News

Supervisor candidates urge a pause on Livermore solar projects

Election foes issue rare joint statement calling for moratorium

The two candidates running for Alameda County Board of Supervisors District 1 have found common ground on the North Livermore Valley solar projects, issuing a joint statement this week calling on the county to stop review of individual proposals in favor of comprehensive planning.

While falling short of calling for the projects' outright denial, election opponents Dublin Mayor David Haubert and Fremont City Councilman Vinnie Bacon urged the county to hit the pause button as part of a shared quote released late Monday through the resident group Save North Livermore Valley.

"We call on Alameda County Board of Supervisors to place a moratorium on the review of new solar power plants on agricultural land until the county completes a comprehensive study and mapping project on the appropriate siting, scale and operation of solar power plants, if any, on agricultural land, and incorporates this work in a solar ordinance and General Plan Amendment," Bacon and Haubert said in a joint statement.

"The East County Board of Zoning Adjustments for Alameda County should likewise defer review of any individual proposed utility-scale solar facilities on agricultural land until the solar ordinance and General Plan Amendment are adopted," they added.

Dubbed the Aramis and SunWalker projects, the two proposed solar plant developments are located near each other, along Livermore Avenue between Manning and May School roads in the unincorporated Livermore Valley. The Aramis project is 410 acres of developed land and is being planned by Intersect Power while the smaller SunWalker project will consist of about 70 acres.

What's local journalism worth to you?

Support PleasantonWeekly.com for as little as $5/month.

Join

"After nearly three years of environmental study, the County's comprehensive Environmental Impact Report for the Aramis project provides a wealth of both site-specific and landscape-level data and analysis to serve decision-makers and the public in making independent judgments about whether the project is well sited, well designed and appropriately mitigated," officials from Intersect Power said of the Aramis project.

Intersect Power added that the Aramis project is located on land that has "impaired soils with no viable water source" making it unsuitable for agriculture, is located next to an existing power substation and is "devoid of critical habitat."

Certain residential groups such as Save North Livermore Valley have come out in opposition to the projects however, in part citing Alameda County lacking a comprehensive plan for how to expand renewable energy in rural areas.

"The residents of North Livermore Valley deeply appreciate and thank Councilmember Bacon and Mayor Haubert for listening to our concerns. We are all committed to addressing climate change through the development of more solar power, but insist the county proceed in a thoughtful, environmentally sound manner," stated Chris O'Brien of Save North Livermore Valley.

"The first location in rural Alameda County for new utility-scale solar power plants should not be the location that poses the greatest conflict with agriculture, natural habitat, open space and visual and scenic resources," he added.

Intersect Power officials have opposed the moratorium, saying that they have already gone through extensive review in order to support wildlife and agriculture, while minimizing any negative effects, and a moratorium would lead to depicting "the work already done for this project."

"Furthermore, drafting a solar policy would achieve some, but not all, of the environmental review obligations of any individual solar project proposal," Intersect Power added. "For a solar policy, the county would prepare an Initial Study, or an Environmental Impact Report, to evaluate the opportunities and impacts of siting large-scale solar facilities throughout the County; however, the information will be coarse in scale and not sufficient to inform the public and decision-makers about any particular site."

Save North Livermore Valley group says it was told that the first project is anticipated to be presented by staff to the East County Board of Zoning Adjustments during the board's meeting on Oct 22.

Bacon and Haubert face each other on the Nov. 3 ballot to represent Alameda County Supervisorial District 1, which includes the north Livermore Valley among other areas.

Stay informed

Get daily headlines sent straight to your inbox.

Sign up

Information from Bay City News Service was used in this story.

Follow PleasantonWeekly.com and the Pleasanton Weekly on Twitter @pleasantonnews, Facebook and on Instagram @pleasantonweekly for breaking news, local events, photos, videos and more.

Supervisor candidates urge a pause on Livermore solar projects

Election foes issue rare joint statement calling for moratorium

by / Pleasanton Weekly

Uploaded: Wed, Oct 7, 2020, 3:40 pm
Updated: Thu, Oct 8, 2020, 9:35 am

The two candidates running for Alameda County Board of Supervisors District 1 have found common ground on the North Livermore Valley solar projects, issuing a joint statement this week calling on the county to stop review of individual proposals in favor of comprehensive planning.

While falling short of calling for the projects' outright denial, election opponents Dublin Mayor David Haubert and Fremont City Councilman Vinnie Bacon urged the county to hit the pause button as part of a shared quote released late Monday through the resident group Save North Livermore Valley.

"We call on Alameda County Board of Supervisors to place a moratorium on the review of new solar power plants on agricultural land until the county completes a comprehensive study and mapping project on the appropriate siting, scale and operation of solar power plants, if any, on agricultural land, and incorporates this work in a solar ordinance and General Plan Amendment," Bacon and Haubert said in a joint statement.

