPROPRIATELY MAINTAINED.
LOTS OF QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS REGARDING THAT.
UNDERSTANDABLY, SO, COMMENTS RECEIVED THROUGH JUNE 10TH THROUGH JULY 10TH, WILL BE ADDRESSED AT THE FIRST PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING JULY 18TH.
NOW I'M SUMMARIZING THE COMMENTS WE'VE RECEIVED TO DATE, AND NOW WE'RE COLLECTING MORE COMMENTS THAT WE WILL ADDRESS AT THE UPCOMING P&Z MEETING ON JULY 10TH AND 18TH.
>> MR. CHAIRMAN, JUST ONE COMMENT, IF I MAY.
HAVE YOU INCLUDED HOMELAND SECURITY IN REVIEW OF THE SOLAR FIELDS WHEN THEY'RE SO BIG?
>> IS THAT SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED, AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER MR. GLASSY MIGHT BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO THAT, BEING VERY INVOLVED WITH THE TECHNOLOGY SIDE OF IT AND HOMELAND SECURITY BEING SO KEENLY NOW IN OUR FOCUS ON THESE MATTERS FOR TERRORISTS OR ATTACKS OF WHATEVER TYPE.
>> MOST IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE IS THAT THEY'RE NOT EXPLOSIVE MATERIALS, AND SO THEY COULD BE CUT OFF AND DISCONNECTED.
IT'S REALLY THAT IF THE WIRES BECOME OR CATCH ON FIRE, IS THAT GOING TO BRING FIRE TO ADJACENT AREAS? BUT THERE MAY BE OTHER ISSUES THAT I'M NOT EVEN AWARE OF IN HONESTY, BUT IT'S A GOOD QUESTION, OF COURSE. THANK YOU.
>> CLEAR UP FOR ME WHAT YOU MEANT WITH THAT SECOND BULLET MEANS?
>> REGARDING REQUEST TO ENSURE NATIVE VEGETATION.
>> HOW DO YOU DO THAT IN A SOLAR FIELD?
>> THAT'S ONE OF THE ISSUES IS WHEN WE STARTED LOOKING AT THIS, AND WE USE MODELS, NOT JUST WITHIN STATE, BUT OUT OF STATE.
WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT MODELS IN JOHNSON COUNTY, KANSAS, YOU'RE SEEING WILDFLOWERS GROWING UNDERNEATH YOUR SOLAR FIELDS.
WELL, THEY DON'T HAVE FIRE ISSUES AND CATASTROPHIC STAND REPLACING FIRE ISSUES IN THE GREAT PLAINS. HERE WE DO.
WHAT APS MAY OR MAY NOT ALLOW UNDER THE PANELS, WHETHER IT'S VEGETATION OR THEY'RE GOING TO REQUIRE A CRUSHED STONE MEDIUM ON COMPACTED SOIL.
THAT IS NOT A FIRE PRONE AREA,
[02:20:01]
AND MAY BE WHAT THEY REQUIRE AND THE COMMENT THAT WE JUST HEARD AS FAR AS REQUESTING APS, MAYBE TO COME AND ANSWER AND RESPOND TO SOME OF OUR QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, AND CONCERNS.THAT MAY BE A GOOD IDEA FOR AN UPCOMING MEETING.
>> WELL, MAINTAINING THE NATIVE VEGETATION IN SOME AREAS OF YAVAPAI COUNTY AS YOU GO FROM GRASS TO SAND TO LITERALLY TALLER VEGETATION, ESPECIALLY I'M THINKING DOWN IN THE CORTES AREA WHERE WE JUST HAD THE FIRE AND THAT WOULD INTERFERE WITH USING THE EQUIPMENT, I WOULD THINK.
HOW WOULD YOU MAINTAIN IT? ON THE OUTSIDE, YES.
UNDERNEATH THE PANELS, NO. I DON'T KNOW.
I THINK IN ANY INSTANCE, YOU'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO WANT WOODY VEGETATION BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY THE FIRE PRONE FUEL, THE MATERIAL.
>> HERE GRASSES DRY OUT, AND IT CREATES A FIRE HAZARD.
WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO HEAR MAYBE THAT.
WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT SOME CRUSHED STONE MATERIAL.
>> COMMENTS CONTINUED REGARDING USE PERMITS, PAGE 5.
BASICALLY WHEN YOU SEE A COMMENT, YOU SEE A PAGE NUMBER, THAT COMMENT IS TALKING ABOUT A SECTION ON THE PAGE OF THE DRAFT ORDINANCE AS CURRENTLY WRITTEN.
PUBLIC PROCESS SHOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO BE COMPLETED BEFORE APPLICATION.
WELL, THAT IS THE APPLICATION PROCESS SET FORTH FOR A USE PERMIT IN THE COUNTY.
PAGE 2, REQUIRE CLASS III CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY AT THE OUTSET.
WHEN YOU'RE EXAMINING RESOURCES, WHETHER IT'S ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES, OR EVEN IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR CONTAMINANTS, THERE'S A DIFFERENT LEVEL OF IN-DEPTH STUDY THAT HAPPENS, AND IT ALWAYS STARTS WITH A DESKTOP STUDY OR A PHASE 1.
WHAT OUR RESPONSE IS IS THAT WE WOULDN'T NECESSARILY WANT TO REQUIRE A PHASE 3, UNLESS THROUGH THEIR PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION THAT HAPPENS AT THE PRE-APPLICATION STAGE, IF IN CONDUCTING THAT DESKTOP STUDY THAT THEY FIND THAT THE PROPERTIES CRISSCROSSED WITH IMPORTANT RESOURCES, THEN YEAH, PROBABLY WE WOULD PROPOSE TO INSERT LANGUAGE INTO THE ORDINANCE THAT THAT WOULD, IN FACT, THEN TRIGGER A CLASS III SURVEY.
WE REALLY WANT TO KNOW WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH OUT THERE.
IF THEY'RE DOING IT RIGHT, I WOULD EXPECT THAT AN APPLICANT WOULD BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE FOR PROTECTING THOSE TYPES OF RESOURCES.
