SU0009067 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

adversely affect other land uses transportation, or facilities in the vicinity. (Underlining added. We point out that in clear contrast the provisions about use permits applications are"It is the intent of this Chapter to provide a method of reviewing proposed uses". Section 9-821.1 (bolding added)). At the public hearing the main opposition did not address whether the proposed use had "the potential to adversely affect other land use, transportation, or facilities in the vicinity". Rather the opposition disagreed with the use until or unless the County adopted a county wide policy with respect to solar farms. We offer no opinion about the merits or demerits of this claim. However, simply stated, the claim is outside the scope of a simple Site Application and does not apply to the questions asked by the Zoning Title regarding Site Applications. Finally, we respectfully point out that State Law announces a clear policy in support of solar energy and has enacted policies to discourage the denial of solar energy proposal on the basis of local land use laws. See,for example, Government Code section 65850(c). In sum, the County's professional and independent planning department concluded that the proposed use satisfied all regulations and was prepared to approve the application administratively. The planning commission received no competent evidence or facts concerning the narrow scope of review for a Site Application and made no formal findings denying the request. Since the Site Application complies with all County rules and regulations we respectfully request the appeal be granted by the Board of Supervisors.