The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20242774.tiffINVENTORY OF ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION Applicant: Prospect Solar LLC Case Number: USR24-0013 Submitted or Prepared Prior to Hearing At Hearing 1 Jeff & Robin Erker, objection letter received June 25, 2024 X 2 Lad Nemecek, objection letter received July 8, 2024 X 3 Amy Hernandez, objection letter received July 8, 2024 X 4 Nicole Hurtado, objection letter received July 9, 2024 X 5 Perry objection letter received July 9, 2024 X Thompson, 6 Loretta Birkmeyer, objection letter received July 9, 2024 X 7 Abbie Stewart, objection letter received July 9, 2024 X 8 Clint Nolan, objection letter received July 9, 2024 X 9 Linnea Riebschlager, objection letter received July 11, 2024 X 10 Breanne Nolan, objection letter received July 9, 2024 X 11 Amber Davis, objection letter received July 5, 2024 X 12 Response from Applicant to Ms. Davis, received September 13, 2024 X 13 Response from Applicant to Ms. Birkmeyer, received September 13, 2024 X 14 Response from Applicant to Ms. Nolan, received September 13, 2024 X 15 Response from Applicant to Mr. Nolan, received September 13, 2024 X 16 Response from Applicant to Ms. Riebschlager, received September 13, 2024 X 17 Response from Applicant to Mr. Thompson, received September 13, 2024 X 18 Response from Applicant to Ms. Stewart, received September 13, 2024 X 19 Response from Applicant to Ms. Hernandez, received September 13, 2024 X 20 Response from Applicant to Mr. & Mrs. Erker, received September 13, 2024 X 21 Kerry Madole, letter of support received September 25, 2024 X Prior to Hearing At Hearing 22 Jeff Erker, email correspondence regarding Applicant's response X 23 Presentation submitted by Applicant X 24 Keith & Carey Thoene, letter of support X I hereby certify that the 24 items identified herein was submitted to the Department of Planning Services at or prior to the scheduled Planning Commissioners' hearing. Diana Aungst, Planner June 25, 2024 Weld County Planning Services 1402 N. 17th Avenue PO Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 RE: Planning Case # USR24-0012 and USR24-0013 Attn: Chris Gathman Ann: Diana Aungst Please accept the following comments as they pertain to the proposed Solar Farm development in the two cases for USR24-0012 Janus Solar and USR24-0013 Prospect Solar LLC. 1. Setback 500 ft from existing plotted subdivision lots. Reference attached Recorded Exemption No. 1479-30-4 RE -4104 dated August 2, 2005, in Weld County. Note Lot C Building Envelope is recorded in the SW corner of this subdivision, and it appears the proposed solar development encroaches on the required 500 ft setback. 2. Horus Energy makes claims the solar development is supported by adjacent landowners. Let it be known that is a false statement as we let them know we do not support the development as an adjacent landowner. Particularly all landowners with private residences on adjacent property do not support the development. 3. Environmental Wildlife concern - the use of this land will greatly impact ungulate travel patterns as they now freely roam the whole area, they do not confine to just the "wildlife corridor" designated by Horus Energy. This very small corridor will only cause harm and entrapment of deer and antelope as they are prone to predation in this funnel. 4. Environmental Wildlife concern - Kit fox, Swift fox, and Gray fox as there is an active fox den with pups in the vicinity that is used annually. 5. Landscape screen —with the layout of Juniper trees in a triangular fashion, there should also be a minimum 3" caliper and 6' tall size required at time of planting as well as like plantings for future dead tree replacements. The estimated water usage to establish this type of tree is misstated assuming they do not need to water in the wintertime, when in fact this climate will require winter watering to establish. Additionally, Horus claims to only need to water them for 1 season to establish, this climate and tree will require regular watering for 3-5 seasons to establish. Replacement of dead trees should have a time frame of a maximum of 4 months to replace. 6. Landscape screen —the Questionnaire indicates a Skunkbush Sumac to be planted along with the Juniper. However, the plan does not show where or how they will be incorporated in the layout. An alternate to the Skunkbush Sumac might be the American Wild Plum shrub. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments. Respectfully, Jeff &Robin Erker 36751 County Road 4 Rogge n, CO 80652 Enclosed — Recorded Exemption No. 1479-30-4 RE -4104 EXHIBIT usgai-aid 4 ucraii-co13 t ■ ImarnaE `Iri MIMk S''sw'v • a r 0r }mril ! s fi` f / 'f1. ',WIMPS It /frrir .1 tee) rI + i .a.__:.____I6s. r LOT O 140.111 all - MN 1.1i? Mato S 1i0.— MM. te1 LOT' El Ls ma • Mid an SAP VW aura N'- as Ii �. ...r.—. — — a a . —.r.._ a WELD COUNTY IMO 4 or ow —a MSSlasaIsm 1a>'al-r-sraaaDa�ra =Ira..e� 4F. aaeaL aiglar �i�lt� ilArlM ll=Li- TIII.L a iooa =ralla�aao a-alau I:. SOW OCINNIMPla WINS -a wIIIWISaia_____ r n animas byre mumas Omit M mallInal`'MSS pus VICISSIE 1 lloSaalMQlt. a Mir a - yew alloying. Si. P 3 ill(► - NMI I RECORDED EXEMPTION NO. 147940-4 RE -4104 THE SOUTHMST CUNT= CVO OF SECTION 3D, T 6HIP I NORTH, RANGE Et WEST (nem em PRINCIPAL INENCIANI1 NTY OF MA STATE OF COLORADO IMIMINIMMIIIMINIIIIMalignalatal WIMI Oliaiilanaoaarn aii,waallIirtal NNIMO NWIIMP IPONNI IMIFe nDaR NM O6uawaafa alterinNra71 tazort flM MilkSL. Ant 11■ onassN1!7f S WallieWataannautallb VMS nine MtaSMrn4-■aotawaw i aMlrilri�lY1! illat IalT4w� aMSIN Si CMNWVSI IMAM Y4 .Milt APISMUNSMISMISIMMIMINF tit.ingew`reala -Sea MINI.M1R■ -a- ? :� lNaikareat nn MISIIIMSSIS aa■1rimimMIFnnsissignmeangsagammairammatbSitfla � lasSeSSIOUSt �y sI11 NI MliN� PISm 111 lliesa�aure Silliansm4/r aytar al 1111f slaaNwMSLaiaiiMi a1ii�NalaiaarilM■aw riensISI iiAPINMIPla aaarMitSpr tart terGe rnsoss :1irlPISSIIIIINALUNSi AiMMLa toppi ll� aSa.e —,. aa s~f�C i�wlvi.114AtinekbellafloSitIIMiillemi While teME ilLilliNNI I4 IMPS IN11111SIV leitleSSIS Wes sunnowicaups i1 _ __-praairlilaawrY+MMiRai ali i�iYladlrl..rMLOr tri•.ovr•arsaaat lleataltatt IMII IT a llala uM#M+�an a'S WWI .ittlitan +af pa se Ttm a opsa a•aaraa-uaran-aell■MSaalilr■INSPINANI tear akillat ISM MIMS NISIMSIIIM OP Jae amp iniaaaaeaolae,wit4dai IS NWIS I I SHIMee SIPerf ORIONS ISINSINIMkPEPAY'a!'Mai pea age urarmaas SAL NWIE taai0atonilnso I IMS FAMIL MIPSIllal�WW,I&III iaiNMua+yNib410( la]�t �24r�7iae ndirlllr�iZ iaall aaalrla.a�lrlar �lefQ *N! Y iKtSele SaIw1IMINt a erns at alas. • ffalr� la ri�Maii lfMaairitl■ MURNIS S A rialla ae na tam�� 7.Miaaaa, l aaaLaalMail M aaraTlleMA/ilaaMs rr aai tlrlalOUNSrsawn PO i LIMLI IOR Braciammonnalsaiwaa foismainuilePASSYMISSISSLIMS tafi�NSIMMAMMalnlfNNW aalFaa NDIMORSONT ICSSr rousiosin allillsasaitsNISISSIAISOMIPTaFaaPOS SUM Ma aa-a +tnouiaslai Malivnl ailal SANIall riar. 1lMaarl7MaMalaaal a■I'IlSIIMMINIMaMrlr NIONNIWININANNOWWW MILS SM. i aaeaaraa llSS lai11a1 S laa `MIDI R-a-IsaNsavni ii �aa maraimanerausensemwmanowniammuilliMMIIIIIP ovialssivmsamploaseamersePOPISVPISIMIllanalialaauMMII.MaaL S ea a MLtNrIiiiil�r Ilan aq mra>•aawaas a-ari--, woes f al��lwa`a11Ys Haan aM fl M - M+1►aIHrlS MaM`wISS illaMilom aaMMialw a'a IULISSINNOISINNWLwAolaMaan Einfla�Iwq OeMrlr �M-fa .. - - aiaa.a*a0-eau.a PSISINIUSSOCSELA aMal laa INUIS NM WSW italleA Lan aalaWNINSNLYNNIL algan Ma Thom WI MUM NMI NID SUS NM assurii. era *WAS lealaagnmas Sas OIMPOK IXICa7 SISS aahswSMM araafiwtraaneal+wawawlllaalNor IS IMMO -ma. nNafaFgactl t,MMUSMrISIONX aM° IIwMN wrN a la Wan le lama oan-Y a -I -a lOfeL Ir 14R 41Fa WINw uidiininielleAM I NIal.alatlaleMuanaa- laaowwrrioaaallleaanrlaa Will itinllM>rlalasani.11aIFlila iMualllMaUaiaiLMOP SW& Min VROMIapgNfsslll/'llltatlMslfrlaa Iaanmain alWarlianinaI aaMOUNS U ..—Mia>ilaaiallal ailwMalINIWItrSNINSINw IONIWI taxi ININiawaui■na-MSitat aaaaar-.aaa.Mll.e- —iRksiOte.aarPOINI OM ISMS ONMEIMINI NON leilikallinSWINCIUMLiolallililiMIt I -a -a alatatf Sit soliNSIMOMMERSIMIUSIORIPPSIIIMIsalia =rnig) empfu atimmainsupsia.a.alatalQ�..iMMN1.laYM� I Jllarrl�liwiiaarYMla rl�+llrlr�ltlaNlli�ir■r w oMigiR.la- Ai-asMll'r aailaum'i ourawmaussar7--' niesMHat paw aaF4 no iti? l_taaaSPEW tll■e.LTJIUI* - INTINSIPS all+rawlaiaim a nala ar a aaant wlWaoalala lai -IirNaiiwtN iNISS atwsar. ialaiM�alMMlraaa sus sass ablivesS stitea iaaIIISSIiruaanaaraimea.r, in wan k's- r gal=e�asiitr ISM Mara lliffR MlaPONet n--a-- — amnia nal NOS. rat of atimititto a 400 IIMMaar.is.r, 1ylaaataNfl NMSWSSSN ilal�lNOWISIONINNOWSIMenninanignallelalhlona- i& o asa *m* MYRMaa174ii1aSaaa. NINWOLSOMMOOLanta lIMPROISAN anilatleva twen aaltllra�o-1! SINS SA ea +MaiallMitaMilaLiMfillAfiOliJ i+uaii0l NannR9r ialMa% 4161M0. - .. miliPS. Faramedkalliali DIMir matt �QQIIorI era NM Salad IS IX OP i ICIIONS.7 MI4, ire dalalM Nit _, astaRKIVACIANIIIIID ,�- UNEAR MGM' NC Millailtutainalliiioa �a set From: Lad Nemecek <nemec189@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, July 8, 2024 1 X41 AM To: Diana Aungst cgathmam weld.gov Subjects USR24-OO12,USRR24- 13 Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello Diane and Chris, I have received your notices about the USR24-0012 and USR24eOO13 projects. Listed here are my concerns. My property borders both projects on two sides for a combined I mile. This has quite significant impact. This property represents the most valuable asset I own. i was planning to subdivide It into at least 4 individual parcels. As an adjacent landowner, I am likely to face a disproportionate share of the cumulative impacts from the solar farm development, with my property bearing the brunt of the