HomeMy WebLinkAboutC.054.93011_1125 (2)Evaluation of Criteria: Items (b) and (d) would appear to be met based on the
limited amount of traffic that this operation generates as well as the plans of the
applicant. Items (a) and (c), however, would require greater analysis. The applicant
must demonstrate that the proposed expansion would not prove detrimental to the
surrounding community. In answering this, one may look to the suitability of the
surroundings for this type of industrial operation. Although the area is not zoned for
general industrial use, the subject parcel involves an agriculturally -based business that
is located in an undeveloped rural area (zoned RA). There are no homes adjacent, and
there is vacant wooded land or hree sides (north, east, and south) of the subject
property. The parcel to the west is vacant and owned by the LeaWay owners, as well.
Therefore, the subject property's physical situation would buffer it well in terms of
impact on neighboring property. In addition to this factor, rendering facilities are
heavily regulated by the State and will, as described in the enclosed environmental
report, have to meet stringent permitting requirements. In summary, the location of the
existing operation appears to be no less suitable for a rendering facility than any other
industrially -zoned territory in the County. It is located in an agricultural community
that has been relatively undeveloped. After due consideration of the many factors
surrounding this case, and upon site visit to this area, staff would recommend in favor
of this request.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION: On April 5, 2006 the Planning Board voted
unanimously (10-0) to recommend in favor of this expansion request.
rs*s*
McHargue said the setbacks had been met by the applicant's preliminary site
plan, and the traffic might actually decrease due to the different means of material
processing. He said the company provided a service to Iredell residents as well as some
adjacent counties. Mr. McHargue said LeaWay picked up deceased animals and
processed the legally usable parts into pet food. He said other parts, such as bones and
organs, were rendered or cooked offsite. McHargue said that from an economic
standpoint, the company had been advised that it would be more advantageous to render
the material onsite rather than having it trucked to other locations. He said the primary
regulatory body was the state veterinarian (Dr. Marshall), who had said the State of
North Carolina had not issued a license for a rendering facility in 20 years. Also, he
indicated there were only ten rendering plants in NC, with most being large facilities
owned by large companies. McHargue said Tyson's Foods in Harmony, NC, a
rendering facility, produced in the millions of pounds per week, compared to the
projected amount of 50,000 pounds per week that LeaWay could process in livestock
ruminants. He said the planning board members had noted how small of an operation
the LeaWay facility would be when making their decision. McHargue said the new
building would be 60 ft. wide by 100 ft. long; all enclosed. He said the applicant owned
about seven acres nearby, but it was in a different parcel.
McHargue said the planning board felt it was appropriate to recommend in favor
of the request. He said the planning board had tried to determine where a "perfect" site
might be found to place a rendering facility and decided that due to only a few homes
around the LeaWay Company, the site would be suitable; especially when looking at the
county's industrial land use map.
Commissioner Johnson mentioned the criteria, and he asked McHargue if it
were safe to say the recommendation was based on the small scope of the project and
the engineering report (closed facility).
McHargue said this would be a fair assessment, plus the area was well buffered
in a natural way. He said that if homes were situated across the road from the company,
the decision would be more difficult.
Jimmy Gr av (advocate), a dairy farmer and Vice Chair of the Soil & Water
Conservation District Board distributed a handout. He mentioned dairy farmers had to
go through a certification process that included an explanation on the methods to handle
animal mortality (disposal pits, trench burial, incineration, rendering, and composting).
Gray said many landfills did not accept animal carcasses, and onsite burials and pit
disposals were being heavily scrutinized due to the water tables, or soils being
vulnerable to the leaching of nutrients. In addition, he said incineration was