FARMINGTON – The Planning Board began discussing a $110 million solar power project at Monday’s meeting, after recognizing the contributions of a longstanding board member.
Thomas Eastler, a now-retired University of Maine at Farmington professor of geology, has accrued more than 40 years of service working with numerous town committees. Not least among them was his long tenure on the Planning Board, which recognized him Monday evening with a plaque.
Bussie York, who previously was on the board with Eastler, said that the two men had sat next to each other for many years. “We always looked to Tom for good, solid information,” York said. Eastler’s contribution could not be judged in terms of dollars and cents, York added.
The board then heard a presentation by NextEra project manager Liz Peyton on a proposed, $110 million solar power project located off Route 2. The project would be the biggest in the state, covering 490 acres, and would produce 77 megawatts of energy and connect to the Central Maine Power substation on Route 2. The project would be owned and operated by Farmington Solar LLC, a subsidiary of NextEra. Ranger Solar, a solar development company, originally proposed the project which was then taken over by NextEra.
Peyton divided the project into four areas for description purposes: a section south of Route 2, which will include some panels as well as a temporary site to stage construction equipment; a collection of panels and associated equipment in pasture lands north of Route 2; another section in the wooded area further off Route 2; and a final section off the Horn Hill Road on the other side of Beales Brook. A line would span Beales Brook to tie in that fourth section, while the collection line from the bulk of the panels would go under Route 2. A horizontal directional drill would be utilized to avoid trenching the well-traveled road, Peyton said.
Planning Board members complimented NextEra on the thoroughness of their site review application. Members asked a number of questions, several sharing the common concern of how the eventual decommissioning of the project could be ensured. A decommission bond would be taken out by the company to meet the town’s ordinance requirements, Peyton said, with that bond to provide for the removal of the structures and returning of the land to the pre-construction level. Peyton said that NextEra would reassess the decommission costs associated with the project every five years, taking scrap and component values into account. The town would be a beneficiary of that bond, Peyton said.
The life expectancy of the project is roughly 40 years. While the cells can last that long, Peyton said, their efficiency begins to degrade before that point. Whether the cells would be replaced prior to the 40-year mark or not would be the result of a cost-benefit analysis.
Other comments by board members included how to manage traffic along Route 2 during construction, oversight for the construction process and the staging area, whether the solar power cells would contain toxic chemicals – Peyton said that these cells, manufactured in Florida, would not – and how disabled cells would be disposed of. Several members said they wanted more time to continue reviewing the site review application, which is extensive, prior to asking additional questions.
The project’s financial benefit to the town would depend on further consultations with the assessor. Town Manager Richard Davis said that, speaking in approximate terms, a $100 million investment into the town would represent roughly $2 million in annual tax payments. NextEra predicts that the project would create 185 jobs over the 12 to 24 month construction period, followed by 8 to 10 long term jobs, ranging from mowing and plowing, to security and monitoring.
Two residents spoke in opposition to the project, saying they were concerned about the impact on their property values. Both homeowners live on Stanwood Park Circle, near where the first section of the project would be installed.
“What you’re proposing would cut off my view of the river,” resident Kevin Reed said, saying that visibility was part of his home’s value. He said he was concerned about the potential impact to his property values and whether the solar panels could have an adverse impact on his health.
Peyton said that NextEra wanted to be a “good neighbor” to abutting landowners. The project section south of Route 2 would be screened by evergreen trees.
“It can never be a good neighbor for me,” Reed said.
Resident Bill Crandall said that while he agreed residents’ property values should not be adversely impacted by the development, he believed that people should be able to do what they want with their property. Much of the land under proposed development belongs to Sandy River Farms and Bussie York.
“I think we’ve been very lucky that the Yorks have let us use that land as a community,” Crandall said, referencing events such as the annual sled dog races.
The project will require a number of permits from the state and that process is ongoing, according to Peyton. Locally, the board intends to conduct a site review on Aug. 29 at 3 p.m. The project will continue to be discussed at the September meeting.
Thank you Doc Eastler for all of your community service. UMF, Farmington, and the State of Maine have greatly benefited from your contributions. Personally, you changed the way I look at the earth and made me self aware of the impact of my behaviors. What I learned from you allows me to be a better steward of the land. The impact of your teachings will continue for generations – a true gift to all. Wishing you the best.
Dr Eastler Thank You for your many years of service to the community. My family thanks you for your friendship and wisdom over these many years.
Many people feel that the solar project is a great thing and I feel that parts of it are a great thing. But not one person that I have spoken to in the community feels they want the solar panels by their house. These projects foster the idea that “these projects are great, just not in my back yard”. Every article I have read from small and large newspapers in the mid west, New York, Vermont, Carolinas, Florida, has had the same arguments that we have brought forth plus more as well as the energy company responses. But these projects are new enough in this country (less than 10 years old) that no long term independent impact statements have been created that can answer these concerns. One article from realtor.com said everyone likes solar just not in their backyard so how can I sell that house? AS Mr Crandell stated Mr York has the right to use his property as he sees fit, but we are not talking a shed or barn, but a project that may impact the quality of life and the property value of people that abut his property.
A well deserved recognition for Dr. Tom Eastler. Thank you for many years of service to the community, state, and country!
His interesting insights at meetings, including the Town Meetings will be missed. Thank you Tom for all your contributions over the years. And for many of us, your common sense approach has always been welcomed.
I’m not a resident of Farmington so some might say I have zero input about solar power in that town. However, I live on an aquifer which feeds my well…..an aquifer that is also harvested by Nestle as a for-profit resource …at zero cost to them, in terms of amount harvested…. they do NOT pay any per/gallon cost beyond transportation off property for example..
.in the case of water, there is a limited amount of this resource falling to a specific area of earth per year, which can be critical to the survival of those who have access to it, especially if that amountnchanges dramatically…. Also, water, unlike light, cannot be generated whole cloth.
I think having a solar farm in the area helps the world, as well as the local community, it also supports the tax base, local businesses and holds true to the values of “sustainable farming”….wind farms also provide these benefits, with some obvious costs in terms of optics…..water extraction does none of this at all. It is a form of underground strip-mining and will cost all citizens dearly in the future. It should never be allowed without serious reinvestment into the community by the harvestor….and careful consideration of long term effects on community and regional health…neither of which was done
5 comments in almost 3 days? Must be some serious censoring going on…