effects. Property Value Impacts: Visual Effect -The large-scale solar arrays will likely have a significant visual Impact on your property, as they will be prominently visible. This can detract from the aesthetic appeal and rural character of the area, negatively affecting property values. Aesthetics - The industrial appearance of the solar farm infrastructure will be disruptive to the natural landscape and visual character of the surrounding area, diminishing the aesthetic appeal. Stigma - There is a documented "solar farm stigma" that can further depress nearby property values, regardless of actual impacts. Environmental Damage: Water Runoff - The large impervious surfaces of the solar panels can increase water runoff and potentially impact local drainage and groundwater recharge. This could lead to change in the water table affecting existing water wells. Leaching a With an estimated 3.6 million panels, there is a significant risk of leaching of toxic hazardous materials over time, such as cadmium, lead, copper and others into the soil and groundwater over time. Hazardous Waste a Solar panels are considered hazardous electronic waste at the end of their Ilfespan, which poses challenges for disposal and recycling. Chemical Spills - There is a risk of chemical spills from maintenance activities or equipment failure, which could contaminate the surrounding environment. Dust -The construction and ongoing operation of the solar farm can generate significant dust, which can negatively impact the surrounding area. Noise and Vibration: Construction Noise - The heavy equipment and construction activities will generate substantial noise and vibration, which will disrupt the tranquility of the area. Ongoing Noise - The operation of Inverters, transformers, and other equipment can produce persistent low-level noise that may be noticeable to nearby residents. Traffic - The Increased truck and worker traffic during construction and ongoing maintenance will likely cause disruptions and safety concerns for the local roads and community. Glint and Glare -The reflection of sunlight off the solar panels can create harmful glint and glare effects, which can be a 1 disturbance to nearby residents and potentially impact aviation safety. Heat Effects - The large-scale solar arrays can generate localized heat effects, potentially impacting the microclimate and vegetation in the surrounding area. Inadequate Screening - from the current plan diagram, the screening and setback buffering measures are insufficient, the visual and other impacts of the solar farm will be more pronounced for my property. Electromagnetic Interference - The electrical infrastructure of the solar farm can potentially interfere with radio, television, and other communication signals. Light Pollution - Nighttime lighting for the solar farm can contribute to light pollution, negatively affecting the rural character and ambiance of the area. Conflicts with Future Land Use Plans - The solar farm development may be incompatible with the existing or planned land use for the surrounding area, creating long-term conflicts. Psychological Effects: Stress and Anxiety - The proposed large utility -scale solar farm and its impacts is already causing significant stress and anxiety for myself and nearby residents, affecting their quality of life. Change in Quality of Life - The disruption to the rural character and tranquility of the area can result in a diminished quality of life for me and other neighboring residents. Here are a few studies that have found negative impacts of utility -scale solar farms on nearby real estate values: North Carolina State University Study (2020): This study analyzed home sales near 11 utility -scale solar facilities in North Carolina. The researchers found that homes within 0.5 miles of a solar farm sold for 7-8% less than similar homes farther away. East Carolina University Study (2021): This study examined home sales near 9 utility -scale solar farms in North Carolina and found a 5-7% decrease in home values for properties within 1 mile of a solar facility. Illinois State University Study (2022): This recent study looked at home sales near 13 solar farms in Illinois and found a 7- 9% reduction in home values for properties within 0.5 miles of a solar facility. "Solar Farms and Property Values: A Study of the Impact of Solar Farms on Residential Property Values in Nevada" by the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (2013) This study found that solar farms can decrease property values by 5-10% within a 1 -mile radius. here are a few more relevant studies that suggest significant negative impacts, especially in rural areas: "The Impact of Utility -Scale Solar Farms on Rural Property Values" (2017) by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory: This study found that large-scale solar farms can reduce property values by 7-8% within a 1 -mile radius in rural areas. The negative impact was most pronounced for agricultural and vacant land properties. "Assessing the Impact of Solar Farms on Rural Property Values" (2019) by the University of Massachusetts Amherst: This study analyzed 391 rural properties in Massachusetts and found that properties within 0.5 miles of a solar farm experienced a 10-15% reduction in value. The negative impact was greatest for agricultural and vacant land properties. "The Effect of Utility -Scale Solar Farms on Surrounding Property Values" (2020) by the Journal of Real Estate Finance and 2 Economics: This study, which focused on rural areas in North Carolina, found that properties within 0.5 miles of a solar farm experienced a 10-20% reduction in value. The negative impact was more pronounced for agricultural properties compared to residential properties. These studies suggest that large-scale solar farms can have a severe negative impact, often exceeding 10%, on property values in rural and agricultural areas, particularly for properties in close proximity to the solar installations. Thanks, Lad Nemecek 3 Diana Aungst From: Amy Hernandez <amyhernandez77@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, July 8, 2024 12:39 PM To: Diana Aungst; Chris Gathman Subject: Proposed Solar Farm in SE Weld county EXHIBIT Ia5(281 en; u5/224-t0t33 Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello; I live at 1634 County Road 71 in Roggen. I absolutely oppose the solar farm being proposed to be built all around my property. Please know I will fight, complain and work to strike down any proposal. My family and I have made our feelings known to the company planning the solar farm at their outreach meeting last summer. Lad Nemecek, our neighbor, has brought to lite many strong points to block the solar farm. I am in total agreement with his research on property values, environmental damage, the noise and vibration, etc. All of his research points to a bleak and horrible future for us to stay and live on our property if the solar farm is built!!! We will be surrounded by solar panels which will greatly affect our quality of life and our business. The map referenced by the solar farm building company that has been submitted to the county to show the location of the construction has completely blurred out our property as if we don't exist. I am whole heartedly offended by this assessment of the land layout. I am angered that we are having to fight for our lives, our home, and our livelihood! We have lived here 5 years and now are facing certain death if this solar farm is built. Again, I absolutely oppose the solar farm being built at all ever! The stress alone of this entire situation is completely overwhelming and unbearable. This planned solar farm sickens my stomach and saddens me beyond words. Regards, Amy Hernandez 1 From: Sent: To: Subject: Nichole Hurtado <nhanley914@hotmail.com> Tuesday, July 9, 2024 8:34 AM Diana Aungst Solar Farm in Prospect Valley Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Good Morning Diana, I am writing in with concerns about the proposed solar farm near my families farm. First not one person in my family received a notice of these plans. We heard about this through neighbors word of mouth at the last minute. This does not leave me with a good feeling. It is almost as if this was done to not inform the entire area. Second when picking a location to move to from first Aurora then Brighton/Hudson the primary focus was a simplified and quiet life. While modern technology is nice it is not what we wanted. Views of the Rocky Mountains tranquility and to get of the grid were the main objectives. This Solar Farm is far from what this community is about. We don't want disrupted views additional noise or traffic. Please don't bring this project to our quiet space. Thank you, Nichole Hurtado Sent from my iPhone 1 Diana Aun From: Sent: To: Subject: perry thompson <gsx97boy@yahoo.com> Tuesday, July 9, 2024 10:19 AM Diana Aungst PROTECT AGRICULTURAL - Concerns for Solar Farm EXHIBIT tA6,20q,„ --ea? IAA/Wet/P0 5 Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. HI, I have received the notices about the USR24-0012 and USR24-0013 projects. Listed below are my concerns that are widely shared among our local community. My property is down the road on County road 4. This has quite a significant impact. Property Value Impacts: Visual Effect - The large-scale solar arrays will likely have a significant visual impact on your property, as they will be prominently visible. This can detract from the aesthetic appeal and rural character of the area, negatively affecting property values. Aesthetics - The industrial appearance of the solar farm infrastructure will be disruptive to the natural landscape and visual