solar farms

Farmers aren't converting profitable cropland into solar farms, said Tim Call, a Batavia businessman and farmer, after the Batavia Planning Board heard a proposal from New Leaf Energy to install a 5-megawatt project on 20 acres he owns at 7757 Oak Orchard Road.

There's good money to be made off of good land, according to Call, but it's become harder to turn a profit on low-yield land.

New York's new labor laws have a lot to do with turning marginal land into unprofitable land.

"Farmers are getting so good at producing on good acreage," Call said. "You don't need all the acreage that's there. The bad ground is not going to produce a lot of good things. It's just like the dairy farmers. If they have cows that are producing 40,000 pounds of milk a year, and they have one that's producing 10,000 pounds, why are you going to keep feeding those 10,000 pounds? You cull that one and get ones that are going to produce the most and give you the best return. You can't afford to farm bad farmland. It's just not profitable."

The state's increase in minimum wage and new overtime rules for farmworkers are causing farmers to re-evaluate what land they keep in production and what crops they grow, Call said. Out are low-yield acreage and crops that are labor intensive, such as cabbage, and other vegetables. Corn, wheat, and soybeans are favored because those crops don't need to be weeded or picked by hand.  The harvest can be fully mechanized. 

Last year, New York adjusted the overtime threshold for farmworkers to 40 hours per week. That's made it harder to hire workers who can migrate to other states with more worker-friendly laws, Call said.

"The overtime rule is really crippling everybody," Call said. "Plus the minimum wage that's out there. When we're trying to compete against other states where the minimum wage is $7, $8 and our minimum wage is $14.20, almost double, and then you can't get the farm or the migrants to come in and work because they can't get the hours that they want. It's just crippling. How do you compete?"

The proposed solar farm came before the board on Tuesday so the board could appoint itself lead agency for the environmental review, which it did.  The board will later be asked to vote on a proposed special use permit for the project.

This new solar installation will go on an 85.5-acre parcel that is just south of Daws Corners, which already contains a 15-acre solar farm on the back portion, along with some wetlands left undisturbed by either project. The two projects will cover 39.6 percent of the parcel, which is below the allowable 50 percent threshold.

New Leaf will plant about 153 trees to help visually screen the array.

The topsoil from the project area will be stored in a berm along the front of the property, which will make it available to redistribute on the parcel once the solar array is decommissioned.  The land could potentially, then, become farmland again.

Call noted during an interview with The Batavian that a solar installation doesn't permanently take the acreage out of agricultural use.

"The thing is, if it doesn't work out, you take the panels off, you pull it out of the ground, you pull the wire up, and you go back to farming," Call said. "You can't do that with some of these other things that they're doing. This isn't blacktop. It's not concrete, you know. You don't have a 40-by-40 pad that's 10 feet down in the ground. You can go back to farming."

Photo: Will Nieves, project developer for New Leaf Energy, and Mark Kenward, project engineer with Erdman Anthony, make a presentation for a solar project on behalf of property owner Tim Call, in the background. Photo by Howard Owens.

If all goes as expected, a solar energy project in Elba and Oakfield will net a nearly $88 million gain for Genesee County over the next three decades, Steve Hyde says.

The CEO of the county’s Economic Development Center reviewed that financial projection as part of a Hecate Energy Cider Solar LLC project. Public hearings were recently conducted in each municipality, with a few comments and not much of an outpouring of concerns or complaints, Hyde said.

He and Marketing and Communications Director Jim Krencik presented the review during Wednesday’s Ways & Means Committee meeting. Krencik credited a successful negotiation between all entities for the project’s forward progress.

“This is going to have a major impact philosophically and visually,” he said. 

Once, or if, the measure is approved by both municipal boards and the county Legislature, the presence of a solar operation is to help fund infrastructure throughout the county via first-year payments to Elba ($989,739) and Oakfield-Alabama ($660,133) schools, the towns of Elba ($756,698) and Oakfield ($504,463), and Genesee County itself ($774,165), he said.

Thirty-year revenue predictions result with those entities each garnering $12 million to $19 million each, plus a residential utility bill credit of $2.5 million and special district taxes of nearly $5.8 million, Hyde and Krencik said. In the shorter term, each entity is predicted to receive anywhere from $504,463 to $989,739 from the deal in the first year alone.

Although the projects won’t create a lot of jobs, Hyde said, there is an impact of getting back $22 for every dollar invested, he said.

“We’ve got something here that’s pretty significant from a tax basis,” he said.

Committee legislators agreed with the plan.

“This is a transformational project for these communities,” Legislator Marianne Clattenburg said. “They need to get something back. We’re going to authorize our IDA to collect money on our behalf. If the state comes in, they’d be doing it for free.”

Admittedly, “playing tough” is not Hyde’s style, he said, but negotiations “got really tough at some points.”

There were more than 10 meetings from spring 2021 to this fall, and they involved each town’s, the county’s and EDC’s leadership to arrive at an agreement. If approved by the Towns of Elba and Oakfield -- slated for votes of consent on Thursday and Dec. 13 -- and then approved by the county Legislature on Dec. 14, "all parties would execute on their approved agreements with Hecate Energy Cider Solar LLC," Krencik said.

The time and effort has been worth it, Hyde said.

"Accomplishing a high level of fiscal benefits from solar energy projects has been a shared goal of the GCEDC, Genesee County, and our towns and schools. We thank the towns of Elba and Oakfield for their commitment and collaboration throughout the negotiations for Hecate Energy Cider Solar LLC," he said. "They have gone above and beyond in representing their communities," Hyde said.

The Batavian has reached out to the Town of Elba for the results of this week's expected vote and will add that once a reply is received.

Top File Photo: Steve Hyde, CEO of Genesee County Economic Development Center, by Howard Owens; above, Marketing and Communications Director Jim Krencik, from GCEDC website. 