PAGE 7, TOO PREMATURE IN PROCESS FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT TO BE SUBMITTED WITH INITIAL APPLICATION.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE BEEN AT A TUG OF WAR OF THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS IS THAT WE WANT CERTAIN PLANS AND STUDIES TO BE DONE, BUT SOME OF THIS STUFF CAN MORE APPROPRIATELY BE DONE LATER ON IN THE PROJECT ONCE AN APPLICANT THERE'S MORE FLESH ON THE BONES WITH WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE ACTUALLY THOUGHT MADE SENSE.
I BELIEVE THAT MAY HAVE BEEN A COMMENT WE RECEIVED FROM ALYCIA.
ESPECIALLY, WHAT YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE IS THAT ALL OF THIS STUFF HAS TO BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED CERTAINLY BEFORE YOUR CONSTRUCTION PERMIT IS ISSUED.
JUST TO ACQUIRE A CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE PROCESS DOES ACTUALLY SEEM A BIT PREMATURE.
>> WHAT IS THE ADDITIONAL APPLICATION GOING TO HAVE IN IT? JUST THE BASIC SITE AND THE SIZE OF IT.
IT'S GOING TO BE 2,000-3,000, WHATEVER.
AT SOME POINT, YOU REALLY NEED TO UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT TYPE OF FACILITIES THEY'RE GOING TO PUT IN THERE.
>> WITH THE APPLICATION, WE WANT TO DRILL INTO THE DETAILS.
WITH THE PRE-APPLICATION, WE'RE GOING TO WANT A LOT OF SURVEYS.
WE'RE GOING TO WANT A FULL PROJECT OVERVIEW.
WE'RE GOING TO WANT A NARRATIVE.
IT'S LIKE THERE'S MORE, I WOULDN'T SAY SUPERFICIAL LEVEL OF LOOKING AT THE PROJECT INITIALLY, AND THEN.
>> BUT THEN ONCE YOU GET INTO THE APPLICATION, WELL, YOU WANT TO MAKE AN INFORMED-BASED DECISION, SO YOU NEED TO KNOW JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING, AND SO THAT'S THE BALANCING ACT WE'RE AT.
THEY WANT LESS, THEY WANT LATER.
WE'RE SAYING, WELL, NO, THE BOARD NEEDS TO BE ABLE TO FULLY APPRAISE THE PROJECT IN ITS TOTALITY BEFORE THEY SAY YES.
>> IT WAS JUST SIMILAR IN MY MIND.
AN INITIAL PLAT AND THEN A FINAL PLAT, SOMETHING IN THAT NATURE.
I KNOW THEY'RE NOT THE SAME BUT.
>> THAT'S A GOOD COMPARISON, ACTUALLY.
SPECIFIC COMMENTS CONTINUED FOR FACILITY USE PERMITS, PAGE 10 OF THE DRAFT PROPOSED ORDINANCE, AND IN THE DECOMMISSIONING PLAN REMOVE ADEQUATELY RESTORED NATURAL CONDITIONS.
NO TECHNIQUES EXIST TO EFFECTIVELY STORE DEGRADED DESERT SOUTHWESTERN HABITAT.
[02:25:03]
NOTED, THAT'S A CONCERN, ARIZONA FISH AND GAME WILDLIFE.IF WE'RE SETTING FORTH AN EXPECTATION TO THE PUBLIC THAT, HEY, DON'T WORRY, WHEN THIS IS ALL DONE, THIS IS GOING TO BE RESTORED TO EDEN-LIKE CONDITIONS.
THAT'S PROBABLY NOT GOING TO HAPPEN, AND WE JUST NEED TO BE AWARE THAT THAT'S THE REALITIES OF WHEN YOU DISTURB LAND IN THE SOUTHWEST, AS WITH ANY DEVELOPMENT.
I THINK WE ACCEPT SOME LEVEL OF DISTURBANCE TO DO BUSINESS.
PAGE 11, ARIZONA LAW ASSIGNS AUTHORITY OVER TRANSMISSION LINES TO THE ARIZONA CORPORATION COMMISSION.
THIS COMMENT, I BELIEVE WAS FROM ALYCIA, AND THIS WAS ACTUALLY ONE THAT WE DID SEEK SOME LEGAL CONSENTATION IN INPUT ON, AND SO OUR RESPONSE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES RESPONSE TO THAT IS THE ARIZONA CORPORATION COMMISSION DOES NOT APPEAR TO PREEMPT LOCAL JURISDICTIONS.
WE WOULD NEED CLARIFICATION FROM THE COMMENTER ON HOW THEY BELIEVE THE COUNTY'S ABILITY TO REGULATE IS INVALIDATED BY THE ACC LINE SIGHTING COMMITTEE.
WE'D LIKE TO HEAR MORE ON THAT.
>> I HAPPEN TO AGREE WITH YOU BECAUSE THAT WOULD APPEAR TO ME IS THAT THEY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, BUILDING AND SAFETY, AND THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT RATES, AND RATES IS OBVIOUSLY GOING TO BE CONTROLLED BY ACC, WHICH WE DON'T REALLY CARE BECAUSE WE DON'T DO ANYTHING IN REGARDS TO RATES OF PRODUCTION OR COSTS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
I THINK I WOULD GO TO THE ACC AND JUST GET THEM TO SAY WHAT THEY WOULD BE COVERING THIS TYPE OF SITUATION.
I'M SURE THAT THEY'VE GOT ALREADY THERE.
IF IT'S MAYBE SOMETHING, MAYBE NOTHING.
>> IF WE HAVEN'T ALREADY, I'M SURE WE HAVE, BUT WE'LL MAKE A POINT TO REACH OUT TO THEM TO REVIEW THE ORDINANCE, AND WE CAN CALL OUT THAT SECTION TO THEIR ATTENTION.
COMMENTS CONTINUED. THIS IS UNDER THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, PAGE 14, ADD THE FOLLOWING LIABILITY INSURANCE REQUIREMENT.
THIS WAS LANGUAGE THAT WE RECEIVED FROM YAVAPAI COUNTY HR RISK MANAGEMENT, AND WE AGREE.
ABSOLUTELY, INSERT THAT LANGUAGE SO IT PERTAINS TO LIABILITY INSURANCE.