character of the surrounding area, diminishing the aesthetic appeal. Stigma - There is a documented "solar farm stigma" that can further depress nearby property values, regardless of actual impacts. Environmental Damage: Water Runoff - The large impervious surfaces of the solar panels can increase water runoff and potentially impact local drainage and groundwater recharge. This could lead to change in the water table affecting existing water wells. Leaching - With an estimated 3.6 million panels, there is a significant risk of leaching of toxic hazardous materials over time, such as cadmium, lead, copper and others into the soil and groundwater over time, affecting surrounding crops. Hazardous Waste - Solar panels are considered hazardous electronic waste at the end of their lifespan, which poses challenges for disposal and recycling. Chemical Spills - There is a risk of chemical spills from maintenance activities or equipment failure, which could contaminate the surrounding environment. Construction Noise - The heavy equipment and construction activities will generate substantial noise and vibration, which will disrupt the tranquility of the area. Ongoing Noise - The operation of inverters, transformers, and other equipment can produce persistent low-level noise that may be noticeable to nearby residents. Traffic and littering - The increased truck and worker traffic during construction and ongoing maintenance will cause disruptions and safety concerns for the local roads and community, in addition to the increase in the amount of liter that will occur from construction crews - The area that this is proposed is fully surrounded by crop and local 1 generational farmers. Glint and Glare - The reflection of sunlight off the solar panels can create harmful glint and glare effects, which can be a disturbance to nearby residents and potentially impact aviation safety. Heat Effects - The large-scale solar arrays can generate localized heat effects, potentially impacting the microclimate and vegetation in the surrounding area. Inadequate Screening - from the current plan diagram, the screening and setback buffering measures are insufficient, the visual and other impacts of the solar farm will be more pronounced for my property. Electromagnetic Interference - The electrical infrastructure of the solar farm can potentially interfere with radio, television, and other communication signals. Light Pollution - Nighttime lighting for the solar farm can contribute to light pollution, negatively affecting the rural character and ambiance of the area. Conflicts with Future Land Use Plans - The solar farm development may be incompatible with the existing or planned land use for the surrounding area, creating long-term conflicts. Psychological Effects: Stress and Anxiety - The proposed large utility -scale solar farm and its impacts is already causing significant stress and anxiety for myself and nearby residents, affecting their quality of life. We worry about our futures living so close to a solar farm: health, quality of life, re -sale of housing, no protection for the agricultural lifestyle we fight hard to protect! Change in Quality of Life - The disruption to the rural character and tranquility of the area can result in a diminished quality of life for me and other neighboring residents. Here are a few studies that have found negative impacts of utility -scale solar farms on nearby real estate values: North Carolina State University Study (2020): This study analyzed home sales near 11 utility -scale solar facilities in North Carolina. The researchers found that homes within 0.5 miles of a solar farm sold for 7-8% less than similar homes farther away. East Carolina University Study (2021): This study examined home sales near 9 utility -scale solar farms in North Carolina and found a 5-7% decrease in home values for properties within 1 mile of a solar facility. Illinois State University Study (2022): This recent study looked at home sales near 13 solar farms in Illinois and found a 7-9% reduction in home values for properties within 0.5 miles of a solar facility. Solar Farms and Property Values: A Study of the Impact of Solar Farms on Residential Property Values in Nevada" by the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (2013) This study found that solar farms can decrease property values by 5-10% within a 1 -mile radius. Here are a few more relevant studies that suggest significant negative impacts, especially in rural areas: "The Impact of Utility -Scale Solar Farms on Rural Property Values" (2017) by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory: This study found that large-scale solar farms can reduce property values by 7-8% within a 1 -mile radius in rural areas The negative impact was most pronounced for agricultural and vacant land properties. "Assessing the Impact of Solar Farms on Rural Property Values" (2019) by the University of Massachusetts Amherst: This study analyzed 391 rural properties in Massachusetts and found that properties within 0.5 miles of a solar farm experienced a 10-15% reduction in value. 2 The negative impact was greatest for agricultural and vacant land properties. "The Effect of Utility -Scale Solar Farms on Surrounding Property Values" (2020) by the Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics: This study, which focused on rural areas in North Carolina, found that properties within 0.5 miles of a solar farm experienced a 10-20% reduction in value. The negative impact was more pronounced for agricultural properties compared to residential properties. These studies suggest that large-scale solar farms can have a severe negative impact, often exceeding 10%, on property values in rural and agricultural areas, particularly for properties in close proximity to the solar installations. Please hear your community and advocate for: the families, the generations of local farmers, ranchers & the community that has spent years protecting, and providing to keep the agricultural lifestyle alive. The companies and the beneficiaries of this solar farm are not the people it will directly negatively impact. Thank you, Perry Thompson 3 From: Diana Aungst Sent Tuesday, July 9, 2024 10:21 AM To: Ibirkmeyer@jlrflatirons.com Cc Chris Gathman Subject: RE: solar farm Good morning Loretta: Thanks for the email. The notification was sent to property owners who own property within 1,320 feet of the development (114 mile) your property is 4,200 feet from the development which is why you did not receive a letter. I will have the clerk add you to the mailing list for updates. Regards, Diana Aungst MCP, CM Planner Ill Weld County Departrnent of Planning SWIMS 1402 N. 17th Amite, PO Box 758, Greeley, Colorado 80632 0: 8704004524 0: 9704004100 Fay; 970-304-6498 d Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any aeon concerning the contents of this communication or arry attachments by anyone other than the named redpient is strictly prolix. From: ibirkrneyertqlrflatirons.com cibirkmeyer@jlrflatlrons.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 8:51 AM To: Diana Aungst cdaungst.weld,gov> Cc: Chris Gathman ccgathman@weld.go Subject: RE: solar farm Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government, Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. After thinking about this more I have more concerns. The well on my property Is a historical well and only 110 feet deep, I can only imagine this will be affected greatly. 1 I also can't believe I had to hear about this last night from a neighbor. I would love to know why the surrounding property owners notified. Thank you, Loretta Birkmeyer Business Manager Land Rover Flatirons 303.554.3000 Main 303.554.3030 Direct Ibirkmeyer©jlrflatirons.com landroverflatirons.com landrover.com RANGE ROVER 0 EFEISJDER DISCOVERY Land Rover Flatirons, 11420 Via Varra, Broomfield, CO, 80020. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message including attachments, is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed & may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized review: use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. From: Diana Aungst <daungst@weld.gov> Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 8:44 AM To: Ibirkmeyer@ilrflatirons.com Cc: Chris Gathman <cgathman@weld.gov> Subject: RE: solar farm Hi Loretta: This letter will be added to the case. Regards, Diana Aungst AICP, CFM Planner lii Weld County Department of Planning Services 1402 N. 17th Avenue, PO Box 758, Greeley. Colorado 80632 D: 970-400-3524 O: 970-400-6100 Fax: 970-304-6498 daungst weld.gov www. weld. qo v Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged. confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure. copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited. 2 From: Ibirkmever@ilrflatirons.com <Ibirkmever@tIrflatirons.corn> Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 7:47 AM To: Diana Aungst <daungst@weld.gov> Subject: RE: solar farm Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I am totally against this project. I purchased my property for the reason of rural life. We farm and raise animals on our property Highway 79 and road 6. For all the reasons below what more can I say. I am disgusted that my property value will drop greatly, and it will no longer be desirable to anyone in the future. I beg that this does not happen. Again, alt the reasons below are of great concern. I can't believe anyone would consider doing this to our community. Thank you, Loretta Birkmeyer Business Manager Land Rover Flatirons 303.554.3000 Main 303.554.3030 Direct IbirkmeyerCc7jlrflatirons.com landroverflatirons.com landrover.com RANGE ROVER DEFENDER DISCOVERY Land Rover Flatirons, 11420 Via Varra, Broomfield, Co, 80020. