Silicon Ranch asks lower fee for solar farm – themoorecountynews.com

Representatives from Silicon Ranch met with the Metro Lynchburg Moore County Planning Commission to discuss the permit fee for a proposed solar farm in Moore County.

Silicon Ranch’s proposed 1,400 acre solar panel farm has been a topic of discussion for the Metro Council and the Planning Commission since 2021.

After an ordinance for the development of Standards for Ground Mounted Solar Energy Systems (GSES) in November of 2021, discussions for the development of the solar farm have continued.

The county fee schedule was put in place to be effective as of June 2023, and in September of 2023, discussion of the solar farm resurfaced in a public meeting held at Moore County High School.

The permit fee for the proposed solar farm would be defined by each panel structure included on the 2,000 acre farm. Structure size was defined by the commission as a panel area of 2,400 square feet or less, and the charge per structure was $1,500 for the structure itself, and $2,500 for the environmental impact of each structure.

In discussion with the Silicon Ranch representatives, the commission brought up their concerns regarding the impact of the solar farm on the county, as well as the damage of panels.

The representatives, Morey Hill and Rob Riley with their attorney Madison Hayes, explained they felt that the current permit fee, which would come out to about $25 million, was not legally sound or fair in comparison with the other fees presented on the county’s fee schedule.

Riley discussed the concerns having to do with a previously mentioned incident that was said to have happened in Alabama, but actually happened in Texas, regarding the damage of solar panels and the leakage of toxic materials into the environment. He said that the Cadmium Telluride (CdTe) which would be used in the panels was not toxic, and also said that the project would be heavily insured, so as to repair any damage that might happen. He also stated in regard to their concerns about the roads and that they had already laid out in their decommissioning plan, which was proposed in Oct. 2022, that Silicon Ranch is obligated to return roads surrounding the solar farm to their previous condition at the end of construction. He added that they would also be using state roads during construction.

Commissioner Scott Truvall asked the representatives if they knew exactly how much in funds they had allocated to spend on the restoration of roads, because according to his research, the use of the roads could cause there to be a need of $200,000 to $300,000 worth of repairs at the end of such a project. He also asked how many road miles the construction would be impacting. He added that the fee was in place to protect the county concerning impact.

“If we need to adjust our price, can you give us some more information,” asked Truvall.

He was told that while they did not have the exact numbers at the time and could not until construction was complete, they had previous experience in road repair following the construction of other projects in and around Tennessee.

Riley said “this is a very regular thing for us,” explaining that the company has repaired roads to their previous condition in multiple projects without any issues.

Truvall added that he worried the damage might be more than their typical conditions due to the small size of Moore County and the terrain.

“This is going to impact Cumberland Springs, Cobb Hollow, Five Points, Ledford Mill and probably Motlow College Road,” he said. “There’s a lot more county road miles that could be impacted.”

Hayes, the Silicon Ranch attorney of Bradley Arant Boult Cummings, LLP, responded to Truvall’s concerns by saying that there was a difference between the standards the company was held to through their decommissioning plan through state law versus the price of the permit fee, and what could be included in it.

“Our experience in other places in the state is that the fee has to have a reasonable relationship to the cost of reviewing the permit, and it doesn’t include the cost to the roads,” she said. She added that she felt the proposed fee wasn’t “valid under state law.”

She added that Silicon Ranch “is happy to provide more information” on the issue with roads and other impacts, but added that they felt that the county “using the permit fee” to regulate things such as land use was out of the bounds of what the commission could legally do.

Hill added that “we are not here to leave the roads in bad condition,” and added that the company fully intended to do the restoration already laid out in their decommissioning plan.

Hayes added that they felt they should be treated “like any other industrial or manufacturing project in the county.” She said because they also did not have anything that would be added into an industrial building like plumbing or other utilities, “we don’t see any reason we should be treated any differently on the building permit fee.”

“We understand what our obligations are in other areas, but that’s a totally different conversation,” she said.

Truvall asked what the permit fee on the last warehouse the commission had approved was, and he was told that it was $4,500 for a roughly $7 million project.

There was some back and forth discussion regarding the fee differences, but Chairman Dexter Golden and several of the commissioners expressed a wish to see more information before making a decision to change the permit fee, as it would be a process to again present the solar farm permit fee to the Metro Council, and any changes to the county fee schedule would need to be passed in two readings.

The company representatives said they could provide the commission with more information, and Golden said the commission would be willing to schedule a work session in the second week of July to research and discuss possible changes to the permit fee.

This post was originally published on 3rd party site mentioned in the title of this site