Skip to main content

BW Solar

Town of Stafford solar proposal prompts spirited debate; ZBA decides to table variance request for 30 days

By Mike Pettinella

The Town of Stafford Zoning Board of Appeals on Monday night tabled an application for a variance to the municipality’s solar ordinance from BW Solar on behalf of a Batavia Stafford Townline Road couple seeking to put a pair of 5-megawatt systems on their property.

Following a public hearing that turned into a “Q & A” with BW Solar Project Developer Dan Huntington, the ZBA voted unanimously to put the action on hold for 30 days. It made its decision at the request of Chair Michael Lathan, who said he had several questions for the town attorney.

Lathan said he expects the board to make a determination at its next meeting on April 18.

About 30 residents attended the hour and 45 minute session that became necessary since BW Solar’s site plan included setbacks (distances from residential and/or nonresidential property lines) that were less than stipulated in Stafford’s solar law.

The Woods own and operate a large farm (and also lease and farm adjoining land) and desire to use about 60 acres for the two side-by-side ground-mounted solar systems. One will cover 31.08 acres and the other will utilize 28.32 acres in a district near College Road zoned as Industrial Park, which the town has deemed appropriate for solar.

While the setbacks were the primary focus, town residents fired off queries on related subjects – most notably the Stafford solar ordinance, itself, as well as impacts to real property value, health, the environment and the rural nature of the town.

RESIDENT CITES SOLAR LAW

Diane Hawn, a Stafford resident for 24 years, read three times from the town’s ordinance on Solar Energy Facilities, asking if BW Solar has followed the letter of the law by establishing a $150,000 escrow account and maintaining umbrella insurance coverage of $10 million during the application process.

“If these haven’t been established, with that huge thing in 2018 (the drafting of the solar ordinance), how can this even be happening right now?” she asked.

Hawn went back and forth with Lathan and Huntington on whether these fees needed to be paid upfront, with the application fee, or if that was part of the next step in the process – after BW Solar was granted the variances it sought to proceed with the project.

Huntington, responding to a question about the escrow account, said he hasn’t encountered that in his other solar projects.

“A $150,000 escrow account controlled by the town, even in a decommissioning sense, has never been established where the town controls the escrow account,” he said. “I can’t say across New York State that’s not true, but in all of the projects that I’ve done … I’ve never seen something of that nature.”

Town Board member Ron Panek advised that the escrow account for solar mirrors the one set up for a Planned Unit Development (such as a senior housing complex or trailer park).

“Is it unusual?” he said. “No, it’s right in our other laws.”

IN DEFENSE OF SOLAR LAW

Panek said much effort and time (nearly two years) were put into the wording of the solar law, and, since then, the Town of Le Roy has used parts of the law and the Town of Alexander’s law “is word for word, identical (to Stafford’s).”

Hawn also quoted another section of the law where it states that Stafford’s Comprehensive Plan “desires to maintain the pastoral, rural nature of this region. An industrial solar energy facility is in conflict with the culture and character of the community.”

ZBA alternate member Tim Thomas noted that the Wood property is in an industrial zoned area.

“Somebody could come in and build a manufacturing facility,” he said. “There’s probably a variety of industrial-type complexes that could go there. So, I would just ask to keep that in mind as you’re looking at this. Solar complexes – solar farms – really don’t demand a lot of services in the town.”

Huntington has maintained all along – in dealings with the Genesee County Planning Board and Town of Stafford officials and attorney – that BW Solar has crafted a solar site plan that minimizes the negative effect on the couple of neighbors by moving it away from the road and placing the two systems next to each other to enable the Woods to farm more of their land.

“The Town Board can’t reasonably do all the work they have to do, if we can’t even decide where the footprint of this thing is going to lie,” he said.

“So, that’s why we’re at the variance part first – to determine you can build there, you can’t build there. Once we know that, then we can say, we’ll outline the footprint, if we have to alter these designs and resubmit them to the Town Board, and now we have a clear, defined footprint that we can review everything, without changes from there.”

CONCERN OVER REAL PROPERTY CLAUSE

The ZBA’s inability to grant a variance to the town’s solar ordinance real property value protection clause, as indicated by the town attorney, is cause for concern, Huntington acknowledged. The law states that the solar operator shall assure there will be no loss in property value for any property within 2,500 feet of the solar farm – a significant distance.

“To create some type of an agreement with every single one of those homeowners is something that I’ve never heard of in any project that I’ve been involved in in New York State,” he said. “On this specific project, there is actually only one homeowner that’s adjoining the property.”

He said having to enter into contracts with up to 100 property owners in that 2,500-foot radius “could quadruple the cost of the project,” adding that if it came down to that, BW Solar would be forced to “defend in court.”

Huntington said he “can sympathize” with the one resident next to the proposed solar farm (who was in attendance last night).