>> YOU HAVE SOMETHING IN THIS AGREEMENT THAT WOULD INDICATE IF THERE IS A FIRE, THEY ARE GOING TO END UP PAYING FOR THE COST OF FIGHTING THAT FIRE.
>> I'M NOT SURE THAT THAT'S SPECIFIED IN THE ORDINANCE.
>> I WAS REMEMBERING THAT EARLIER, AND IT WASN'T.
>> I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S TYPICALLY REQUIRED OF AN APPLICANT OR A LAND USE AND WHETHER THAT'S A LEGAL QUESTION.
AGAIN, I'LL JUST STATE FOR THE RECORD, I'M NOT AN EXPERT IN SOLAR FACILITIES.
>> THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING YOU WOULD WANT TO LOOK AND TAKE INITIATIVE.
>> IF THERE'S A PRECEDENT OUT THERE THAT IT'S REQUIRED ELSEWHERE, AND, OF COURSE, I DON'T HAVE THE BENEFIT OF KNOWING WHAT EVERY CITY WROTE AND LEGALITY OF.
>> WE'LL CIRCLE BACK. I'M GETTING SOME NODS, SO YEAH, REST ASSURED, WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THAT. THANK YOU.
>> THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT. WE DON'T WANT TO END UP WITH HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT ARE NOT BEING THOUGHT ABOUT IN TERMS OF THE OUTCOME OF A FIRE, THAT'S REALLY THE RESULT OF THESE SOLAR PANELS.
>> YEAH, AND AGAIN, IT COULD JUST BE THE IGNITION.
>> WE'VE HAD THAT WITH TRANSMISSION WIRES IN CALIFORNIA, SO IT'S A GREAT.
>> WE THOUGHT WE COVERED EVERYTHING, BUT YOU JUST NAILED ONE OF THEM THAT IS IMPORTANT.
>> IT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT APS IS ADDRESSING TOO, IS THAT POSSIBILITY OF FALLEN LINES COMMITTING FIRE, AND THEN THEY'RE GOING TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DAMAGE, WHICH HAPPENED TO PG&E IN CALIFORNIA.
THANK YOU FOR THAT. COMMENTS, DEVELOPMENT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.
PAGE 15, PREFERRED SITE REQUIREMENTS WOULD LIMIT DEVELOPMENT STAFF RESPONSE.
WE'LL REMOVE REQUIREMENT FOR COMPLIANCE WITH AT LEAST THREE.
THIS GETS BACK TO YOUR POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE CRITERIA.
THE WAY WE ORIGINALLY STRUCTURED THE ORDINANCE WAS FOR FOR PREFERRED SITES WE WANT TO DIRECT YOU TO REPURPOSE MINE TAILING SITES AND AREAS NEXT TO HIGHWAYS THAT WE WOULD REQUIRE AN APPLICANT TO ACTUALLY MEET AT LEAST THREE OF THAT LIST OF CRITERIA, OR IT'S PROHIBITIVE.
IT'S DISALLOWED. WE HAD A LOT OF PUSHBACK ON THAT, THAT MAYBE THAT SHOULD BE A LITTLE BIT MORE OPEN-ENDED TO THIS DISCRETION.
AGAIN, IT'S STILL YOUR DISCRETION.
I BELIEVE WE MIGHT HAVE ALSO HEARD FROM COUNCIL ON THAT ONE.
THAT WOULD BE ONE WHERE WE'VE ACTUALLY ALREADY MADE THAT CHANGE AND WOULD PROPOSE THAT THE BOARD HAS THE DISCRETION RATHER THAN US SETTING FORTH A SPECIFIC NUMERIC CRITERIA FOR AN APPLICANT TO MEET.
[02:30:07]
ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ON THAT? THAT AGAIN, THAT WAS BASED UPON WHAT WE HEARD FROM INDUSTRY REPS, AS WELL AS COUNCIL.COMMENTS CONTINUED, ALMOST DONE, DEVELOPMENT, PERFORMANCE STANDARDS CONTINUED, PAGE 16.
THIS IS A COMMENT WE HEARD FROM INDUSTRY.
SETBACK SHOULD BE THE SAME AS OTHER USES.
I COULDN'T MORE STRONGLY DISAGREE WITH THAT COMMENT.
I THINK THE WHOLE PREMISE OF ZONING IS TO SEPARATE UNLIGHT USES AND PROTECT PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY.
THIS GIVEN THE SCALE OF THESE TYPES OF PROJECTS, IT ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY, SO I WOULD DISAGREE WITH THAT COMMENT.
PAGE 16, ADD SETBACK FOR THIS QUESTION, PAGE 16, COMMENT FROM ARIZONA FISH AND GAME.
REALLY WHAT THEY'RE SAYING HERE IS THAT WE HAVE, ESPECIALLY IN YAVAPAI COUNTY, A CHECKERBOARD LAND PATTERN OF OWNERSHIP BETWEEN PRIVATE LANDS AND STATE TRUST LANDS, AND SO THAT CAN CREATE CHALLENGES WHEN YOU'RE PUTTING UP FENCES, BECAUSE IF EVERYTHING IS A HARD RIGHT ANGLE, THAT'S NOT GREAT FOR WILDLIFE.
THAT'S REALLY WHAT THEY'RE SAYING IS WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT SETBACKS, ALLOW SOME FLEXIBILITY TO ROUND OUT THE EDGES, BECAUSE THAT TENDS TO BE WHAT WORKS THE BEST FOR MOBILE WILDLIFE, AND WE AGREE WITH THAT.
THAT MAKES SENSE. YOU CAN ACTUALLY MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE FOR WILDLIFE BY JUST MAKING THAT LITTLE CHANGE.
WE'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT DOING THAT IN INSTANCES WHERE YOU HAVE THOSE 38 ACRE LAND SECTIONS OF STATE OWNERSHIP, I THINK THAT WOULD BE DISCRETION OF THE BOARD.
WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT, BUT WE AGREE WITH THE COMMENT.
PAGE 17, AGAIN, PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, ADD SUBSECTION FOR POST-CONSTRUCTION MONITORING FOR WILDLIFE CORRIDORS, TO VALIDATE EFFECTIVENESS OF MAINTAINING CONNECTIVITY.