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message including attachments, is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed & may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized review: use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. Forwarded message From: Lad Nemecek <nemecl89Ccgmail.com> Date: Mon, Jul 8, 2024, 9:59 PM Subject: solar farm To: <cjnolan0305@gmail.com> Hi, This is what I sent to the county. I have received your notices about the USR24-0012 and USR24-0013 projects. Listed here are my concerns. My property borders both projects on two sides for a combined 1 mile. This has quite significant impact. Property Value Impacts: 3 Visual Effect - The large-scale solar arrays will likely have a significant visual impact on your property, as they wilt be prominently visible. This can detract from the aesthetic appeal and rural character of the area, negatively affecting property values. Aesthetics - The industrial appearance of the solar farm infrastructure will be disruptive to the natural landscape and visual character of the surrounding area, diminishing the aesthetic appeal. Stigma - There is a documented "solar farm stigma" that can further depress nearby property values, regardless of actual impacts. Environmental Damage: Water Runoff - The large impervious surfaces of the solar panels can increase water runoff and potentially impact local drainage and groundwater recharge. This could lead to change in the water table affecting existing water wells. Leaching - With an estimated 3.6 million panels, there is a significant risk of leaching of toxic hazardous materials over time, such as cadmium, lead, copper and others into the soil and groundwater over time. Hazardous Waste - Solar panels are considered hazardous electronic waste at the end of their lifespan, which poses challenges for disposal and recycling. Chemical Spills - There is a risk of chemical spills from maintenance activities or equipment failure, which could contaminate the surrounding environment. Dust - The construction and ongoing operation of the solar farm can generate significant dust, which can negatively impact the surrounding area. Noise and Vibration: Construction Noise - The heavy equipment and construction activities will generate substantial noise and vibration, which will disrupt the tranquility of the area. Ongoing Noise - The operation of inverters, transformers, and other equipment can produce persistent low-level noise that may be noticeable to nearby residents. Traffic - The increased truck and worker traffic during construction and ongoing maintenance will likely cause disruptions and safety concerns for the local roads and community. Glint and Glare - The reflection of sunlight off the solar panels can create harmful glint and glare effects, which can be a disturbance to nearby residents and potentially impact aviation safety. Heat Effects - The large-scale solar arrays can generate localized heat effects, potentially impacting the microclimate and vegetation in the surrounding area. Inadequate Screening - from the current plan diagram, the screening and setback buffering measures are insufficient, the visual and other impacts of the solar farm will be more pronounced for my property. Electromagnetic Interference - The electrical infrastructure of the solar farm can potentially interfere with radio, television, and other communication signals. Light Pollution - Nighttime lighting for the solar farm can contribute to light pollution, 4 negatively affecting the rural character and ambiance of the area. Conflicts with Future Land Use Plans - The solar farm development may be incompatible with the existing or planned land use for the surrounding area, creating long-term conflicts. Psychological Effects: Stress and Anxiety - The proposed large utility -scale solar farm and its impacts is already causing significant stress and anxiety for myself and nearby residents, affecting their quality of life. Change in Quality of Life - The disruption to the rural character and tranquility of the area can result in a diminished quality of life for me and other neighboring residents. Here are a few studies that have found negative impacts of utility -scale solar farms on nearby real estate values: North Carolina State University Study (2020): This study analyzed home sales near 11 utility -scale solar facilities in North Carolina. The researchers found that homes within 0.5 miles of a solar farm sold for 7-8% less than similar homes farther away. East Carolina University Study (2021): This study examined home sales near 9 utility -scale solar farms in North Carolina and found a 5-7% decrease in home values for properties within 1 mile of a solar facility. Illinois State University Study (2022): This recent study looked at home sales near 13 solar farms in Illinois and found a 7-9% reduction in home values for properties within 0.5 miles of a solar facility. "Solar Farms and Property Values: A Study of the Impact of Solar Farms on Residential Property Values in Nevada" by the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (2013) This study found that solar farms can decrease property values by 5-10% within a 1 -mile radius. here are a few more relevant studies that suggest significant negative impacts, especially in rural areas: "The Impact of Utility -Scale Solar Farms on Rural Property Values" (2017) by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory: This study found that large-scale solar farms can reduce property values by 7-8% within a 1 -mile radius in rural areas. The negative impact was most pronounced for agricultural and vacant land properties. "Assessing the Impact of Solar Farms on Rural Property Values" (2019) by the University of Massachusetts Amherst: This study analyzed 391 rural properties in Massachusetts and found that properties within 0.5 miles of a solar farm experienced a 10-15% reduction in value. The negative impact was greatest for agricultural and vacant land properties. "The Effect of Utility -Scale Solar Farms on Surrounding Property Values" (2020) by the 5 Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics: This study, which focused on rural areas in North Carolina, found that properties within 0.5 miles of a solar farm experienced a 10-20% reduction in value. The negative impact was more pronounced for agricultural properties compared to residential properties. These studies suggest that large-scale solar farms can have a severe negative impact, often exceeding 10%, on property values in rural and agricultural areas, particularly for properties in close proximity to the solar installations. The county planners are asking for comments by July 9. You can send your concerns to: Diana Aungst daungst@weld.gov Thanks, Lad Nemecek 303-917-8142 6 From: Sent To: Subject: Abbie Stewart <abbie,peakre@gmaii.com> Tuesday, July 9, 2024 10:17 AM Diana Aungst st Protect Agricultural - Concerns for USR24-OO12 and USR24 0013 projects Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi, I have received the notices about the USR24-0012 and US 4-0013 prof s. Listed below are my concerns that are widely shared among our local community. My property is doom the road on County road 4. This has quite a significant impact Propel Value Impacts: Visual Effect - The large-scale solar arrays will likely have a significant visual impact on your property, as they will be prominently visible. This can detract from the aesthetic appeal and rural character of the area, negatively affecting property values. Aesthetics - The industrial appearance of the solar farm Infrastructure will be disruptive to the natural landscape and visual character of the surrounding area, diminishing the aesthetic appeal. Stigma le There is a documented "solar farm stigma" that can further depress nearby property values, regardless of actual impacts. Environmental Damage: Water Runoff - The large impervious surfaces of the solar panels can increase water runoff and potentially impact local drainage and groundwater recharge. This could lead to change in the water table affecting existing water wells, Leaching - With an estimated 3.8 million panels, there is a significant risk of leaching of toxic hazardous materials over time, such as cadmium, lead, copper and others into the soil and groundwater over time, affecting surrounding crops. Hazardous Waste - Solar panels are considered hazardous electronic waste at the end of their lifespan, which poses challenges for disposal and recycling. Chemical Spills - There is a risk of chemical spills from maintenance activities or equipment failure, which could contaminate the surrounding environment. Construction Noise - The heavy equipment and construction activities will generate substantial noise and vibration, which will disrupt the tranquility of the area. Ongoing Noise - The operation of inverters, transformers, and other equipment can produce persistent low-level noise that may be noticeable to nearby residents. Traffic and littering - The increased truck and worker traffic during construction and ongoing maintenance will cause disruptions and safety concerns for the local roads and community, In addition to the Increase in the amount of liter that will occur from construction crews - The area that this is proposed is fully surrounded by crop and local 1 generational farmers. Glint and Glare - The reflection of sunlight off the solar panels can create harmful glint and glare effects, which can be a disturbance to nearby residents and potentially impact aviation safety. Heat Effects - The large-scale solar