"The East County Board of Zoning Adjustments for Alameda County should likewise defer review of any individual proposed utility-scale solar facilities on agricultural land until the solar ordinance and General Plan Amendment are adopted," they added.

Dubbed the Aramis and SunWalker projects, the two proposed solar plant developments are located near each other, along Livermore Avenue between Manning and May School roads in the unincorporated Livermore Valley. The Aramis project is 410 acres of developed land and is being planned by Intersect Power while the smaller SunWalker project will consist of about 70 acres.

"After nearly three years of environmental study, the County's comprehensive Environmental Impact Report for the Aramis project provides a wealth of both site-specific and landscape-level data and analysis to serve decision-makers and the public in making independent judgments about whether the project is well sited, well designed and appropriately mitigated," officials from Intersect Power said of the Aramis project.

Intersect Power added that the Aramis project is located on land that has "impaired soils with no viable water source" making it unsuitable for agriculture, is located next to an existing power substation and is "devoid of critical habitat."

Certain residential groups such as Save North Livermore Valley have come out in opposition to the projects however, in part citing Alameda County lacking a comprehensive plan for how to expand renewable energy in rural areas.

"The residents of North Livermore Valley deeply appreciate and thank Councilmember Bacon and Mayor Haubert for listening to our concerns. We are all committed to addressing climate change through the development of more solar power, but insist the county proceed in a thoughtful, environmentally sound manner," stated Chris O'Brien of Save North Livermore Valley.

"The first location in rural Alameda County for new utility-scale solar power plants should not be the location that poses the greatest conflict with agriculture, natural habitat, open space and visual and scenic resources," he added.

Intersect Power officials have opposed the moratorium, saying that they have already gone through extensive review in order to support wildlife and agriculture, while minimizing any negative effects, and a moratorium would lead to depicting "the work already done for this project."

"Furthermore, drafting a solar policy would achieve some, but not all, of the environmental review obligations of any individual solar project proposal," Intersect Power added. "For a solar policy, the county would prepare an Initial Study, or an Environmental Impact Report, to evaluate the opportunities and impacts of siting large-scale solar facilities throughout the County; however, the information will be coarse in scale and not sufficient to inform the public and decision-makers about any particular site."

Save North Livermore Valley group says it was told that the first project is anticipated to be presented by staff to the East County Board of Zoning Adjustments during the board's meeting on Oct 22.

Bacon and Haubert face each other on the Nov. 3 ballot to represent Alameda County Supervisorial District 1, which includes the north Livermore Valley among other areas.

Information from Bay City News Service was used in this story.

Comments

Marisa Mitchell
Registered user
Livermore
on Oct 7, 2020 at 6:02 pm
Marisa Mitchell, Livermore
Registered user
on Oct 7, 2020 at 6:02 pm

Intersect Power takes great care to site solar projects where their local benefits will be greatest and their local impacts fewest. Aramis is a shining example of smart-from-the-start solar development. After nearly 3 years of environmental studies and reviews, the County's comprehensive Environmental Impact Report for the Aramis project provides a wealth of both site-specific and landscape-level data and analysis to serve decision-makers and the public so they can make their independent judgments about whether the project is well sited, well designed, and appropriately mitigated. Aramis is sited on land that has impaired soils, has no viable water source for crop production, is adjacent to an existing substation, and is devoid of critical habitat. We are ready to continue moving forward through the County's existing process, which includes numerous prior precedents of finding that solar is compatible with agricultural land, and not put on the breaks for a solar policy that would duplicate the work already done for this project. We have designed Aramis to enhance wildlife habitat, promote continued agriculture, and provide abundant landscaping for a visually appealing aesthetic.

Furthermore, drafting a solar policy would achieve some, but not all, of the environmental review obligations of any individual solar project proposal. For a solar policy, the County would prepare an Initial Study or an Environmental Impact Report to evaluate the opportunities and impacts of siting large-scale solar facilities throughout the County; however, the information will be coarse in scale and will not be sufficient to inform the public and decision-makers about any particular site.

The project EIR is available here Web Link


Mike
Registered user
Val Vista
on Oct 8, 2020 at 12:49 pm
Mike, Val Vista
Registered user
on Oct 8, 2020 at 12:49 pm

I don't understand how people can have a say about what is being done on private property. A solar project is the perfect use for this land and it allows the property owner their rights of enjoyment of their property. This is another attempt to NIMBY things out of sight. Solar power production is the future and if Alameda County wants to regulate commercial solar then fast-track the writing of the rules and partner with this company to document best practices and codes. Let this project be a partnership between government and business. The NIMBY attitude is what is driving our area's rise in homelessness, drug use along with petty crimes. We need solutions from government NOT more roadblocks. I disagree and will not be voting to support your narrow mindedness. This is the reason many people dislike government because elected officials get into government to show us over and over that instead of partnering with society they want to block things, delay things, and take value away from potential industries.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Post a comment

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.