SO WILDLIFE STUDIES COULD BE ENCOURAGED OR REQUIRED IF THE BOARD WISHES.
CURRENTLY, WE DON'T PROPOSE TO REQUIRE THAT.
IT MAY BE IN THE COURSE OF AN APPLICATION.
THE ORDINANCE REQUIRES CONSULTATION WITH ARIZONA FISH AND GAME, AND SO IF WE HEAR STRONGLY THAT BECAUSE YOU'RE PROPOSING TO LOCATE THIS IN AN AREA THAT HAS THOSE RESOURCES ON THE GROUND OF MIGRATION, AND THEY ASK FOR THAT REQUIREMENT, THAT MAY BE A STIPULATION OF THE BOARD.
>> THAT STIPULATION SHOULD OR COULD INCLUDE THAT THOSE MIGRATION PATTERNS CHANGE OR CIRCUMSTANCES CHANGE BECAUSE OF CLIMATE AND TRAFFIC AND EVERYTHING ELSE, DEVELOPMENT, AND SO IT'S NOT JUST THAT ONE TIME RECOMMENDATION, BUT RATHER SOME ABILITY TO GO BACK AND SAY, CIRCUMSTANCES OR THE ENVIRONMENT OR CLIMATE HAS CHANGED, AND WE NEED AN ASSESSMENT NOW, AND IT SHOULD BE AT THEIR COST.
>> WE'LL NEED THE FLEXIBILITY TO MAKE ADJUSTMENT AS TIME GOES BY, BECAUSE YOU TAKE SITUATIONS LIKE THE BALD EAGLES.
THEY'RE NOT ALWAYS IN THE SAME SPOT.
THEY MOVE DIFFERENT PLACES DEPENDING UPON THINGS LIKE THAT, AND YOU MAY WELL HAVE SOME KIND OF AN IMPACT THERE.
SAME GOES FOR ANY OF OUR FOUR FOOTED FRIENDS.
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF THINGS CHANGE FOR THEM, THAT WE CAN CHANGE WITH THEM TO SOME DEGREE.
>> THESE ARE GREAT COMMENTS. YOU WON ME OVER.
WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THAT LANGUAGE.
>> SPECIFIC COMMENTS CONTINUED.
PAGE 20 BELIEVES APLIC, THE BIRD STANDARDS, I MENTIONED THE AVIAN BIRD STANDARDS I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY VIOLATE ARIZONA TRANSMISSION LINE STATUTES.
STAFF RESPONSE, WE WILL NEED MORE INFORMATION FROM THE COMMENTER ON HOW THEY BELIEVE THIS RELATES TO STATE STATUTE.
TO JUST SAY, HEY, THIS IS ILLEGAL, YOU CAN'T DO THAT, WELL, I WOULD ASK YOU AS A COMMENTER MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC TO PROVIDE SOME SUBSTANCE FOR THAT ARGUMENT FOR US TO REACT TO AND RESPOND TO IT.
PAGE 20, MANUFACTURED DOCUMENTATION.
>> NO. THEY MIGHT BE THINKING ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU HAVE WINDMILLS, MORE SO THAN WITH SOLAR.
BUT NOW THAT I'M THINKING ABOUT IT, I KNOW SOMEBODY WHO WORKS FOR ONE OF THE SOLAR COMPANIES OUT THERE IN THE DESERT ABOVE BLYTHE AND HER SOLE JOB IS TO LOCATE ANIMALS WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THEIR SOLAR FIELD AND FIGURE OUT WHY THEY DIED AND THERE'S A LOT OF.
>> A BIRD MAY LOOK AT A SEA OF PANELS AND THINK IT'S A SEA OF WATER.
>> BUT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SEE THE THWACK THWACK ASSOCIATED WITH WIND WITH SOLAR.
NOISE. WE HAD A COMMENT ABOUT NOISE LEVELS.
THEY FELT THAT OUR STANDARD OF 50 DB WAS TOO HIGH.
THAT'S REALLY THE INDUSTRY STANDARD.
[02:35:02]
OUR RESPONSE IS SUSTAINED REPEATED EXPOSURE TO NOISE LEVELS ABOVE 80-90 DECIBELS CAN RESULT IN HEARING LOSS.THE BOARD CAN SET FORTH THE STANDARD.
BUT THIS IS A STANDARD THAT'S PRETTY MUCH UNIFORMLY USED ACROSS THE BOARD.
>> I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE REST OF THE BOARD, BUT FOR ME, WHEN YOU START GETTING INTO DECIBELS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, I'D RATHER HAVE SOMEBODY EXPERT GIVE ME AN OPINION.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN BROWN. I WILL POINT OUT THAT WITH A LOT OF THIS STUFF, LIKE WE HAVEN'T HEARD FROM EXPERTS, AND YOU CERTAINLY HAVE THE ABILITY TO RETAIN AN INDEPENDENT OUTSIDE EXPERT TO TALK TO INDUSTRY IN GENERAL, THE ECONOMICS, I'M SURE WE HEARD FROM ONE APPLICANT TODAY.
THERE'S OTHERS THAT WOULD ALSO, I'M SURE, BE MORE THAN WILLING TO PROVIDE THEIR TAKE ON THE INDUSTRY AND SOME OF THESE ISSUES.
>> YEAH, I AGREE WITH THE CHAIRMAN, AND I THINK I'VE BEEN NIPPED AROUND THE EDGES ON SOME OF MY COMMENTS TO THAT VERY POINT.
WE NEED AN OUTSIDE OBJECTIVE EXPERT INPUT ON SEVERAL OF THESE PARAMETERS.
>> IF NOT A FULL BONE PRESENTATION, YOU CERTAINLY HAVE THE RIGHT TO REVIEW IT.
I CAN TELL YOU THAT WE'VE HAD GREAT INTERACTIONS WITH THE BOARD PROFESSIONALS AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PROFESSIONALS.
THIS HAS BEEN A REAL TEAM EFFORT, AND WE FEEL PRETTY GOOD ABOUT WHERE WE ARE.
BUT, AGAIN, SIMILAR TO CATASTROPHIC FIRE AND THINGS, THESE PANELS DON'T TEND TO EXPLODE.
