2024.05.06 CC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

Council Meeting Minutes for May 6, 2024 Page 10 of 13 would sign a contract with Xcel who would give them 25 years to sell the bill credits. That was why they were asking for a 25-year IUP. After 25 years, they would need to renew or decommission after the useful life was done as per application requirements. He explained there were no concrete footings poured into the ground. Instead, high beams would be hammered into ground in rows with a rack on it that the panels go into. He said he had applied for an interconnection agreement with Xcel that was in an advanced study phase, so it was ready for construction. He explained the steps he went through to have his plan reviewed and accepted by experts. He talked about other projects that are several smaller projects with points of interconnections that would have a lot of poles. He said this would be a small one-megawatt project on 3.9 acres that would have two more poles than what is located along the road right now. Carlson said his vegetation management plan preserved all existing habitat that’s possible; everything that flies could still be there, and he explained the deer-style fence. He said by doing this they were preserving this habitat for the future. Weidt asked how the area was calculated because it appeared it took up more than 3.9 acres. Carlson responded that the fenced area would be 5.5 acres, and the solar panel area would be 3.9 acres. Carlson stated that he would be open to an alternative public use of the setbacks. Bear addressed the question on whether there was a renewable mandate saying there was not, but there was a law that required electric companies to purchase electric from these types of facilities, which had created a market for them. There was no mandate that requires cities to approve these applications. John Udstuen requested Council show the video and pics they put together. Arnie Triemert, 1522 Everton Avenue, said he wanted Council to consider how it did not fit in the neighborhood at all. The Mayor granted Udstuen’s request and the photos were shown to Council. Laura Syring explained they hired a drone company to take these pictures depicting the feeling and flavor of the area to show that the solar farm does not fit the character of the neighborhood. A drone video was also presented. She thanked the Council for viewing them. Evan Carlson commented that the image does a good job demonstrating what people are concerned about, but that was not his plan. He said his plan preserved the trees and had setbacks and greenspace. Had the City not done such a robust job enacting its ordinance, he said his project may have looked like that. Bear noted that the photos and video would become part of the record. Weidt talked about the neighborhood being unique and set aside after multiple discussions in 1989 and again in 2006. It was the largest undeveloped piece of land in a high and medium density residential neighborhood in that part of town. He said there can certainly be a case made on the effect it would have on a neighborhood, and it would change the intention of why it was set aside. He talked about not knowing if a solar farm would have met the intention of the Council so many years ago, but he has seen many examples of how the character is changed by a project like this. He talked about the solar ordinance and the original intent of having solar farms allowed in agricultural zones was to have it on larger open pieces of land that make it easier to