Press release:

The Genesee County Economic Development Center (GCEDC) board of directors will consider final resolutions for solar projects that would generate $576.5 million of capital investment at its board meeting on Thursday, December 1, 2022.

Projects to be considered at the meeting include Hecate Energy Cider Solar LLC’s proposed $550 million utility-scale solar project and community solar projects estimated at $26.5 million.

Hecate Energy Cider Solar LLC’s 500-megawatt utility-scale solar is proposing to create approximately 500 full-time construction jobs and will have the capacity to supply 920,000 hours of renewable electricity annually and provide power to up to 120,000 homes.

Agreements negotiated for Hecate Energy Cider Solar LLC project also would generate approximately $73.5 million through PILOTs and host community agreements with the Town of Elba, the Town of Oakfield, the Elba Central School District, and the Oakfield-Alabama Central School District, including:

• $13.18 million to Genesee County
• $19.38 million to the Town of Elba
• $12.92 million to the Town of Oakfield
• $16.85 million to the Elba Central School District
• $11.24 million to the Oakfield-Alabama School District

“This project will generate significant financial benefits to the host communities and I want to acknowledge the leadership of the various taxing jurisdictions in working collaboratively and successfully to reach agreements matching the scale of this historic renewable energy project for our region,” GCEDC President and CEO Steve Hyde said.

The GCEDC Board also will consider final resolutions for three community solar projects totaling 10.5-megwatts of energy generation that would result in up to $2 million in payments for the various host communities.

• AES Rt 5 Storage LLC is proposing to construct a 5-megawatt community solar project on West Main Road in Le Roy. The $11.01 million project would generate $597,180 in payments to Genesee County, the town of Le Roy, and the Le Roy Central Schools.
• RPNY Solar 6 LLC is proposing to construct a 3-megawatt community solar project on Alexander Road in Batavia. The $5.97 million project would generate $447,748 in payments to Genesee County, the town of Batavia, and the Alexander Central Schools.
• RPNY Solar 7 LLC is proposing to construct a 2.5-megawatt community solar project on Alexander Road in Batavia. The $3.55 million project would generate $373,124 in payments to Genesee County, the town of Batavia, and the Batavia City Schools.

Finally, the board will consider an initial resolution from NY CDG Genesee 4 LLC for a 4.275 MW community solar farm in the town of Pavilion on Shepard Road.  The $6.5 million project would generate approximately $500,000 in PILOT, host community, and real property tax payments to Genesee County, the town of Pavilion and the Pavilion Central Schools. If the resolution is accepted, a public hearing on the project agreement would be scheduled in the town of Pavilion.

The Dec. 1 GCEDC board meeting will be held at 4 p.m. at the MedTech Center’s Innovation Zone, 99 MedTech Drive, Batavia. Meeting materials and links to a live stream/on-demand recording of the meeting is available at www.gcedc.com.

Press release:

The Genesee County Economic Development Center (GCEDC) board of directors advanced five projects totaling approximately $582.5 million of investments at its board meeting on Tuesday.

The board accepted initial applications from Hecate Energy Cider Solar LLC for a proposed $550 million utility-scale solar project in the towns Elba and Oakfield and for community solar projects in the town of Batavia and LeRoy totaling $20 million. The board also approved final incentives for a $12 million tourism hospitality project.

Hecate Energy Cider Solar LLC is proposing to construct a 500-megawatt utility-scale solar farm on multiple agricultural properties in the towns of Elba and Oakfield. The $550 million project would generate $73.5 million for host municipalities through a payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT) and community host agreements, including:

• $13.18 million to Genesee County
• $19.38 million to the Town of Elba
• $12.92 million to the Town of Oakfield
• $16.85 million to the Elba Central School District
• $11.24 million to the Oakfield-Alabama School District

Public hearings will be scheduled for Hecate Energy Cider Solar LLC’s proposed project agreements in the town of Elba and the town of Oakfield.

The GCEDC board also approved a final resolution for 8250 Park Road LLC. The project proposes to invest $12 million for extensive renovations to the Quality Inn & Suites and Palm Island Indoor Water Park.

Town of Batavia Planning Board unanimously approved special use permits and site plans for two solar projects on Alexander Road at their meeting on Tuesday.

The projects are located at 9183 Alexander Road, known as the Pike Road Solar Farm Project, and 9071 Alexander Road.

The resolutions passed by the board entitle San Francisco-based Renewable Properties (RPNY Solar 6, LLC) to construct and operate the solar projects.

If the owner/operator changes, the special use permit must be reviewed again by the planning board.

Before a building permit is issued, the company must finalize a host community agreement with the Town of Batavia to include annual payments of $2,500 per megawatt for 25 years with a 2 percent annual escalation of payments or a lump sum payment approved by the Town Board.

The resolution includes provisions on grading and landscaping.

There are also provisions to handle any changes to the development plan.

The company must certify the completed project complies with the special use permit, applicable codes, and industry standards.  

There must also be sufficient funds on deposit to remove the installation and restore landscaping in accordance with the decommissioning plan.

The company must remove the installation at the end of its useful life in accordance with the decommissioning plan.

Town inspectors will be allowed reasonable access to the property during construction to check drainage and stormwater provisions.

Renewable Properties must abide by the required landscaping plan.

The project must be fenced and locked. The fire department will be provided keys.

A year after the project goes into operation, Renewable Properties must return to the planning board for a review of the special use permit.

Finally, Renewable Properties must obtain and retain appropriate insurance throughout the life of the project.

It's about time to get the show on the road, said supporters of two proposed solar projects on Alexander Road in the Town of Batavia.

The two property owners willing to host the solar farms told Town of Batavia planners Tuesday that the projects are important to them, and a representative for the firm that will install and operate the farms said he would like to finalize a deal soon.

Brian Madigan, the company’s senior permitting manager, sought clarity from planners on what issues remained to be addressed as part of the permitting process.