THEY DON'T TEND TO GENERATE A LOT OF NOISE, AND THAT MAY BE WHY WE'RE GETTING THIS PUSHBACK.
WHY ARE YOU FOCUSED ON THIS ISSUE? NOISE ISN'T THE ISSUE.
IT'S REALLY LOCATION, VIEW SHED, HABITAT IMPACTS, THINGS LIKE THIS, HOW MUCH LAND YOU'RE TAKING OUT OF OUT OF PRODUCTION, THINGS LIKE THIS.
BUT IF THE BOARD WANTS US TO LOOK AT RETAINING AN INDEPENDENT REVIEW, THEY CERTAINLY CAN.
>> WE ARE ALREADY BENEFITING FROM THAT FREE REVIEW FROM THE PUBLIC, AND WE HAVE PUSHED IT OUT TO OTHER MUNICIPALITIES.
>> I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO TRY AND REINVENT THE WHEEL.
WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS GET AT LEAST, A STANDARD ESTABLISHED.
IF THERE IS A STANDARD IN THE STATE TO SOME DEGREE, THEN MAYBE WE WILL LOOK AT THAT AND MAYBE LEAVE IT AS IS OR MODIFY IT.
>> WE'LL AGAIN REVISIT. I DON'T KNOW WHERE THIS NUMBER COME FROM.
AGAIN, WE REVIEWED IT AGAINST SEVERAL ORDINANCES, INCLUDING THOSE WITHIN THE STATE.
WE'LL TAKE ANOTHER TO SEE IF WE'RE IN THE SWEET SPOT OF WHERE EVERYBODY ELSE IS.
>> I THINK THAT'S WHAT I'M REFERRING TO, MATT AND SOME OF THESE CATASTROPHIC THINGS THAT MAYBE WE HAVEN'T THOUGHT ABOUT.
THERE'S NO REASON NOT TO PAUSE JUST LONG ENOUGH TO SAY WHAT IS OUR POTENTIAL HERE? WHAT ARE THE RAMIFICATIONS? IF WE DON'T PAY ATTENTION TO IT, WE'VE GOT EXAMPLES OF CATASTROPHIC EVENTS, WHETHER IT'S HOMELAND SECURITY ISSUES, OR SIMPLY FIRE, POLE FALLING DOWN, AND IGNITING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF ACRES, AND SO I THINK SOMEBODY TALKING TO US ABOUT THAT META LEVEL, IRRESPECTIVE OF THE DATA POINTS THAT YOU DO HAVE, AND I THINK THEY'RE GOOD ONES, AND I APPLAUD YOU FOR THAT.
BUT WE MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER THAT BEFORE TOO MUCH LONGER.
>> THANK YOU. I'M DEFINITELY HEARING THAT HAVING APS, HEARING FROM THEM AND INVITING THEM TO A FUTURE MEETING WOULD BE VERY VALUABLE.
I WILL NOTE, OF COURSE, THAT WE ARE ON AN AGGRESSIVE PACE HERE WITH THE TIMELINE WE'VE NOW SET FORTH AND ADVERTISED, AND WE DO WANT TO GET IT RIGHT.
YOU CERTAINLY HAVE THE ABILITY TO PRESS THE PAUSE BUTTON, IF YOU WANT TO NEED TO, YOU HAVE THAT ABILITY.
>> I THINK WE'RE ALMOST THERE. PUBLIC ROADS.
COMMENT, PAGE 22, DEVELOPMENT RISK IS TOO GREAT TO REQUIRE ROAD IMPROVEMENT.
IF DESIGNATED HAUL ROUTES ARE FOUND TO BE INADEQUATE DURING INSTALLATION, NUMBER OF TRIPS, DRAINAGE, SAFETY ISSUE CONCERNS, RESPONSE.
THUS FAR, PUBLIC WORKS HAS BEEN COMFORTABLE WITH THE ORDINANCE AS WRITTEN.
I WAS JUST SPEAKING TO SOME OF THOSE FOLKS DURING THE BREAK, AND WE CERTAINLY WELCOME FURTHER REVIEW AND COMMENT, BUT THUS FAR, PUBLIC WORKS APPEARS TO BE ON BOARD WITH THE ORDINANCE AS PROPOSED AS IT PERTAINS TO THEIR AREA OF EXPERTISE.
FINALLY, NOW WE'RE THANKFULLY AT THE END OF THE COMMENTS THUS RECEIVED SUMMATION.
I WILL JUST SUMMARIZE THAT, AGAIN, THIS IS ABOUT THE CONSIDERATION OF A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE, SECTION 501, SMALL-SCALE SOLAR EQUIPMENT STANDARDS, AND TO ADD A NEW SECTION, SECTION 608, UTILITY SCALE SOLAR FACILITY REQUIREMENTS, STANDARDS, PROCEDURES TO ESTABLISH A UTILITY SCALE SOLAR FACILITY IN UNINCORPORATED YAVAPAI COUNTY.
WITH THAT, THAT'S THE END OF MY PRESENTATION, AND I CAN STAND FOR ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.
>> I'LL JUST MAKE A QUICK QUESTION STATEMENT, IS THAT I DO BELIEVE WE NEED TO GO BACK AND READ THIS AND GET MORE
[02:40:02]
IN-DEPTH QUESTIONS THAT WE MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE ANSWERED BY YOU BEFORE THE NEXT PRESENTATION OR NEXT HEARING.>> I THINK IT'D BE GOOD JUST TO HAVE APS HERE SINCE THEY HAVE SEVERAL SOLAR PANELS THROUGHOUT THE STATE.
THEY SHOULD HAVE PROVIDED QUITE A BIT OF INPUT ON IT.
>> THEY'RE AN IMPORTANT STAKEHOLDER.
>> MARY, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING?
I JUST WOULD LIKE TO THANK EVERYONE FOR ALL THE HARD WORK THEY DID ON THIS PRESENTATION.
REALLY APPRECIATE ALL OF THE WORK THAT EVERYONE'S DONE, AND YOUR PRESENTATION WAS FANTASTIC. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. IF I JUST TAKE ONE SECOND, I JUST WANT TO CALL OUT TO SUSAN ABER, OUR PLANNER, TOO BECAUSE SHE ACTUALLY HAS BEEN WORKING WITH ME HAND TO HAND ON ALL OF THIS.