“He has a beautiful home across the street that does overlook a beautiful farm field – I can’t argue that fact,” he said. “I can sympathize with his concerns …

“The variances we are asking for to pull it away from the road on which he lives on – specifically the 200 feet down to zero and the eastern side, 200 feet to 100 feet, would actually bring the solar array away from the road in such a manner that would actually allow his view, at least 50 percent of it, to stay farm fields. If those variances aren’t granted, the only place we can bring the remainder of those panels, to follow the law, is up into that bend, which would eat up his entire view.”

He said he would work with the resident to ensure the screening was adequate, not only at the beginning of the project but down the road.

OTHER DISCUSSION TOPICS

Other points brought up during the meeting:

  • On health hazards: Huntington said “studies have shown there are no health hazards associated with it when a solar farm is functioning properly, and maintained properly … and part of our duty is to make sure that a facility is operating at a high efficiency.” He added that a State Environmental Quality Review is required and BW Solar plans to notify agencies such as the Department of Environmental Conservation, Department of Transportation, Army Corps of Engineers and local governmental officials at the proper time.
  • On employees needed to build and maintain the system: Huntington said it is likely that union electricians would be hired due to the high voltage and that he hoped that local residents would be hired for seasonal maintenance.
  • On seeking tax abatements: Huntington said the company would seek a payment in lieu of taxes agreement with the Genesee County Economic Development Center. “It’s a pretty standard process for it, and it’s $6,000 per megawatt, which is split between the town, school district and county.”

INACCURACIES POINTED OUT

Lathan, at the outset, pointed out some inaccuracies in a notice placed in a local Pennysaver over the weekend – also calling out the person (or persons) responsible for the ad for not putting a name on it..

“We do not make amendments and we do not make laws,” he said. “We try to grant relief to residents on the law, that’s all we’re here to do.”

He also read where it said the request would be in “direct contradiction” to the Stafford zoning law.

“Almost every decision that that board makes is a contradiction to the zoning law," he said. "That’s why we try to grant relief.”

The ZBA chair also took exception to the notice’s charged that any change would show a “direct bias in favor of the company and a select few to benefit from this project.”

“I've had the privilege to be on this board for 14 years. We have never made a decision that was biased one way or the other. And I take offense to that, whoever put this in.”

Photo at top: Michael Lathan, left, ZBA chair, and Dan Huntington of BW Solar, talk following Monday night's public hearing. Photo at bottom: The session drew about 30 Stafford residents to the Town Hall. Photos by Mike Pettinella.

Previously: Planning board falls back on its purpose in decision to 'disapprove' Stafford solar project variance requests

Planning board falls back on its purpose in decision to 'disapprove' Stafford solar project variance requests

By Mike Pettinella

While acknowledging that the solar project proposed by BW Solar on behalf of a Batavia Stafford Townline Road couple was well-thought-out, the Genesee County Planning Board on Thursday night voted to recommend disapproval due to concerns over setback variance requests.

The board’s action, taken during its monthly meeting via Zoom videoconferencing, sends the referral back to the Stafford Town Board for final determination.

Robert and Michelle Wood of 8244 Batavia Stafford Townline Rd. are hoping to place two 5-megawatt, ground-mounted solar systems on their farmland. One will cover 31.08 acres and the other will cover 28.32 acres.

The couple, along with Dan Huntington, project developer for BW Solar, were on the Zoom call last night.

They came into the meeting knowing that the Genesee County Planning Department staff had issued a recommendation of disapproval due to the setback variances being requested “grossly exceed the requirements of the Town of Stafford’s Zoning Law.”

Stafford’s solar zoning regulations are much more restrictive in terms of the distance from neighboring properties than most others in the county, said Planning Director Felipe Oltramari, adding that a request for a variance from the Real Property Value Protection clause of the law may not be permissible.

A SOLID CASE FOR APPROVAL

Still, Huntington presented a solid case for approval of the site plan, special use permit and area variances for the project – earning praise on the layout from planners and convincing one member, John Deleo, to make a motion for approval (which died from a lack of a second).

BW Solar’s proposal calls for setbacks of 75 feet from residential property lines, where a minimum required per the Stafford law is 1,000 feet, and it also asks for reduction of setbacks along nonresidential property lines from 200 feet to 100 feet, 50 feet and zero feet depending upon the location on the map.

The area is zoned as an Industrial Park (IP) District, which is appropriate for such a project.

Huntington emphasized that the Town of Stafford has some “unique solar laws in place that far exceed what you’re typically seeing throughout the county.”

He said he has been involved in previous projects in the county – one in Elba and one in Pavilion – that were approved by county planners.

“And the two projects we have here are two separate 5-megawatt projects because that's what NYSERDA (New York State Energy Research & Development Authority) guidelines require us to do for community distributed generation projects,” he said. “We do kind of talk about them as one project, but they are two separate LLCs and two separate projects. They are co-located on two parcels of land that Bob and Michelle Wood own.”