"I'd like to be sure that I have addressed all of the concerns," Madigan said during the Planning Board meeting. "I want to submit in a timely fashion (a letter addressing all pending concerns) and make sure that you get hard copies, and you have ample time to read it all. It's been, you know, two years for us. We'd like to move on."

"But," responded Board Chairwoman Kathy Jasinski, "it hasn't been two years for us. We do this with all solar projects. We just want to make sure we're doing it right."

The proposed projects are a 14-acre, 3-megawatt solar farm on a 29-acre parcel at 9183 Alexander Road and a 10-acre, 1.6-megawatt system at 9071 Alexander Road.

The planning board did approve on Tuesday the environmental review, passing what's called a "negative declaration," meaning the projects do not pose any significant environmental risk.

As Madigan tries to address any final concerns, he's also still negotiating a host community agreement with the Town of Batavia and the Genesee County Economic Development Center.  The agreement would ensure payments to the town of solar power generation.

"I have some concern over the timing of being able to get that host community agreement, to get the IDA, the town board and our team all together before your next meeting on October 4," Madigan said. "We are committed to working in good faith to come to an agreement. We presented draft terms to the town, but I'm not sure -- at the pace at which, you know, meetings come together and given our journey thus far -- I'm really hopeful that we could make that final execution of a number (amount of payments in the Community Host Agreement) a condition of approval since it is a town board function ultimately. That for purposes of the planning board, we get a condition that we have to make the town board and the IDA happy."

As much as Madigan wants to tie a bow on the project, the Hylkema family might be even more eager to ensure the solar farm for their property is approved. 

Kerry Hylkema said the solar farm on their private property represents a level of financial security they do not currently enjoy.

Her husband John, she said, is a U.S. Air Force veteran, and he worked in security for the Department of Homeland Security before reaching his required retirement age of 57 after 26 years of service. He is a cancer survivor who was exposed to contaminants at the 9/11 site shortly after the towers fell, and for six months following the attack.

"The income generated from this project makes up for the loss of half of his retirement should something happen to him," Hylkema said. "This secures my family's ability to stay in our home. At the end of the day, this project hurts nobody, is a benefit to the environment, and it keeps the land a viable option for farmland in the future. Please approve this solar project so we can finally plan for our future."

At a previous meeting, several community members spoke in opposition to the projects, and Dan Reuter, the owner of the property for the other proposed project, seemingly addressed some of the objections raised at a previous meeting.

"I'm an engineer by trade and I like to go by facts and not what we can all jump on in this internet rabbit hole, and come up with ideas that might be skewed in our favor," he said. "For me, it's all about facts. It's all about the truth. And you know a lot of these people that have been complaining really need to go to valuable resources, credible sources for information."

He said the projects are in compliance with all of the requirements.

"I don't see a reason why this should not be allowed to go through based on where we are today," he said.

Jasinski said she expects the board will be in a position to vote on final approval at its next meeting.

Top photo: Dan Reuter speaks to the Town of Batavia Planning Board Tuesday alongside Kerry and John Hylkema. Photo by Howard Owens.

 

Three poles at each entrance of a pair of proposed solar projects off of Ellicott Street Road in the Town of Batavia will be less of an eyesore than four, members of the town planning board decided on Tuesday.

At one time, the developer, Cypress Creek Renewables, proposed four poles.

At Tuesday's meeting, project attorney Mark T. Sweeney, after a lengthy discussion of the topic, asked the planning board to commit to three poles if that is truly their desire.

"What we would ask then is that the board clarify the condition of approval to require us to have a maximum of three poles per project," Sweeney said. "Then we can agree, we can accept that and redo a redesign for that. What we really need tonight is to be able to walk away knowing what it is we have to do. So that would be my ask of you as a board is to clarify and modify that condition of approval so that we can do that."

The number of poles is not a straightforward design decision, Sweeney explained during Tuesday's discussion.  The equipment that is mounted on the poles can be placed on the ground but at much greater expense.  The design must be approved by National Grid. The ground-mounted equipment is big and bulky and must be fenced in. And ground-mounted equipment is a special order and supply issues are delaying delivery.

Introduced in June 2019, the proposal from Cypress Creek Renewables LLC calls for the construction of two solar farms on property owned by Don Partridge at 5117 Ellicott Street Road.

• A 5-megawatt array on 18.2 acres of a 65-acre parcel of otherwise agricultural land, known as Trousdale Solar I;
• A 4-megawatt system on 19.6 acres of a 71-acre parcel of otherwise agricultural land, known as Trousdale Solar II.

The four-pole plan Cypress Creek came up with for each project -- and that received a nod of approval from National Grid -- helped the company balance competing factors and the company sought to maintain that balance, Sweeney said. 

"There's a balance, you know, in what SEQR requires," Sweeney said. "The site plan evaluation requires a balance of the impacts versus the cost. One of the things we were looking at is just that element of it. I understand if there's a particular impact that is to be avoided, or identified that we weren't aware of, that's one thing, but just simply ground-mounting something at a significant cost would be -- for no significant benefit to the environment, from a visual standpoint -- would be in our position, something we've tried to avoid. "

When the equipment is ground-mounted, it must be placed on a two-foot-high base, Sweeney said. The equipment enclosure is six feet tall.  And because it is electrical equipment, it must be surrounded by a fence. 

"You do have some residual visual impact resulting from that installation," Sweeney said.

Board members asked why there couldn't be three poles at each location since other solar projects have been able to meet that requirement. 

Sweeney said he couldn't answer that question.

"I understand completely where you're coming from, and having consistency with other projects," Sweeney said. "I don't know why those projects have three. I don't know what their equipment lineup is. I assume that it's substantially similar, but it might be different. The project size might be different panel types, inverter types -- there's a whole level of engineering that goes into what may cause the number to be different. It could be that it could have been an earlier project that got a higher incentive from NYSERDA by being in a different block. So they had more money available to spend on that type of thing. There may not have been any landscaping associated with that project. They could take the money from the landscaping budget and put it into that. There are all kinds of different things of which we're not aware."