HOWEVER GOOD I LOOK TODAY IS BECAUSE I HAVE REALLY GOOD PLANNERS WORKING WITH ME, SUPPORTING ME, AND I APPRECIATE IT.
>> YES, I GOT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
DOWN IN MY AREA, THERE'S A LOT OF CONSIDERATION TO PUT IN MINES ON FEDERAL LANDS, AND THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT NEEDING NIPA REQUIREMENTS, AND IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO TAKE 10 YEARS TO GET THE APPROVAL TO EVEN START THE MINE.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THESE FACILITIES GOING IN, THE AMOUNT OF ACREAGE THAT THEY COULD AFFECTING OUR OTHER CULTURAL RESOURCES, NATURAL RESOURCES.
IS THERE A REQUIREMENT IF THEY'RE GOING TO GO IN ON FEDERAL LANDS THAT THEY HAVE TO MEET A NIPA REQUIREMENT?
>> I BELIEVE THE ANSWER IS YES.
>> IT COULD BE FAIRLY SIGNIFICANT FROM THE TIME THAT THEY PICK AN AREA AND THEY GET TO GET APPROVAL THROUGH NIPA TO ACTUALLY START BUILDING THE FACILITY.
>> WE HAVEN'T SEEN IT YET IN YAVAPAI COUNTY, BUT IT IS TRUE THAT THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, BLM, HAS BEEN LEASING OUT LANDS AND ELSEWHERE IN THE STATE FOR UTILITY SCALE SOLAR, MASSIVE OPERATIONS.
ON THE ONE HAND, IT'S GOOD TO THE EXTENT THAT THAT WE HAVE AGENCIES THAT ARE DETERMINING WHAT ARE APPROPRIATE AREAS FIRST, RATHER THAN LETTING DEVELOPERS SET THE TABLE OF WHERE THEY WANT TO GO, WHICH IS IN THEIR BEST INTEREST.
UNDOUBTEDLY, WITH THOSE PROJECTS, I CAN'T IMAGINE IT NOT BEING THE CASE LIKE YOU SAID, THAT THAT WOULDN'T BE TRIGGERED.
ALSO, THERE'S CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS THAT FOLLOW THE USE OF FEDERAL MONEY.
IF THERE ARE SUBSIDIES OR INCENTIVES OR THINGS LIKE THIS, THEN THAT'S GOING TO TRIGGER SOME LEVEL OF OVERSIGHT.
>> I ASSUME THAT NIPA WOULD PROBABLY GIVE US SOME INFORMATION ON THINGS THAT WE WOULD CONSIDER WHEN WE APPROVE THE APPLICATION.
>> THAT'S ACTUALLY A GREAT QUESTION BECAUSE WE DID SIT DOWN WITH APS THE OTHER DAY, AND THEY SAID THAT THEY WERE GOING TO GET US SOME OF THE STANDARDS THAT ARE BEING USED TO VET THOSE PROJECTS.
THERE'S ALWAYS ANOTHER BODY OF REVIEW AND HOW THEY GO ABOUT IT AND WHAT THEY THOUGHT OF, AND WE DIDN'T THAT WE HADN'T THOUGHT OF YET.
THAT'S GOING TO BE ANOTHER LAYER THAT WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO REVIEW.
>> LIKE SUPERVISOR OBERG [PHONETIC] IS SAYING, I AGREE WITH HIM.
I THINK LET'S GO TO THE INDUSTRY APS AND ASK THEM HOW THEY DO IT, AND THEN WE GO TO, LET'S TAKE, THE FOREST SERVICE AND ASK THEM HOW THEIR NIPA COMPARES.
WHAT INFORMATION, HOW IN DEPTH IS IT? THAT'S WHAT I THINK WE'RE LOOKING FOR.
>> WHAT WE'VE HEARD IS THAT ONCE APPROVAL HAPPENS, IT'S AT BEST A 2-3 YEAR PROCESS, BEST CASE SCENARIO.
ONCE YOU ADD IN NIPA, THAT COULD EXTEND A PROJECT MUCH FURTHER OUT.
IT'S SOMETHING TO BE AWARE OF.
I THINK IN MANY WAYS, OUR ORDINANCE IS NIPA ASK, AND THAT WE ARE ASKING FOR A LOT AS WE SHOULD BE.
THE NIPA REQUIREMENTS PROBABLY GO WELL ABOVE AND BEYOND.
THEY HAVE THEIR OWN POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE CRITERIA THAT THEY LOOK AT.
>> THAT'S TRUE, BUT HOWEVER, YOU'D HATE TO HAVE US AUTHORIZE A PROJECT OF 3,000 PLUS ACRES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, AND THEN IN THE MIDDLE OF IT, FIND OUT WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF A BURIAL GROUND.
WHAT DO YOU DO THEN? YOU TURN AROUND.
IT'S BETTER TO KNOW ABOUT THE BURIAL GROUND UP FRONT SO THAT WE CAN MOVE THE LOCATION.
>> JUST FOR THE RECORD, I WANT TO MAKE IT REALLY CLEAR THAT OUR PROPOSED ORDINANCE ALREADY REQUIRES A CLASS 1 AND CLASS 2 REVIEW OF CULTURAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
THIS ORDINANCE ALREADY CARES ABOUT THOSE ISSUES, AND IF SOMETHING GETS FOUND OR TRIGGERED, THEN IT'S A CLASS 3.
>> WE AUTOMATICALLY GO TO FLOOD TOO?
>> YEAH. I DON'T THINK WE'VE HEARD COMMENTS.
[02:45:02]
WE HAVE. I THINK WE'RE GOOD WITH FLOOD CONTROL.IN FACT, WE HAVE THEIR STANDARDS THAT ARE IN EXISTENCE, AND WE HAVE STATE STANDARDS, BUT IN MANY CASES, YOU CAN CRAFT AN ORDINANCE THAT UNLESS THE ARS SAYS OTHERWISE, YOU CAN GO ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT THE MINIMUM STANDARD IS.
ESPECIALLY WITH OUR BUFFERS AND SETBACKS, WE REALLY GO ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT THE MINIMUM STANDARDS ARE.