arrays can generate localized heat effects, potentially impacting the microclimate and vegetation in the surrounding area. Inadequate Screening - from the current plan diagram, the screening and setback buffering measures are insufficient, the visual and other impacts of the solar farm will be more pronounced for my property. Electromagnetic Interference - The electrical infrastructure of the solar farm can potentially interfere with radio, television, and other communication signals. Light Pollution - Nighttime lighting for the solar farm can contribute to light pollution, negatively affecting the rural character and ambiance of the area. Conflicts with Future Land Use Plans - The solar farm development may be incompatible with the existing or planned land use for the surrounding area, creating long-term conflicts. Psychological Effects: Stress and Anxiety - The proposed large utility -scale solar farm and its impacts is already causing significant stress and anxiety for myself and nearby residents, affecting their quality of life. We worry about our futures living so close to a solar farm: health, quality of life, re -sale of housing, no protection for the agricultural lifestyle we fight hard to protect! Change in Quality of Life - The disruption to the rural character and tranquility of the area can result in a diminished quality of life for me and other neighboring residents. Here are a few studies that have found negative impacts of utility -scale solar farms on nearby real estate values: North Carolina State University Study (2020): This study analyzed home sales near 11 utility -scale solar facilities in North Carolina. The researchers found that homes within 0.5 miles of a solar farm sold for 7-8% less than similar homes farther away. East Carolina University Study (2021): This study examined home sales near 9 utility -scale solar farms in North Carolina and found a 5-7% decrease in home values for properties within 1 mile of a solar facility. Illinois State University Study (2022): This recent study looked at home sales near 13 solar farms in Illinois and found a 7-9% reduction in home values for properties within 0.5 miles of a solar facility. Solar Farms and Property Values: A Study of the Impact of Solar Farms on Residential Property Values in Nevada" by the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (2013) This study found that solar farms can decrease property values by 5-10% within a 1 -mile radius. Here are a few more relevant studies that suggest significant negative impacts, especially in rural areas: "The Impact of Utility -Scale Solar Farms on Rural Property Values" (2017) by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory: This study found that large-scale solar farms can reduce property values by 7-8% within a 1 -mile radius in rural areas. The negative impact was most pronounced for agricultural and vacant land properties. "Assessing the Impact of Solar Farms on Rural Property Values" (2019) by the University of Massachusetts Amherst: This study analyzed 391 rural properties in Massachusetts and found that properties within 0.5 miles of a solar farm experienced a 10-15% reduction in value. 2 The negative impact was greatest for agricultural and vacant land properties. "The Effect of Utility -Scale Solar Finns on Surrounding Property Values" (2020) by the Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics: This study, which focused on rural areas in North Carolina, found that properties within 0.5 miles of a solar farm experienced a 10-20% reduction in value. The negative impact was more pronounced for agricultural properties compared to residential properties. These studies suggest that large-scale solar farms can have a severe negative impact, often exceeding 10%, on property values in rural and agricultural areas, particularly for properties in close proximity to the solar installations. Please hear your community and advocate for: the families, the generations of local farmers, ranchers & the community that his spent years protecting, and providing to keep the agricultural lifestyle alive. The companies and the beneficiaries of his solar farm are not the people it will directly negatively Impact. Best Regards for a future with happy residents and the protection of the next agricultural generation, dee Abbigalle Stewart Broker (303) 591-5647 Peak Real Estate, LLC Land I Commercial I Residential 1181 E grid St, Brighton CO, 80601 kReaIEafate.us *I'm best reached by email* Wire and other frauds occur in real estate transactions. Anytime Buyer or Seller Is supplying confidential i nrormati on such as social security numbers, bank account numbers, transferring or receiving funds, Buyer and Seller should provide the Information In person or In another secure manner. 3 EXHIBIT Diana Aungst LtsgA-GGgseito 8 � From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Clint Nolan <cjnolan0305@gmail.com> Tuesday, July 9, 2024 12:27 PM Diana Aungst Prospect solor project. 0_88556.pdf Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. This email is regarding project USR24-0012 and USR24-0013. A little back ground of who I am and why this will afect me and my family. I work full time as a electrician on large scale projects. We have live in this area for over 10 years. We recently bought a new place 2 years ago just down the road from the family farm. I Currently live at 1083 county road 67. We have a family farm that I farm at 2167 Hwy 79. Aswell custom farm for neighbors when the need arises. First and for most the only people that were notified of this project were people with bordering property. Even all of the homework I have done in the last 10 hours since I was made aware of this project show that it will directly effect property values for a minimum of 1 to 3 mile raduis of the project. From anywhere from 5% to 20%. I find this to be verry unethical. I would honestly be willing to say that it is dishonest and sneaky. If this project goes through with out the affected people being given a proper time to voice there concerns due to this deceitful nature. I'm afraid it will end in the court system. What I am proposing to avoid this. I believe that every property owner within a 5 mile rasius of this project be informed properly and given the correct amount of time to research this and or vice concerns properly. I have reached out to many neighbors this morning to make them aware of this issue. To hopefully avoid this form coming to that. My concerns are as follows Saftey due to added traffic in the area as a ruslt of this project. Many farmers use the roads around this project to move tractors from feild to feild. Myself included. We do our best to avoid the highway however some times it is un avoidable. Traffic has been getting heavier in this area already. There have ban many wrecks in the area one involving a farmer checking cows being hit by a car resulting In fatalities to people in the car. This happend right on the coner of our property. The added traffic form the construction of this site and maintenance of this site will greatly increase this hazard. Water run off. How is the water run off of this feild being mitigated. I would asumm there is a civil drawing with a storm water system to control this issue. Where is the water going from there? I would like to se a studdy of the natural run off water prior to this project. As well as a engineered study of what this project has planned for solution of this issue. This will efect our water tables. And is concerning as the family farm has a historic well that is only about 100-180' deep. What is going to be done about the chance of water pollution to not only our residential drinking water wells, irrigation wells and our ditch water from Hynerlyn ditch? Has Hynerlyn been made aware of this project? How much water is this facility going to use and where will it come from? 1 Heat Many studies show that thes solar farms will afect the climate. Usually resulting in a increase of heat down wind. As well as the wether, driving rain away from the site due to the heat and reflection off of the panel. Causing other areas to get more rain and less rain around the site. This will affect all of our crops the hotter it is the more water is required to sustain a healthy crop. Water is aleardy hard to come by. This is a lose lose for everyone effected nearby. Noise Being a electrician I understand the articulating motors are fairly quite. As a farmer who grew up in the area I also know how quite it is in this area. The thousands of motors moving at once to folow the sun no mater how slow will be noticed by everyone. How loud will it be? What about the supporting equipment? Visually It is my under standing that weld county dose not regulate the appearance of these projects. This leaving a already dipleasing site unregulated and un manged. We will have to see this while having our morning coffee, working the feild and driving down the road. It will afect our property values and many of us would have never built or purchased our properties with this in place. Keep in mind we have many new neighbors in the last two years and one that is building as we speak with no knowledge of this project. That is just wrong! What a way to welcome them to the area. Electricaly I also notice that weld county dose not require a fence around the project. We are talking about DC current that is verry dangerous. This is a big issue with electric cars. This current will need to be converted to AC power through converter/ inverters before it is consumable and sustainable. What are the plans to keep this area safe maintaining NFPA 70e standards? Aswell as keeping unotherized people