To help mitigate the visual disturbance of four poles, the poles were designed to be back from the roadway and screened from view by landscaping.

In the end, board members decided they would rather see only three poles on each site.

"I think even four poles with all the lines and all the stuff hanging out from them, it's just going to be an eyesore, not only for people who live there, but just driving by," said board member Jonathan Long. "It just doesn't fit in with the character of the neighborhood. In my opinion, saying that it's a cost to the project is, in my opinion --  this is going to be there 20-plus years, part of the scenery there; it's not going to go away. So the upfront costs are minor compared to long-term impacts."

Once Sweeney said he would like board action affirming they would accept three poles instead of four, a motion was made and passed.

Photo: Bridget Cuddihy, project developer for Cypress Creek, and Mark Sweeney, project attorney. Photo by Howard Owens.

Previously: 

• Ellicott Street Road solar projects on hold pending receipt of additional visual documentation
• Concessions in hand, Batavia Town planners approve Ellicott Street Road solar projects

Click here for more information

Press release:

Hecate Energy announced today that the application for its proposed 500- megawatt Cider Solar Farm in the towns of Elba and Oakfield, New York has been deemed complete by the New York State Office of Renewable Energy Siting (ORES). If approved by ORES, Cider Solar Farm would be the largest solar project permitted and constructed to date in the State of New York.

Established by Section 94-c of Executive Law, ORES is the newly established state office charged with implementing the timely consolidated review and permitting for major renewable energy facilities in New York State. Its acceptance of the Cider Solar Farm application is the first time ORES has deemed a renewable energy application complete.

“This is the first 94-c application to be deemed complete by ORES, which is a significant milestone for renewable energy in New York,” said Harrison Luna, Cider Solar Farm’s project developer. “The establishment of ORES and the 94-c permit process underpins the state’s commitment to supporting sustainable power, and we’re fortunate to be in a position to use it to bring clean, homegrown electricity to Genesee County. We are encouraged both by the transparency brought to the permitting process by ORES and the comprehensiveness of that process, and we believe this project will be an excellent addition to the next generation of sustainable power supply in New York State.”

The completed permitting application for Cider Solar Farm was extensive and comprehensive. It included 6 bound volumes and more than 96,000 pages of detailed analysis of data from studies assessing the proposed project’s effect on the host communities. Surveys were commissioned regarding a wide range of environmental, cultural, land use, and socioeconomic considerations such as wetlands and streams, wildlife habitat, nearby traffic patterns, cultural resources, noise and vibrations, visual effects from nearby areas, site security, and other potential concerns.

If approved by ORES, Cider Solar Farm would be built on nearly 3,000 acres in the towns of Elba and Oakfield in Genesee County. It is expected to create over 500 construction jobs and will be capable of supplying 920,000 megawatt-hours of renewable electricity per year – enough to power over 120,000 average New York households. Clean energy from Cider Solar Farm is expected to offset 718,694 tons of carbon dioxide emissions annually, which according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is equivalent to the annual emissions from 141,794 passenger vehicles.

“For years people have talked about bringing economic development to upstate New York. This milestone is a very positive sign to other developers who are considering bringing their investment, jobs, and sustainable energy projects to this region,” said Luna. “The New York State Legislature, Governor Hochul, and ORES are to be commended for following through and making this happen. Together with the renewable energy industry, we are finally bringing long-term, sustainable economic development to the upstate region.”

To learn more about Hecate Energy and the proposed Cider Solar Farm, visit the project website at www.CiderSolarFarm.com.

After taking several months to review the Town of Batavia’s regulations governing the installation of solar systems, a seven-member committee working with a Williamsville consulting firm is ready to share its recommendations with the public.

An informational session is scheduled for 6 p.m. on Dec. 29 at the Town Hall on West Main Street Road.

The final draft of the town’s revised Solar Energy Local Law is available for viewing on the Town of Batavia website.

Town Board member Chad Zambito is the chair of the committee that also includes Town Building Inspector Dan Lang, Town Zoning Board members Steve Tanner, Don Partridge and Paul McCullough, Town Zoning Board of Appeals member Brittany Witkop and town resident Nancy Brach.

Drew Reilly of Wendel Companies served as the group’s consultant.

Zambito said the committee used the New York State Model Solar Energy Law as a basis for the town’s law, with some modifications. He said he hopes to receive feedback from residents at next week’s meeting.

According to the document, the town has the authority to develop a solar code through town law and Section 20 of the Municipal Home Rule Law of the State of New York, which authorize the town “to adopt zoning provisions that advance and protect the health, safety and welfare of the community, and, in accordance with the Town Law of New York State, to make provision for, so far as conditions may permit, the accommodation of solar energy systems and equipment and access to sunlight necessary therefore.”

It advances a five-fold “statement of purpose” – emphasizing the need to capitalize on renewable energy, reducing electricity costs to residential and commercial customers, increasing employment and business development, mitigating solar’s effects on agriculture and the environment and linking to the town’s Comprehensive Plan.

The revised law also lists solar term definitions, time frames, safety guidelines, decommissioning (end of use) procedures, maintenance/fees and enforcement/penalty provisions.

The bulk of the document is devoted to “permitting requirements” for the four levels of solar systems – Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3 and Tier 4.

• Tier 1 systems are defined as roof-mounted solar panels and new building-integrated systems, and are must meet design, glare and height guidelines.

• Tier 2 systems, such as accessory structures, also have to comply with glare, setback, height, screening, visibility, equipment placement and lot size requirements. Both Tier 1 and Tier 2 systems are permitted in all zoning districts and are not subject to site plan reviews as long as the specific criteria are in order.