SETBACK DISTANCES QUESTIONED

Stating that he understood the challenges posed by the Stafford solar ordinance and the Real Property Value Protection clause, Huntington pointed out that the 1,000-foot setback “is a stipulation that is not required for any other portion of industry throughout Stafford solar zoning laws and the 2,500-foot setback is also very unique to solar specific and would actually stretch over the highway into a large portion of Batavia as well.”

“So, those are two larger elements that we are looking at for a variance. We applied for those variances based on the guidance of our attorneys at Harris Beach, and also with communication with the town attorney. That was direction that he gave us as to first steps -- to apply for a variance for those two pieces.”

Huntington went on to say that he believed Stafford officials didn’t want solar farms encroaching upon neighboring homes, but that the Woods’ proposal is different in that it is shielded by farmland on one side and railroad tracks on another.

Sharing a visual of the layout as he spoke, Huntington said he, working with engineers at LaBella Associates, strived to make efficient use of the space – in one instance asking for a property setback to be at zero to utilize space for a shared fence for the two solar systems.

“If we were to follow the solar law and have a 200-foot setback on either side of this property line, it would create a 400-foot dead zone that not only we couldn't use, but it would be extremely inefficient for Bob and Michelle to continue their farming operation,” he said.

Huntington said the preference is to share a road entrance “so we're not building additional roads to each 5-megawatt array because they are legally required to be individually fenced.”

“By reducing the setback, we could put the gravel road right down the middle, share a fence and again reduce the amount of impact we have to the farmable land.”

SEEKING TO HONOR INTENT OF LAW

In summary, he said that while the variance difference “may be a little bit higher than what the board is comfortable with in the past, we are just trying to find a way to accommodate this project and still honor the intent of the law when it comes to some of the setbacks.”

“So, my request of the board would be to look at the project as a whole within the county and potentially vote to support the project and allow the zoning board and the town board to make the decision as to whether or not these variances are acceptable to them in their town,” he said. “Because a negative vote could potentially cause additional stresses for them in terms of whether or not they're going to approve or deny something.”

The Woods noted that the solar farms will sit back in their field – protected by a lot of trees.

“You won’t be able to really see it from (Route) 33,” Michelle said. “It’s set way up back. If we can get those variances in place, then we can continue to farm all around the front of it, which would be protected by corn because we grow a lot of corn.”

Planner Tom Schubmehl advised everyone that the planning board’s role “is to gauge intercommunity impacts and to make sure that towns are following their law.”

“That's our role -- not to decide what the towns want or should have or whether it's applicable to the rest of the county,” he said. “Our job is to make sure they're following their law, and that there's no intercommunity impacts. So, from that perspective … it's a nicely designed solar project compared to some of the other ones we have seen. But that's not our role to decided what Stafford wants.”

Planning Board Chair Laraine Caton said she agreed.

“Right. And ultimately, they have the final say, anyway,” she said.

A vote was taken on both projects separately. The outcome was 5-1 each time for disapproval with Deleo -- who thought the 2,500-foot setback was “a little extreme" -- in opposition of that action.

Drawing of BW Solar proposal showing College Road (notch in green section at left) coming into Batavia Stafford Townline Road. Solar panels are in gray; setbacks are in green. Courtesy of Genesee County Planning Department.

Previously: Genesee County Planning Department finds fault with Stafford solar project proposal

GCEDC Board OKs incentives for two projects, accepts incentives application for solar project in Elba

By Press Release

Press release:

The Genesee County Economic Development Center (GCEDC) Board of Directors approved incentives for projects totaling $13.5 million of new capital investment at its May 6 board meeting.  

Forefront Power LLC (Elba Solar) will invest $9.7 million to build a 5 megawatt community solar project on Norton Road in the Town of Elba. The project would generate approximately $518,803 in new revenue to Genesee County, the Town of Elba, and the Elba Central School District over the proposed 15-year agreement.  

The project also will fund a community benefit agreement for workforce development and economic development projects in Genesee County. Forefront Power LLC will receive approximately $1.416 million in sales and property tax exemptions. 

Batavia Special Needs Apartments LP is investing $3.75 million to add 20 living units to an existing special needs housing campus on East Main Street in the City of Batavia.

Batavia Special Needs Apartments LP is receiving approximately $772,000 in sales and property tax exemptions. Additional revenues from the project will be added to an existing PILOT (Payment In Lieu Of Taxes) agreement for the development

Application Accepted

The GCEDC Board also accepted an application by NY CDG Genesee 1 LLC (BW Solar) for a proposed 5 megawatt community solar project on Oak Orchard Road in the Town of Elba at a capital cost of $7.326 million. The project would generate approximately $518,803 in new revenue to Genesee County, the town of Elba, and the Elba Central School District over the proposed 15-year agreement. 

A public hearing on the BW Solar project is scheduled for Monday, May 17 at 10 a.m., as the project is requesting incentives of more than $100,000.

Authentically Local