|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Alameda County officials have again postponed an appeal hearing for the large-scale solar power plant proposed for roughly two miles north of the city limits and Interstate 580 in unincorporated Livermore.
The Board of Supervisors is now slated to hear all four appeals over the Aramis project on March 4. County staff said the date has been moved due to scheduling conflicts for two of the supervisors.
This marks the second delay for the hearing, which was originally scheduled for Jan. 12 but soon pushed to Feb. 18, partly to allow newly elected Supervisor David Haubert time to become more familiarized with the plans after he officially joined the board on Jan. 4.
The East County Board of Zoning Adjustments in November approved the plan to develop an estimated total of 580 acres of land, with 410 of those acres containing solar panels and support facilities.
The decision was met with four appeals, including one from developer Intersect Power, challenging multiple zoning board-imposed conditions of approval. Three advocacy groups — Save North Livermore Valley, Friends of Livermore and Friends of Open Space & Vineyards — also filed separate appeals, each expressing objection to the chosen site and public approval process.
Opponents of the project argue that the development poses a threat to the natural environment of the rural area and violates provisions of Measure D, which was passed by voters in 2000 and aims to preserve agricultural land and open space in eastern Alameda County.
The contentious solar plant has also received pushback from the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service. Last month, the agency issued a letter to the zoning board that claims — despite the final environmental impact report concluding otherwise — the project could negatively affect certain threatened species including the California red-legged frog, the Central California tiger salamander and the endangered San Joaquin kit fox.
“Intersect Power stands firmly behind the quality of the Aramis project’s biological survey work, which was conducted over multiple years by experts, and included protocol-level and focused surveys for amphibians and other taxa,” the company said in a statement responding to concerns raised in the letter.
“There is no potential breeding habitat for California red-legged frog or California tiger salamander on the Aramis project site, and the comprehensive surveys did not detect any frog or salamander individuals. San Joaquin kit foxes also are not present at the site, and haven’t been seen in Alameda County for decades. Intersect Power sited the Aramis project on its particular plot of land because of its low potential for harm and its high potential for local benefits.”
The energy company was also hit with a cease-and-desist order last month after lease negotiations fell through for a plot of land intended to be used for the project.
On behalf of Leland and Mary Stanley, the owners of one parcel totaling 38 acres sought for development as part of the original plans, San Francisco-based attorney Jacqueline Phillips notified Intersect Power counsel that “any and all negotiations between any of the Stanleys and any Intersect Power entity … are hereby terminated. This decision is final.”
Intersect’s principal Marisa Mitchell told the Weekly at the time that although the company was “disappointed” by the outcome, they did not expect the project to be hindered by the exclusion of the Stanleys’ land.
Once again we have the NIMBY crowd wanting to take control away from a property owner. The NIMBY’s have already devalued the property by excluding development of the property. Now the NIMBY’s are taking away additional value of a property owner. This goes against the rights of private property. This company has done its due diligence and this project should move forward. NIMBYism isn’t an excuse. If NIMBY’s want to preserve land raise the funds and buy the land. That should be the end of it.
I agree with Mike, I just wish that the Pleasanton Weekly would bring back the button so I don’t have to make a post saying that I agree. Either a thumb up or down would suffice.