• Tier 3 (larger) systems are permitted through the issuance of a Special Use Permit within the Agricultural Residential zoning district. They are subject to additional requirements, including maximum percentage of land use, written application, public hearing, underground utility lines, vehicular paths, signage, glare, lighting, tree cutting, screening/landscaping, noise, decommissioning and security.

• Tier 4 systems along the line of those proposed for widespread areas in Byron and Oakfield/Elba, also need a Special Use Permit. These may qualify for a Solar Energy System PILOT (Payment in Lieu of Taxes) and will require a Host Community Agreement as determined by the Town Board. Additional restrictions on large-scale Tier 4 systems include submission of an Agricultural Impact Statement, Economic Impact Analysis and Host Community Agreement proposal.

Press release:

The Genesee County Economic Development Center (GCEDC) Board of Directors will consider approving final incentives for a $345 million solar project in the Town of Byron, and construction of a campus-wide electrical substation at the Science Technology and Advanced Manufacturing Park (STAMP). Both matters will be discussed at the agency’s June 3 board meeting.

NextEra Energy Inc. is planning a $345.55 million Excelsior Energy Center utility scale solar farm project to be located on multiple agricultural properties in Town of Byron. The project is a 280 MW (AC) solar generation system, and a 20 MW 4-hour energy storage system, that will be interconnected with the electric grid.

The project will provide enhanced property tax payments via a 20-year PILOT (Payment In Lieu Of Taxes) and host benefit agreements. The project will contribute $6,500/MWAC in total PILOT/host benefit payments annually + a 2 percent annual escalator over the 20-year term.

Resulting property tax-type benefits of the project in the Town of Byron, Byron-Bergen Central schools, and Genesee County are estimated at over $45.2 million.

NextEra Energy is seeking approximately $32.7 million in property and sales tax incentives. A public hearing on the proposed agreement was held April 19.

Plug Power Inc. is planning to invest $55 million toward a campus-wide substation at STAMP. The substation will enable 100 percent renewable, reliable electricity at less than $0.035/kwh to future tenants in partnership with the New York Power Authority and National Grid.

The proposed substation investment is in addition to the $232 million Plug Power is investing to build a green hydrogen manufacturing facility at STAMP. The facility is estimated to create 68 full-time jobs.

Plug Power is seeking approximately $2.8 million in sales tax incentives related to the substation construction. A public hearing on the proposed agreements will be held at 10 a.m. on June 3.

The GCEDC Board meeting is at 4 p.m. and because of the ongoing coronavirus pandemic the meeting will be conducted via videoconference and can be viewed online at www.gcedc.com.

Small-scale solar projects are on hold in the Town of Batavia until municipal officials, working with a paid consulting firm, can find the right ingredients to ensure a fair and effective solar ordinance.

Town Building Inspector Dan Lang took some time out of his busy day Tuesday to update The Batavian on the status of the new code, which he hopes will be drafted and approved over the next few months. In January, the town placed a moratorium on solar farms without establishing an end date.

“We’re putting out bids for a consultant and want to make sure it is the right fit for the town and matches up with our comprehensive plan,” Lang said. “We want to remain solar-friendly but we also want to make sure that we’re putting them in the right areas.”

As is the case with determining real estate values, the phrase “location, location, location” applies in the solar arena, Lang said.

“We have much to review and to sort out, but I can tell you that we’ve been tossing around the idea of incentive zoning for these systems – a tiered approach where you have your best locations, followed by areas that we would allow but would come with more restrictive setbacks and guidelines,” Lang explained. “Then, finally, a third tier where we really don’t want solar on prime farmland but if you’re going to put it here, this would have to be in a specific spot (and likely costlier for the developer).”

Part of the siting process is to identify areas where the transmission power lines have enough capacity to hook into the grid, Lang said.

Thus far, the Town of Batavia has approved five solar projects, all of them active and sitting on parcels of 20 acres or less and generating 2 to 5 megawatts of electricity. Those five are on Bank Street Road (on land owned by Thomas Lichtenthal), on Lewiston Road (two, Call Farms) and on Pearl Street Road (two, Dan Miller).

Five more are at various stages of construction and/or review and are yet to be activated. Those are on West Main Street Road (two, Fred Bowman), on Batavia-Stafford Townline Road (Daniel Underhill), on Galloway Road (Wayne Dunham) and on Ellicott Street Road (Donald Partridge).

Another five are in limbo, Lang said, due to the moratorium and the effort to adopt a new solar ordinance.

Lang said town officials have learned much through the process of approving the five systems, notably that they weren’t up to speed on the amount of buffer and screening needed to hide them from neighbors, and that they would have been better served by limiting the number of utility poles.

That’s where the consultant comes in.

“From experience, we realize we need to reach out and have a consultant come in and tell us some of the better areas for the solar – more or less, what companies will be looking for as far as transmission lines that have the capacity to move electricity from solar farms,” Lang said.

He admitted that it has been difficult keeping up with an industry that is constantly changing.

“For example, we’re finding that we can get away with more underground lines instead of looking at the ugly utility poles,” he said. “No matter what, it continues to evolve and then there is the matter of battery systems and battery storage to deal with. It’s all moving at a rapid pace.”

Lang said the objective is to respect the landowners’ right to put solar on their property while producing cleaner and greener energy in a location that doesn’t negatively impact the surrounding community.

“We realize – and this is a big thing – that supplemental income for the farmer who wants the solar there is important and we encourage that because that’s the highest and best land use value for them,” he said. “And we’re trying to find areas where it’s ‘out of sight, out of mind’ and not intrusive to the neighboring properties.”

Currently, the town requires a decommissioning bond on every project, Lang said.

“If something does go south with it, the system will be removed. It really is a farmland protection. If it is removed five or 10 years from now, you have soil that has been untouched and ready to go again for farming,” he said,

Lang acknowledges that solar projects draw complaints from those who live next to the proposed site.