>> ANOTHER QUESTION, PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE ASKED THIS EARLIER WHEN THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THEY DIDN'T LIKE THE CAP.
NOW, IS THE CAP ON THE INDIVIDUAL FACILITY? IS THAT THE CUMULATIVE CAP THAT THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT?
>> THE OTHER THING IS, LET'S SAY YOU PUT IN A 300 MEGAWATT FACILITY SOMEPLACE.
HOPEFULLY, THEY WOULD PROBABLY PUT IT SOMEPLACE WHERE THERE'S ALREADY TRANSMISSION LINES CLOSE BY THAT THEY COULD TIE INTO, I WOULD ASSUME, BUT LET'S SAY THERE'S NOT.
WHEREVER THEY DECIDE TO PUT THIS FACILITY, THERE'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE A SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENT IN PUTTING IN THE TOWERS AND THE SUBSTATIONS AND THE LINES AND ALL THAT.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DECOMMISSIONING THE FACILITY.
WHO'S GOING TO DECOMMISSION THE LINES AND THE TOWERS AND THE SUBSTATIONS AND EVERYTHING ELSE IF NO OTHER USE EVER COMES ABOUT TO UTILIZE THAT ASSET?
>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER OBERG. GREAT QUESTION.
THIS QUESTION ACTUALLY DID COME UP IN OUR DISCUSSION WITH APS THIS WEEK, IN THAT, IT'S HARD TO IMAGINE THAT LEVEL OF INVESTMENT AND ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE WOULDN'T BE UTILIZED BY ANOTHER OPERATOR.
IMAGINE IF THIS GOES AWAY BECAUSE SUDDENLY THE MARKET OR THE TECHNOLOGY HAS CHANGED, YOU NOW HAVE AN AREA THAT'S PRIME FOR DEVELOPMENT.
SOMETHING ELSE IS GOING TO WANT TO GO THERE AND TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT INVESTMENT, BUT TO THE EXTENT THAT WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT HOW THAT INTERFACES WITH THE ORDINANCE, I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE A LOOK.
>> THAT'S A VERY GOOD QUESTION HARRY IS ASKING.
BECAUSE AS WE WERE LOOKING AT THE PROJECT THAT WAS ORIGINALLY GOING TO BE THE PUMP FACILITY THAT WAS GOING TO BE UP NEAR SELIGMAN, WHERE THEY'RE PUSHING WATER UP OUT OF THE AQUIFER TO PROPEL TURBINES WITHIN A SIDE OF A MOUNTAIN AND CREATE ANOTHER LAKE.
THOSE LINES WERE GOING DIRECTLY OVER THE KINGMAN AREA TO CATCH UP WITH THOSE TRANSMISSION LINES IN THE GRID.
THEY WEREN'T COMING TO PHOENIX AND THEY WEREN'T COMING TO US, BUT THEY WERE GOING DUE WEST. WHAT HAPPENED? BUT LIKE HARRY SAID, IF THEY DECIDE TO STOP OPERATION, THERE'S A LOT OF LINES THAT ARE GOING TO BE BETWEEN GOING ACROSS YAVAPAI COUNTY, THAT WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR THOSE? I DON'T KNOW, IS IT APS OR SRP OR WHO?
>> JUST NOTE IN THE ORDINANCE, IT SAYS, FOR SUBSTATION TRANSMISSION LINES MAY BE CONSIDERED FOR USE PERMIT AFTER DECOMMISSIONING.
UTILITY COMPANIES ARE NOT ALONE IN THIS PROCESS.
THERE'S GOING TO BE A PARTNERSHIP THAT TAKES PLACE BETWEEN THEM AND STATE OPERATORS.
>> WELL, IT MAY NOT BE STATE, IT MIGHT BE INTERSTATE.
LIKE WIPA, WE HAVE WIPA ALREADY WITH WESTERN STATES.
>> I WOULD THINK THAT THEY'RE ALSO DOING THEIR DUE DILIGENCE.
THE VIABILITY OF THE AREA, THE PROJECT, IT DOES RAISE A QUESTION IN MY MIND IN TERMS OF BECAUSE WE'VE CREATED THESE CAPS, WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU HAVE AN APPLICANT THAT HASN'T DONE THEIR DUE DILIGENCE AND THEY'VE COUPLED TOGETHER ALL THESE INVESTORS FOR MAYBE NOT ALL THE BEST PURPOSES AND NOW WE'VE LOCKED UP THE PROJECT, THIS LAND, THAT CAP, AND NOTHING'S HAPPENING? WHAT HAPPENS THEN. THAT'S AT THE EXPENSE OF WHO MIGHT HAVE BEEN THE CHOSEN APPLICANT WHO ACTUALLY DOES HAVE THEIR ACT TOGETHER AND IS READY TO MOVE FORWARD.
>> I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE DIDN'T HEAR MUCH ABOUT AS THE TRANSMISSION LINES. THANK YOU, HARRY.
I THINK WE NEED TO RESEARCH THAT A LITTLE MORE AND GET BACK TO US AND SEE WHAT WE FOUND OUT.
>> IT'S TIED EXACTLY TO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, MATT.
WE DON'T WANT TO TIE UP TIME AND POTENTIAL WITH A INEXPERIENCED APPLICANT OR AN EXPERIENCED APPLICANT WHO WANTS TO DO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO.
THERE'S GOT TO BE SOME WAY TO ADDRESS THAT.
>> YEAH. IT OF GETS TO ARE WE GOING TO DO A REDEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN A MUNICIPALITY TO DEVELOPER? WE'RE GOING TO REVIEW THEIR PROFORMAS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE REALLY UP TO SNUFF AND CAPABLE OF DOING WHAT THEY PROMISED TO DO.
WE DO HAVE AN AGGRESSIVE TIMELINE.
WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK, WE'RE GOING TO LISTEN TO THE MINUTES, WE'RE GOING TO DO AN OUTLINE OF THE COMMENTS TODAY, AND WE'RE GOING TO START WORKING AND TRYING TO GET THOSE ANSWERS.
WHETHER TO THE EXTENT WE GET ALL OF THESE QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS ANSWERED BEFORE THE NEXT HEARING,
[02:50:01]
IT'LL BE A CHALLENGE.THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD QUESTIONS THAT CAME UP TODAY.