from entering the facility? Who is going to receive the power? Is it Morgan County Rea? From recent deiling with them I'm not sure they have the infastructure to accommodate this project. Dust/wind What are the plans to keep dust down during construction and where is the water coming from to do this? What is the 23+ mile an hour going to do to the panels one the project is complete? What vegetation is going to be planted under the panels and who is going to maintain this? Wild life Studies have show that the heat and glare tend to cook insects which are vital to farming. We need them to polinat our crops. It has shown that the reflection can disoriente birds asell as burn them. How is this going to afect the migration of birds? What about the wild life that it will displace. We have deer, antelope, elk, coyotes and fox to name a few.. that we get the pleasure of seeing almost daily as we care for the land? How is this going to affect them and where are the going to go? This is going to displace many of these animals. Sustainable farming. For the life of me I can not figure out why we would decide keenesburg (prospect valley) although it's considered a ghost town. Would be the place we decide to put this. A town that was named because of it fertility and under ground auquafer. That make this such a great place to farm. Why not an area where there is no fertal ground for sustainable farming? Please consider giving proper notice to the people affected by this? Maybe even a town hearing where these questions can be raised and answered in a civil manner. Attached below are links form some of my sources Sincerely, 2 Clint Nolan https://www. justice.gov/opa/pr/swinerton-builders-reaches-agreement-address-clean-water-act-violations-and-offset https://www.science.org/content/article/massive-solar-farms-could-provoke-rainclouds-desert https://arka360.com/ros/solar-energy-impact-wildlife-biodiversity-sustainability/ https://www.aay.org/blogpost/1525799/492796/Sola r -Energy -Production -s -Toll -on -Wild -Birds https://aqualisco.com/managing-runoff-on-solar-farms/ 3 !!2NREL •1,, :-ti _ 1ft \ Nit\ It, •S County Land -Use Regulations for Solar Energy Development in Colorado Ilison Jackson,' Kate Doubleday, Brittany Staie,2 Allison erna,z Martel Sabraw,1 Liz Voss, Apolonia Alvarez,2 yron Ko.minek,1 and Jordan Mac knick2 1 colorado AgiWoftaibs Learning Center 2 Nations! Renewable Energy Laboratory NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Enemy, LLC This remit is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.goviOublications. Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 Technical Report NRELITREA20-88556 April 2024 ralmREL County Land -Use Regulations for Solar Energy Development in Colorado Allison Jackson,' Kate Doubleday,2 Brittany Staie,2 Allison Perna,2 Mariel Sabraw,1 Liz Voss,' Apolonia Alvarez,2 Byron Kominek,' and Jordan Macknick2 1 Colorado Agrivoltaics Learning Center 2 National Renewable Energy Laboratory Suggested Citation Jackson, Allison, Kate Doubleday, Brittany Staie, Allison Perna, Mariel Sabraw, Liz Voss, Apolonia Alvarez, Byron Kominek, and Jordan Macknick. 2024. County Land -Use Regulations for Solar Energy Development in Colorado. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. NREUTP-6A20-88556. https://www.nrel.qov/docs/fy24osti/88556.pdf. NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications. Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 Technical Report N RE UTP-6A20-88556 April 2024 National Renewable Energy Laboratory 15013 Denver West Parkway Golden, CO 80401 303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov NOTICE This work was authored in part by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, operated by Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC, for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under Contract No. DE-AC36-08G028308. Funding at NREL provided by the InSPIRE project through U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Solar Energy Technologies Office award DE-EE00038642. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the DOE or the U.S. Government. This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) reports produced after 1991 and a growing number of pre -1991 documents are available free via www.OSTI.gov. Cover Photo by Werner Slocum: NREL 64503. NREL prints on paper that contains recycled content. Acknowledgments The Colorado Agrivoltaic Learning Center would like to thank the National Center for Appropriate Technology (NCAT) and the NCAT AgriSolar Clearinghouse for their financial support of this report. The authors wish to thank Megan Day, Anthony Lopez, Aaron Levine, Amy Brice, Mark Ruth, Caitlin Murphy, Dan Bilello, David Glickson, Jeff Cook James McCall, Martha Symk Davies, Mary Werner, William Livingot , Doug Arent, Juan Tones,, Gian Porro, Kristen Boysen, and Wil Mannes for their insightful reviews and comments, and National Renewable Energy Laboratory team members Billy Roberts and Emily Horvath for their valuable contributions iii This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrerl.gov/publi ions. List of Acronyms CALC CRS CSG EIA ft GWac GWdc kW kWh MWac MWdc NREL PV SETA USDA Colorado Agrivoltaic Learning Center Colorado Revised Statutes community solar garden U.S. Energy Information Administration foot gigawatts alternating current gigawatts direct current kilowatt kilowatt-hour megawatts alternating current megawatts direct current National Renewable Energy Laboratory photovoltaic Solar Energy Industries Association U.S. Department of Agriculture iv This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. Executive Summary The United States is experiencing rapid growth in ground -mounted solar, including in Colorado where utility -scale (>1 MW nameplate capacity) solar photovoltaic (PV) plants have been deployed in 28 of 64 counties (U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA] 2023a). Ground - mounted or free-standing solar uses an array of PV modules mounted on a racking system on the ground. It includes both large, utility -scale plants as well as smaller applications, such as customer -sited arrays at commercial or industrial facilities and community solar gardens. As solar deployment has increased, so have community concerns about impacts to the visual landscape, property values, community character, and the development of agricultural land (Nilson, Hoen, and Rand 2024). Agrivoltaics, a dual land use combining agriculture and ground - mounted PV on the same land, is one possible solution to some of these challenges (Macknick et al. 2022). Agrivoltaics can include cultivating crops, beekeeping, and grazing livestock underneath and/or in between solar panels and can provide diversified income, water savings, and other synergistic benefits (Hernandez et al. 2019; Macknick et al. 2022; Nilson, Hoen, and Rand 2024). There is recent interest in agrivoltaics in Colorado, including successful commercial deployments as well as state -level grants and tax incentives for more demonstration sites (Jaffe 2022b; Colorado General Assembly 2023a). Additionally, Colorado has a goal of achieving a 100% reduction in economy -wide greenhouse gas pollution by 2050, and the state's largest electricity provider, Xcel Energy, is targeting 100% carbon -free electricity by 2050 (Colorado General Assembly 2023b; Xcel Energy 2023). Since permitting authority for solar plants in Colorado lies with local governments, county land use codes and permitting processes play an important role in solar deployment (Lerner 2022; Lopez et al. 2023; Pascaris 2021). Counties commonly define zoning districts with different allowable uses and permitting processes for land -use changes, varying in their oversight and requirement complexity. Requirements can include maximum structure height; setbacks from property lines, roads, and structures; fencing or screening for safety or visual appeal; and other visual impact and vegetation management requirements, which can impact the design and viability of solar arrays (Daniels and Wagner 2022). In addition, agrivoltaic systems are a dual land use that might not fit neatly within existing zoning definitions or solar regulations that assume single land use. Each county generally adopts unique land use codes, causing high variability in solar regulations, which is a challenge for interested stakeholders, such as policymakers, solar developers, and researchers. In addition, county -level codes may be publicly available online in a document form such as a pdf, or they may not be available at all. In this report, we present a comprehensive review of county -level policies across Colorado that regulate ground -mounted or free-standing solar, as opposed to rooftop or building -integrated solar, for both utility -scale and distributed applications. This review includes both solar -specific ordinances as well as general land -use code that might be applicable in counties without solar - specific policies. This report provides an accessible reference for stakeholders interested in identifying counties with particular regulations or in analyzing the diversity of regulations across Colorado. We defined a set of search criteria to find information on solar definitions and classifications, permitting processes, and use -specific requirements in each of Colorado's 64 counties. We reviewed relevant ordinances, land -use code, and comprehensive and master plans conforming to those criteria from March to November 2023. If any uncertainties were identified, we contacted county officials for clarification. The findings were categorized and mapped to v