“We’ve heard them all – they’re an eyesore, they pollute the land and so on,” he said.

When a consultant is selected and a new ordinance is drafted, the plan will be reviewed by county and town planning boards before going to the Town Board, Lang said. Until then, more meetings of a six-person committee that includes Lang will be scheduled and citizens are invited to send their opinions via email to solar@townofbatavia.com.

Other members of the committee are Town Board Member Chad Zambito, Town Planning Board members Paul McCullough and Donald Partridge, citizen representative Nancy Brach and Zoning Board of Appeal Member Brittany Witkop.

Cider Solar Project - Virtual Open House presented by Hecate Energy

Or the meeting can be accessed directly through Zoom at https://zoom.us/j/98566949504

The Batavia Town Board this afternoon called for a “timeout” as it attempts to keep up with the changing landscape of the solar farm industry.

During a special meeting via Zoom videoconferencing, the board passed a resolution to hold a public hearing to consider Local Law No. 1 of 2021 entitled, “A Local Law, Establishing a Town of Batavia Moratorium on Solar Energy Systems.”

The public hearing is set for 7 p.m. Jan. 20 at Batavia Town Hall on West Main Street Road.

The board also voted to declare lead agency status with regard to an environmental review per the State Environmental Quality Review Act and will prepare an assessment form for this action.

Supervisor Gregory Post said that several key changes have taken place since the board passed the town’s solar ordinance five years ago.

“This is something that probably was going to be addressed during the course of the past 2020 year along with a revisit to our comprehensive plan and other things that were budgeted in our planning budget,” Post said. “We continue to work to be an energy efficient community – and have received a lot of grant money as a result – but so much has changed and now is the time for a review.”

Post pointed to the following aspects pertaining to community and large-scale solar projects that must be considered:

• New York State Article 10

“In my opinion, solar farms also serve as an ag protection plan in that the ground remains fertile and available for farming in the future,” he said. “But now, New York State has jumped in with Article 10 and started taking over towns' rights.”

He said that “giant corporate entities” are taking thousands of acres without local participation or control, specifically mentioning huge projects in Byron, Oakfield and Elba.

“I’ve also talked to the Town of Le Roy Supervisor (James Farnholz) and he was expressing some frustration in that they had spent an enormous amount of time and energy to come up with a solar law, only to have the governor and the state change it almost on the same day they were prepared to adopt it,” Post offered. “And it caused them to have to go back and revisit it.”

The supervisor said there’s much to learn about Article 10 (and a new state regulation to replace it).

“That’s another reason to hold things up until we all are better understanding of the Article 10 process and the changes to Article 10, and the experiences of other communities that are in Article 10,” he said. “Planning and zoning board members need to be educated about this stuff because it is a big deal and it is bound to be more time consuming than expected.”

• Building More Than What is Needed

Post said the recommendations of so-called experts has led developers to “overbuild capacity.”

“They’re building solar and wasting energy because the price to develop solar now is so cheap … instead of building what you need, they build 130, 150, 200 (megawatt) -- maybe three times what you need, and if you don’t have a place for it, that’s all right because it’s cheap to build,” he said. “That wasn’t the thinking five or six years ago.”

• Battery Storage

Post said the advancement in battery stations likely have expanded the solar farm feasibility map.

“At the outset, we were comfortable that there would be very few places available for solar development because of the need for the connectivity to part of the grid that was able to handle the output,” he explained. “There was essentially a limitation on the number and locations of solar because National Grid’s network wasn’t able to connect all these farms – it had to be where there was capacity and those places on that map were limited.”

Now, Post said that he and the town’s engineering staff suspect that the mapping has changed.

“With these battery things, maybe you can store it up and feed it back in little bits and quantity. So, we have to address it,” he said.

• ‘Hidden’ Costs to Municipalities

Post said increasing administrative costs are cause for a discussion about whether a tax should be imposed upon solar farms, which (to varying degrees) already are subsidized by tax dollars. Currently, the town does not tax property owners who are leasing land for solar.

“Again, five years ago we didn’t expect there would be any cost to service a solar farm. They got a driveway cut, and they don’t request any services from the town. There’s no need for police or fire or highway or water or sewer. Essentially, it’s like driving past a field of alfalfa – there’s nothing there. So, we weren’t looking to exploit that because we didn’t anticipate any costs,” he said.

Today, the town is “really seeing how expensive the administration of these applications is – with the engineering review and the decommissioning bonds and our attorney’s fee, and just the overall cost of the community’s resources because we are stretched thin,” he advised.

Post said he had no opinion either way but sees the need to get people to the table to look at the cost issue.

He said the moratorium will not affect solar projects that are in the pipeline – it should be noted that the town has permitted numerous solar farms thus far – and that “anything new coming in can wait 90 days or so.”

“Once the public hearing is held and we pass the moratorium, hopefully we will have more public participation … and hopefully we will be in a better place with COVID and have a better idea of our revenues,” he added.

If solar farms are coming to the Town of Alabama, local officials have determined that they would rather have some local control than letting the state have all the power.

Monday night, the town board approved a local ordinance that will allow the town to set some parameters on solar farms and perhaps keep the largest of them off good farmland.

"The planning board struggled with this over the months and months," said Supervisor Robert Crossen. "The town board did, too. None of us are about losing farmland but we with Article 10 saying this will happen, I guess my view is that this is part of what you have to do to stay in the game. If we don't participate in it, then we won't have a lot to say."

In other words, without adding Section 624 to the town code, the town won't have any say in the planning and siting of solar farms in the town.

Article 10 of the Public Service Law, passed in 2011, lays out the process for permitting new major electric-generating facilities, giving the responsibility for permitting and siting resides with the State Energy Siting Board. Without local building codes, local jurisdictions have no say in the size, scope, location, setbacks, visual screens, or decommissioning plans for the facilities.

