Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board remands contested Escalon-area solar permit back to planning commission after heated public comment
Summary
After hours of testimony on a developer's appeal and a late-revised smaller site plan, the San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors voted 5-0 to send the reduced utility-scale solar proposal back to the planning commission for rehearing so the commission and the public can consider the changed project and outstanding compatibility concerns.
The board on Aug. 4 remanded an appeal of a planning commission denial for a proposed utility-scale solar facility near Escalon back to the planning commission for rehearing, after hearing extensive testimony from both the applicant and dozens of nearby residents.
Applicant representatives argued staff recommendations and supporting technical memos supported approval, and said the developer had submitted a reduced project plan (6.8 acres) shortly before the board hearing. "This decision should be made on the law and not in motion," attorney and company representative Robert Chandler told supervisors, urging that the required findings can be written in the affirmative for the reduced layout.
Neighbors and farmers countered that the parcel is productive agricultural land, that notification and outreach had been inadequate and that the county should not convert farmland near homes into commercial utility-scale solar. "We're not compatible with them," said farmer Adam Bresino, summing the opposition's key theme that working farmland and large-scale solar are poor neighbors; other residents submitted petitions and said they had not been consulted.
Planning staff confirmed they received a revised project description and plan on the Monday before the board meeting and noted the planning commission had not had the opportunity to consider the reduced proposal. Given the late change and the intensity of neighborhood opposition, multiple supervisors recommended sending the revised proposal back to the planning commission for full public hearing.
The board approved the motion to remand by a 5-0 vote; staff will schedule the item with the planning commission so the public and commission can consider the revised site plan and recommended conditions.