>> THIS IS A EVOLUTIONARY PROCESS. I'M SORRY, MR. CHAIR, I DIDN'T MEAN TO JUMP ON YOU, BUT MY BRAIN JUST STARTED TALKING TO YOU, MATT.
IRRESPECTIVE, IT SHOULD BE AT LEAST A PLACEHOLDER IDEA, AND WE CAN BACK FILL IT AS NECESSARY, BUT I THINK IT'S A RELEVANT POINT TO MAKE IN BOTH CASES.
>> YOU MIGHT FIND IT'S EASILY ANSWERED JUST BY TALKING TO THE APS. WE DON'T KNOW.
>> NO. SORRY. I WAS THINKING FORWARD.
>> WELL, LAST THING I WANT TO SAY IS, THIS IS A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT EFFORT THAT YOU'VE UNDERTAKEN HERE, AND I THINK YOU'VE DONE A GREAT JOB IN TRYING TO COME UP WITH ALL THE POSSIBILITIES THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER.
I WANT TO THANK YOU AND YOUR STAFF FOR DOING THAT, BUT I KNOW I'M GOING TO HAVE MANY MORE QUESTIONS AS WE MOVE FORWARD ON THIS THING, BUT THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR RIGHT NOW. THANKS.
>> TRULY EXCELLENT QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS.
YOU MADE OUR JOB EASIER BECAUSE WE REALLY WANT TO GET IT RIGHT.
WE REALLY WANT THE MODEL ORDINANCE, LIKE YOU DID WITH YOUR DARK SKIES ORDINANCE SO MANY YEARS AGO, THE MODEL FOR OTHER COUNTIES AND STATES AND JURISDICTION SO DO.
IF WE COULD DO THAT HERE WITH THIS ORDINANCE, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE COULD ALL BE PROUD OF.
>> WE'RE LOOKING AT THE NEXT HEARING TO BE IN SEPTEMBER, CORRECT? SEPTEMBER 4TH. IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID?
>> THAT WOULD BE THE FINAL PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE BOARD FOR FINAL-
>> IS THERE A PLAN IN PLACE FOR US TO REVIEW THIS ONE MORE TIME BEFORE THEN?
>> THE SHORT ANSWER IS NO, NOT BEFORE THE BOARD.
WE DO HAVE TWO HEARINGS, AM I RIGHT? YEAH, I'M RIGHT.
WE HAVE THE TWO HEARINGS COMING UP PRESENTLY ON THE JULY 18TH AND AUGUST 8TH BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
PART OF IT WAS BECAUSE THE ADVERTISEMENTS THAT'S GONE OUT, WHAT'S BEEN OUTWARD FACING TO THE PUBLIC.
>> AGAIN, IF YOU DECIDE YOU WANT TO HIT THE PAUSE BUTTON, YOU CERTAINLY CAN DO THAT.
>> I JUST WANT TO GIVE US SOME GUIDELINES.
IF WE HAVE COMMENTS IN OR QUESTIONS, WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO GET THEM TO YOU LONG BEFORE THE 18TH OF JULY.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. THAT WOULD BE SURELY WELCOME.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BY THE BOARD? MARY, ANYTHING?
>> NOW, I JUST WANT TO COMMEND YOU ON YOUR EFFORTS ON THIS, BOTH OF YOU.
THANK YOU, VERY COMPREHENSIVE, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING FROM APS ALSO.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. EXCELLENT. MOVING ON TO NUMBER 6.
[6. Development Services - Recommend approval to the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control of series 006 Bar Liquor License Application # 295164 without protest, submitted by Kyle Anthony Kickbush for Old Corral Bar located at 11375 E. Cornville Road, Cornville, AZ 86325 (District 2 - Supervisor Gregory)]
I LIKE THIS ONE. A LIQUOR LICENSE.RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF LIQUOR LICENSE AS A CONTROL A SERIES OF THE '06 BAR LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION 295164 WITHOUT PROTEST.
SUBMITTED BY KYLE ANTHONY KICKBUSH FOR OLD CORRAL BAR LOCATED AT 11375 EAST CORNVILLE ROAD IN CORNVILLE, ARIZONA 86325.
>> I'D LIKE TO HEAR THE WHOLE PRESENTATION.
NO. I'M NOT. HAVE WE HEARD ANYTHING FROM THE PUBLIC?
>> NO PUBLIC COMMENTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED.
>> I'M GOING TO NEED THEM TO OPEN UP RIGHT AWAY.
>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
>> MOTION MADE BY MR. GREGORY, SECONDED BY MS. MICHAELS. ALL IN FAVOR.
>> UNANIMOUS. WE'RE GOING TO GO TO CALL TO THE PUBLIC.
INDIVIDUALS MAY ADDRESS THE BOARD FOR UP TO THREE MINUTES ON ANY RELEVANT ISSUE WITHIN THE BOARD'S JURISDICTION PURSUANT TO ARS 38431.01H.
BOARD MEMBERS SHALL NOT DISCUSS OR TAKE ACTIONS ON THE MATTERS RAISED DURING THE CALL TO THE PUBLIC.
THE BOARD MAY DIRECT STAFF TO STUDY THE MATTER OR DIRECT THE MATTER TO BE RESCHEDULED FOR CONSIDERATION AT A LATER DATE.
DO WE HAVE ANYBODY OVER IN PRESCOTT? CALL TO THE PUBLIC.
>>IN COTTONWOOD. I SEE NOBODY SHAKING THEIR HEAD.
THEREFORE, WE'LL MOVE ON TO GOING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
[ EXECUTIVE SESSION]
DO I HAVE A MOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION?I DON'T KNOW WHAT THIS ONE IS ENTIRELY.
>> I JUST HAVE TO BE BACK THERE BY 3:00.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
MS. CRAIG BROWN, WE ARE BACK IN SESSION AT THIS POINT FROM OUR SEPARATE SESSION.
[02:55:03]
WE ARE, AT THIS POINT, GOING TO TAKE NO FURTHER ACTION, SO WE'RE GOING TO ADJOURN. THANK YOU.>> THANKS FOR ATTENDING.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.