"Our regulation attempts to put a footprint in the sand and say this is what we’d like to see," Crossen said after the meeting.

While the new law sets code standards for small installations for the personal use of solar energy on residential, commercial, and farm property, the key aspects of the new law cover what are considered Tier 3 and Tier 4 solar farms.

A Tier 3 installation is one of up to 1,500 square feet but generates more than 110 percent of the electricity used by the property it is installed on.

A Tier 4 installation is more than 50 acres in size.

Crossen said the town hopes it can use the new law to avoid large industrial installations but indicated the final decision will be part of the Article 10 process.

The town put in place a moratorium on new solar farms while it reviewed its options and Crossen said now that the new law is in place, he expects to see applications flowing in.

"We are well aware that there are many companies that are ready to propose many projects," Crossen said.

There are potential economic benefits to the town, in the form of fees (perhaps as much $5,500 per megawatt), as well as the county and the school district, for any commercial solar projects installed in the town.

The new ordinance also requires large projects to negotiate a host community agreement that should generate additional revenue for the town.

The sole resident to speak at the public hearing prior to Monday's town board meeting was resident Dave Bencic who questioned the town's commitment to protecting farmland by enacting a law that would permit solar farms on prime farmland.

Trustee Kevin Fisher recalled all the work that went to creating the town's farmland protection regulations but conceded town officials were hemmed in by state law.

"So much for home rule," Fisher said.

"So much for home rule, correct," Crossen said. He then called for the motion to adopt the new law. It passed unanimously.

Town of Batavia officials, in conjunction with the Genesee County Soil & Water Conservation District, are looking at adopting guidelines for solar farm developers to follow when it comes to pollinator habitat plantings on ground-mounted

systems.

Appearing at the Batavia Town Planning Board meeting on Tuesday night at the Town Hall, Bradley Mudrzynski, district manager for GCSWCD (photo at right), presented a draft of a plan that covers topics such as the need and importance of pollination, planting process, maintenance and performance standards.

“The main thing is for flexibility (in the plan) – having the ability to plant in the fall or spring with either stock mix or through a seed contractor,” Mudrzynski said. “In the end, (you’re saying) the seed mix should look like this, with these characteristics.”

Mudrzynski’s plan supports the Town’s concern over losing prime farmland to solar development – even if temporarily – and the Town’s view that “pollinator habitat plantings can mitigate farmland losses and increase ecosystem services provided to farms in the form of pollination.”

Discussion with the planning board ultimately came down to the percentage of the solar farm that should be seeded, where to locate grass mix in the solar array and enforcement of the guidelines as they pertain to special use permits issued by the Town.

“When you spec out a 10-acre site (for example), what percentage of the solar array do you want planted down?” Mudrzynski asked. “Between the rows? Around the outside? Thirty percent? (The point being) finding a good and reasonable acreage or percentage.”

Working off a solar site pollinator habitat scorecard from the state of Vermont, planners initially said they were in favor of a 46 to 60 percent vegetative cover for each solar project. After more discussion, they agreed on 80 percent of the lot, including putting grass mix under the solar panels.

“And this (level) would cover those solar farms already approved since none have more than 20 percent (of the total space) for access roads,” said Steve Tanner, a planning board member.

As far as enforcement once the guidelines are formally approved, planners decided to include the pollinator piece in the special use permit and to require developers to work with GCSWCD or an “agreed-upon equally qualified consultant” such as a landscaper or architect to perform periodic inspections.

Planners also talked about the importance of developers contracting with licensed herbicide applicators to ensure that performance standards are achieved.

Following the 20-minute discussion, Planning Board Chair Kathy Jasinski said she will share the draft of the plan with other Town leaders and asked Mudrzynski to return to the next planning board meeting on Oct. 15 with an updated version.

In other developments, the planning board:

-- Voted to extend the State Environmental Quality Review process and tabled the developers’ application in connection with a proposal to build two 20-acre, 7.2-megawatt ground solar systems at 8050 Oak Orchard Road (Route 98).

The request by Borrego Solar Systems LLC has been in the works for quite some time, hampered by the fact that it seeks to site the solar farm on land that is in the Town’s Planned Business Development District.

Requirements of the PBD District center on a development of at least 100 acres – a measure put in by Town officials to ensure large-scale commercial projects that would benefit the Town and preserve the agricultural viability of the land.

Jasinski said that the board will take no action “until we get more information” from Borrego. She said she expects the developer to come in with a new application, which could result in having to redo the SEQR application as well.

Extension of the SEQR was mutually agreed upon by both the planning board and Borrego, as required, she noted.

-- Received an update from project officials Dan Yanosh and Tom Healy on the revisions made to their proposal for a 19.8-acre, 4-megawatt ground-mounted solar system at 3565 Galloway Road.

Last month, the plan by Bright Oak Solar LLC to place solar panels on property owned by Wayne Dunham was met with solid opposition from neighbors on Galloway and Lewiston roads, with comments focusing on lack of screening, decreased property values, and potential negative effects on the environment and aesthetics.

Yanosh and Healy presented another visual of the layout, this time noting that they added screening (trees) along the front on the southeast side – in response to an objection from the adjacent property owner – and increased the size of the culvert in front and reduced the number of poles from five to four.

Jasinski advised them that no action will be taken until they meet with town engineers and zoning officers to review the changes.

She did say the matter would be put on the board’s Oct. 15^th meeting agenda as long as she receives a report from the aforementioned town officials before that date.

A plan to build a 5-megawatt solar farm on Ellicott Street Road in the Town of Batavia is not sitting well with area residents, who shared their views with the property owner at a neighborhood meeting on Friday night.

About 25 people gathered at the home of Bill and Nancy Brach at 5168 Ellicott Street Road to discuss the pros and cons of solar farms in general and to gain information about the specific project proposed by Donald Partridge, owner of a large dairy farm on that road.