This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. illustrate the distribution of key policies adopted across Colorado's counties on the following topics: solar definitions, solar siting policy documentation, categorization of PV systems for pitting 1041 permitting, solar on agricultural land, panel height restrictions, fencing requirements, vegetation management, visual impacts, and plans and financial assurance for decommissioning. Additional topics relevant to solar permitting, such as wildlife impact mitigation, mad impact fees, lot coverage restrictions, and setbacks are left for future work or are addressed elsewhere (e.g., Lopez et al. 2023). Appendix A lists the documents reviewed for each county, and other county -level results are available in the appendices. As ofNovember 2023, 39 of Colorado's 64 counties had documented solar land -use regulations that contain some or all of the information in the search criteria (Figure ES -1). Nineteen counties have no land -use code specific to ground -mounted solar. However, this landscape is continually evolving —the remaining six counties had moratoriums on large-scale solar applications in effect during the review and report preparation periods. Five of these moratoriums were instituted to provide sufficient time for land -use code revisions soon after large solar power plants were permitted or announced to the public, and county officials determined that existing regulations did not sufficiently address solar as a land use or sought to proactively address other community concerns (Witowski 2022; Bunton 2023; Turner 2023a; McDermott 2023; Sida 2023). Derailed solar lad Use Repletion, Some Solar Land Use Replations No Land Um Code Related to SolarSolar Development Under ?Aaatorhun Figure ES -I. Status of solar land use regulations In Colorado counties (2023)e Counties with "Detailed Solar Land Use Regulations" have documentation on all the policies listed In the reviewes search criteria, and counties with 'Some Solar Land Use Regulation? have documentation on some but not all. While a few counties have adopted language similar to that of their neighbors, most counties have adopted their own definitions of solar energy systems and their own land -use requirements. The cumulative effect is a wide variety of potential regulations for utility -scale solar in Colorado, as summarized in Figure ES -2. When considering both solar specific ordinances and general vi This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrelagovlpublications. land -use codes, the most common requirements regulate fencing and visual impacts, closely followed by required plans and financial assurance for decommissioning after the system's useful life. Particularly relevant for agrivoltaic installations, several counties have specific restrictions regarding solar or general development on irrigated land, and many counties have restrictions on the maximum panel height, although most restrictions are currently high enough for common agrivoltaic configurations. Unique to Colorado, many counties also have "1041" permit requirements that might apply to solar; 1041 powers refer to delegated powers from the state to local jurisdictions to regulate certain matters of statewide concern, and 1041 permits are generally more expensive, rigorous, and have a higher level of scrutiny than other permit types. Percentage of Colorado Counties 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% cic° ics (‘'‘. (.‘ ce , fie . oti� ' oso �`e `e e o �� ,�,� `�e cosfi �� Ce •%.\moo, �� )(` 2,6OL (ct �� °� citt*ems ee\ER .44 ��'� eootee‘tir Ni‘s c2,65 ke it \OC‘ \Ps' Figure ES -2. Summary of land -use policies and requirements that might apply to utility -scale solar across Colorado's counties From the review results, we found the following key takeaways: • Solar plant permitting requirements across Colorado are county -specific and highly variable. Counties often varied permitting requirements for PV systems based on their installed capacity, land area, and/or electricity end use. These groupings might not be applied as intended for new and emerging solar configurations due to gaps or ambiguity in definitions. For example, there might be fewer requirements for large off -grid PV arrays for commercial uses than grid -tied systems in counties that differentiate based on electricity end use. There can also be overlap with legacy 1041 regulations, in some instances requiring developers to complete both a 1041 permit and a conditional use or special use permit (County of Elbert 2018). Relatedly, two counties require 1041 permits at a lower installed nameplate capacity threshold for solar and wind compared to fossil fuel, biofuel, or similar power generating facilities. • 75% of Colorado's existing utility -scale solar power plants and 89% of its installed solar capacity are located in 45% of its counties, each of which has documentation for all of the policies in the review. Once a county starts receiving applications for solar power plant permits, there appear to be two common drivers motivating the adoption of vii This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. solar -specific regulations: community response and clear gaps in the existing land -use code. The public processes required for land use code and zoning changes can help address community needs and concerns, and clearly documented policies lower risks for solar development. • Some county policies existing at the time of the review could limit agrivoltaic deployment, including four counties restricting solar in some or all agricultural zones, several others considering agricultural impacts in the review process, four counties with 10 -15 -foot panel height limits, and six counties with higher permitting stringency for any development on irrigated land. viii This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. Table of Contents Executive Summary v 1 Introduction 1 2 Background 4 3 Methods 7 3.1 Search Criteria 7 3.2 Document Search 8 3.3 Contact With Planning Departments or County Commissioners 9 3.4 Categorization and Mapping of the Data 9 4 ResultsMOO40,0080000 OOOOO WIWIPSO*4 OOOOO 0000•84 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO SSIBOOMOOS**....*......******...***********0***.*80*********400041*****..*** 1 0 4.1 Solar Definitions 4.2 Solar Siting Policy Documentation and Solar Deployment 4.3 Categorization of PV Systems 4.4 1041 Permitting (Areas and Activities of State Interest) 4.5 Solar on Agricultural Land 4.6 Panel Height Restrictions 4.7 Fencing Requirements 4.8 Vegetation Management 4.9 Visual Impacts 4.10 Decommissioning Plans 4.11 Financial Assurance for Decommissioning 5 Discussion 5.1 Solar -Specific Ordinances, Deployment, and Community Response 5.2 Variability in Solar Permitting Across Colorado's Counties 5.3 Agrivoltaics and Solar Land -Use Code 5.4 Future Research 6 Conclusion a Glossary References Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E County Land -Use and Permitting References Solar Definitions by County 1041 Permit Thresholds by County Panel Height Restrictions by County Fencing ix 10 11 13 14 16 18 19 20 22 23 24 26 26 29 31 33 35 37 38 48 55 66 68 70 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. List of Figures Figure ES -1. Status of solar land use regulations in Colorado counties (2023)......................................*.... i1 Figure ES -2. Summary of land -use policies and requirements that might apply to utility -scale solar across ii. Oalorado's...............•..i....ii..ii........i.........i.............................................�..................■ Yti Figure ].Average solar resource and utility -scale (>1 megawatt [MW]) solar deployed by county as of October2023 202 b).....f...........................i!!...........i.....ii...i..i........ii......ii..ii......R.iiii........ 5 Figure 2. Policies and definitions reviewed for each Colorado county .........i....l.............*n...1.........ii.ii.i.ii.i 8 Figure 3. Solar power or solar power zoning definitions in Colorado nt...................*......................11 Figure 4. Identification of which Colorado counties have implemented landduse policies regulating solar installations.....................i.....a..i.....ii.iii.....i..if....i.ii.ii.....f..*...i..i..........iiiiiti..ii......i.....r........... 12 Figure 5. Colorado counties' methods for categorizing solar power installations to determine which requirements to apply during the panitting process.i..iiiiwwwwwiii...■a...e.i.■...i..i...iiii.................. 14 Figure 6. Solar power plants might trigger a 1041 permit requirement in some Colorado counties.15 Figure 7. Regulation of solar power plants on agricultural land in Colorado cies.....................i17 Figure 8. Maximum allowable height of solar panels in each Colorado county......... .... 18 Figure 9. Fencing requirements for solar power installations in Colorado 1/ ..............i20 installations Figure 10. Vegetation management requirements for solar power in Colorado counties21 Figure 11. Visual impact requirements applicable to solar power installations in Colorado counties 22 Figure 12. Decommissioning and reclamation requirements for solar power installations in Colorado countiesi...i..... .i........ii..i........................•l...l....s..l..i.11.i..t............ii..a.*.l...s.....l..i.a.i 23 Figure 13. Financial assurance requirements for decommissioning solar power installations for Colorado counties.......i..n.......i.....iii■iii.i..ii.■i.........owl .ii54....i*ii.i1.......i............l..4iii...■.i..■.■■.■■..■.■............ 25 Figure 14. Timelines of solar deployment, adoption ofsolar-specific ordinances or definitions, and amendments to those ordinances for Colorado counties with high solar deployment to date. •...... 