They can still submit information to be reviewed,” he said.Īccording to Bowen, Ripley’s zoning code did not allow energy storage systems to begin with. Our attorney is arguing that we are still in the process of reviewing things.
#NEWS AND OBSERVER OBITUARIES BROWSE BY TOWN FULL#
“The developer’s argument is that law came into effect after the full application was deemed complete. “The vocal members don’t want to see the energy storage component go forward,” Bowen said.īowen noted the town passed a Battery Energy Storage Systems law in June which does not permit large scale energy storage.
There was also an attorney representing the Ripley Fire Department as well. “ORES put forward strong arguments, the developer put forward strong arguments, and our attorney put forward strong arguments,” Bowen said. He called the hearing “a good discussion” on both sides. “We’ll see where that moves forward,” he said.īowen was unable to give a timeline on when the administrative judge will make a ruling.
“The developer put forward their case, ORES put forward their case, the town of Ripley spoke on why they feel that the zoning law should be followed, and then there was rebuttal arguments back and forth,” Bowen explained at the meeting.īowen said the administrative judge has three options: waive Ripley’s zoning law, mandate that Ripley’s zoning law must be followed and the battery storage won’t be allowed, or the judge will request hearings in writing as to why not allowing the energy storage component would be detrimental to the project. Those oral arguments took place Wednesday morning.
0 kommentar(er)