“To be honest, probably some of us would like to see if there’s any way to keep this particular project from taking place,” Nancy Brach said.

She was referring to Partridge’s application to put a 36-acre solar farm on land located at 5103 Ellicott Street Road, about a half-mile southeast of Shepard Road – on the left-hand side as you head out of Batavia toward East Bethany.

Brach cited concerns over adverse health effects, proximity to residences, unattractive appearance, negative effect on property values and taxpayer subsidies in her opening statement to the group.

Currently, Partridge’s proposal is on hold since it was denied by the Town Zoning Board of Appeals for being over the maximum size allowed (20 acres). It could be resubmitted, however, if it were modified to show two separate 20-acre parcels or if the ZBA were to reconsider its decision on a variance.

To his credit, Partridge (and his wife, Pat) attended the meeting and stood his ground. And to his neighbors’ credit, the meeting progressed in a respectful, civil manner.

Partridge said that he proposed one 36-acre solar farm instead of two 20-acre units to eliminate the need for two sets of poles and other hardware. He also said that he moved it back from its original location.

“We sought a variance to make it more efficient and when (Trousdale Solar) engineers came back to me with the first design, it was tight up to Folger’s pine trees,” he said.

The proposed site is about 150 feet from the property line of Richard and Jolene Folger at 5105 Ellicott Street Road.

It also is within the sight line of the property of Steve and Mary Smith at 5107 Ellicott Street Road and is not far away from an ARC of Genesee Orleans group home down the road.

While Partridge said his goal was to be “less intrusive to everybody,” that apparently isn’t enough to convince the Smiths and the Folgers.

“We’re concerned about the safety of these solar farms, especially being near residents,” Mary Smith, mentioning the need for “filters” and the possibility of stray voltage.

“It’s not so much about useable energy; what are the effects of this electricity on individuals?” her husband added.

Folger said he needs more accurate data to make an informed decision.

“My biggest objection is that there are too many unknowns,” he said. “How does it affect people’s health and property values? And the Town doesn’t have a handle on setbacks (believed to be 50 feet from a neighboring property).”

Partridge, a member of the Batavia Town Planning Board, acknowledged that he will make a “super income” from the project, much more than he would make if he farmed the land.

He added that he would make sure the soil quality would be retained and is committed to green energy, noting that he has three private windmills on his farm.

“Our resources are limited – gas, oil and coal – and someday will run out,” he said.

The neighbors also voiced their displeasure with the way the Town communicates with area residents when projects such as these pop up.

“We feel the Town was a bit underhanded in notifying us (prior to board meetings). It was a last minute thing,” said Kathy Antonelli, of 5061 Ellicott Street Road, who has been assisting Nancy Brach in this effort.

Toward the end of the meeting, Mary Smith provided Partridge with a ray of hope.

“If you would consider moving it (the solar farm) back a ways (from the road), we would be very grateful,” she said.

Photo: Donald Partridge, right, and Steve Smith look at a map of the site of a 36-acre solar farm being proposed by Partridge on Ellicott Street Road. Photo by Mike Pettinella.

The solar farm boom is upon us, which means that more and more rural residents are looking to their municipal leaders to inform them of rules and regulations pertaining to these green-energy producing systems.

That’s one of the reasons why Nancy Brach of 5168 Ellicott Street Road in the Town of Batavia is inviting her neighbors to attend an informational meeting at 6 p.m. this Friday (June 28) at her home. She said the meeting will take place rain or shine, and dessert will be provided.

“We’re having this meeting due to a lack of communication about these projects and to learn what is allowed,” Brach said. “Why are people not notified beforehand? And if something does come up again, we want to have contact information to reach these people (who live near a proposed solar farm site).”

Specifically, Brach and other Ellicott Street Road residents who attended a Batavia Town Planning Board meeting last week were upset about a proposed solar farm installation on land owned by Donald Partridge.

They felt they hadn’t received adequate advance notification of the project, which ended up being denied by the Town’s Zoning Board of Appeals due to the proposed size of 40 acres.

“So this could have taken place with no input at all if not for two people who printed out fliers and left them at our houses last weekend,” she said. “And that is not right. Bill (her husband) and I now read the (legal) notices in the paper, but I doubt we would have noticed that even if we had seen it.”

The Brachs are owners of Brach Machine, which is located at 4814 Ellicott Street Road.

Town Engineer Steve Mountain said the application by Truesdale Solar for the Partridge property could be resubmitted if it were reduced to conform to code (maximum of 20 acres).

He added that if a vote needs to be taken again, the same property owners within 500 feet of the proposed site would be notified by mail.

Although Brach’s home is more than 500 feet away, she believes more should be done to let people know about these projects other than being on the Town’s website.

Brach’s concerns over solar farms go beyond notification methods, however.

“Our meeting will be for awareness,” she said. “These projects benefit two parties -- the person leasing the property and the company installing the solar equipment. The town and the people of the town do not benefit.

“And the funds for these projects come from the taxpayers. These projects do not pay for themselves, they are only profitable with the subsidies we, as taxpayers, fund.”

She decried the expenses to the Town involved in zoning, planning and legal costs, and said that the projects are not self-supporting and should not be permitted until they are.

“And the 20-year bonds may or may not be enough to dismantle the equipment when the time comes, if they even last that long. Plus, people lose the beautiful country vistas that they hoped to enjoy for a lifetime.”

Brach said she thought that the Town of Stafford had a policy “more protective” of the rights of its residents, and hoped that some of Stafford’s ideas could be incorporated into Batavia’s policy.

In the end, she hopes Friday’s meeting will mobilize residents to speak out.

“As a taxpayer, I resent paying for projects that are not profitable just to benefit an individual and a company,” she said. “Luckily, I can afford it. But there are many people who cannot and we need to stand up for them, and for what is right.”