410410.+ii0.iii.ii.iiiiiiiiii.ii.................■............*..........*i...ii.i...■.i...........■.i....*.i......i..t....f....i.ii.ii.i 27 Figure 15. Timelines of current county -level solar moratoriums In Colorado, including public announcement or permit approval of key solar power plants planned In each county. The planned capacity andlar acreage of each solar plant is indicated..........................."..i..i.....■.■ 28 a K This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at wivw,nrelygovipubikations. List of Tables Table 1. Number and Installed Capacity of Solar Power Plants Located in Counties With Different Levels of Solar Siting Policy Documentation 13 Table 2. County Policies Specifically Protecting Agricultural Lands From Solar Development 17 Table A-1. County Documents Referenced in the Review Results 48 Table 8-1. Solar Siting Definitions by County 55 Table C-1. Colorado County Thresholds Potentially Triggering a 1041 Permitting Process for Solar Power Plants in Those Counties 66 Table D-1. Height Restrictions on Solar Panel Heights by County 68 Table E-1. Fencing Requirements by County 70 xi This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. 1 Introduction The United States is currently undergoing a large-scale build -out of rooftop and ground -mounted solar photovoltaic (PV) projects, with total installed capacity projected to nearly double from 189 gigawatts alternating current (GWac) in 2024 to 352 GWac in 20301 (Gagnon et al. 2023). For utility -scale solar power plants and community solar gardens (CSGs) as well as for large commercial and industrial customers consuming their own solar -generated electricity on -site, these installations are typically ground -mounted and can cover tens or up to thousands of acres (Ong et al. 2013). When trying to identify locations for large ground -mounted solar plants, the most promising sites for solar developers are often on large, cleared parcels close to existing transmission lines with strong solar resource, stable soil, and minimal slope (Aran Carrion et al. 2008). Much of the land that meets these needs is current or former agricultural land (Adeh et al. 2019). While solar development is generally supported in the United States (Carlisle et al. 2015), there can be opposition to projects, particularly with projects developed on farm or forest lands (Gaur et al. 2022). Community resistance to solar development has occurred in rural areas, as communities attempt to balance prime farmland conservation, support new economic opportunities, maintain local rural character, and achieve renewable energy targets (Jaffe 2022b; Richardson, Kirk Hall, and Morgan 2022; Sungu 2011). One possible opportunity to address these challenges is agrivoltaics, a dual land use that combines agriculture and ground -mounted PV on the same land (Bessette et al. 2024; Dinesh and Pearce 2016; Kumpanalaisatit et al 2022; Macknick et al. 2022; Mamun et al. 2022). These dual land uses can include cultivating crops, beekeeping, and grazing livestock underneath and around solar panels (Macknick et al. 2022; Kolbeck-Urlacher 2023). In the right conditions and with the right hybrid design, agrivoltaics can provide an additional income stream for landowners, maintain farmland or pastureland in production, and provide other synergistic benefits (Hernandez et al. 2019; Jaffe 2022b; Macknick et al. 2022). These benefits have the potential to address some of the major sources of community opposition, although some of the impacts are still unclear or mixed. The potential visual and aesthetic impacts of solar on the landscape is a common reason for community opposition (Carlisle et al. 2015; Nilson, Hoen, and Rand 2024), and current literature does not find clear community preferences for the aesthetics of agrivoltaic systems (Pascaris et al. 2022; Schrdter, Plittschneide, and Mergenthaler 2023). However, other studies have also found that solar projects would be more likely to be supported with the addition of agrivoltaics, and solar developers have reported sometimes adding agrivoltaics in response to community feedback (Pascaris et al. 2022; Nilson, Hoen, and Rand 2024). Pascaris et al. (2022) found that 82% of survey respondents stated they would be more likely to accept solar projects in their community if agrivoltaics were integrated, even more so if they provided fair economic opportunities to farmers and the surrounding community. While proposing an agrivoltaic rather than a single -use PV system can impact a community's response to a permit application, it can also change how the application is handled during the permitting process. Based on the selected dual -use activities, an agrivoltaic PV array might be configured differently from a single -use utility -scale system (Macknick et al. 2022). For example, the PV panels might be mounted higher above the ground or with wider spacing ' Based on NREL's Mid -case Standard Scenario with current policies (Gagnon et al. 2023). 1 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. between rows of panels to accommodate larger livestock, such as cattle, or agricultural equipment (Macknick et al. 2022). Due to these differences in use and configuration, agrivoltaic and single -use PV systems might also differ in where and how they can be successfully permitted for installation. While national renewable energy policies focus on financial incentives, and state policies generally include a mix of incentives, land -use laws, and renewable portfolio standards, the final authority on whether solar is permitted for installation typically lies at the county or municipal level (Daniels and Wagner 2022; Kolbeck-Urlacher 2023; Pascaris 2021). Therefore, county zoning codes and permitting processes can have a significant impact on where and how ground - mounted solar and/or agrivoltaic installations could be built (Lerner 2022; Lopez et al. 2023; Pascaris 2021). Counties commonly define zoning districts, such as industrial or agricultural, with different allowable uses (Daniels and Wagner 2022). Further, some uses might be allowed as the primary land use, whereas other uses might only be permitted as an accessory that is incidental to the primary use (Dillemuth and White 2013). Agrivoltaic installations are a dual land use that might not clearly fit within the existing zoning definitions (Pascaris 2021). Each zone can have its own requirements, such as maximum structure height, fencing or screening for safety or visual appeal, and minimum distance that structures are set back from the road (Dillemuth and White 2013). These requirements can impact the design and economic viability of ground -mounted solar and agrivoltaic installations. There are other siting considerations as well, such as minimizing impacts on wildlife, scenic vistas, and sensitive historical, cultural, or archeological resources. For each zoning district within a county, counties specify the type of permit required for each allowable use in that district, such as an accessory or use -by -right permit, conditional use permit, or special use permit. Use -by -right permits have minimal if any requirements, conditional use permits have requirements that must be reviewed by the county administrator or land -use department, and special use permits require extensive documentation and are reviewed by the Board of County Commissioners in a public hearing (Daniels and Wagner 2022). Zoning codes often allow large-scale ground -mounted solar plants within certain zones subject to a special use permit process (Daniels and Wagner 2022). Information on county -level regulations is not centrally located and can be time-consuming to review, presenting a challenge for stakeholders such as policymakers, solar developers, and researchers interested in accessing and analyzing that information. Guarino and Swanson (2023) conducted a review of local -level agrivoltaic regulations in Illinois, which to the best of our knowledge is the only such resource for agrivoltaics in the United States. Lopez et al. (2023) reviewed county -level ordinances in the United States and analyzed the impacts of wind and solar setbacks on land available for renewable development. Owusu-Obeng, Mills, and Craig (2024) developed a database of local zoning ordinances for the Great Lakes region and quantified the expected impacts of these ordinances on solar deployment. This report expands that knowledge pool by reviewing and reporting county -level land -use codes impacting ground - mounted solar and agrivoltaic development across all counties in Colorado. While both Guarino and Swanson (2023) and Lopez et al. (2023) only reviewed solar -specific ordinances, this review includes both solar -specific ordinances and generally applicable zoning standards for those counties that have not adopted solar -specific ordinances, offering a more comprehensive review of solar siting requirements in Colorado. 2 This report is available at no cost from the Nationa' Renewable Energy Laboratory at www nrel goy/publications This report reviews the state of ground -mounted solar regulations in each Colorado county's land -use code by reviewing relevant documents and directly contactingcounty lid -use departments, administrators, or commissioners. We also discuss how these regulations might impact the deployment of agrivoltaic systems; impacts to large, utility -scale solar deployment are outside of the scope of this report. Note that land -use policies are rapidly evolving due to the high demand for solar power. Six of Colorado's 64 counties have temporary moratoriums on solar or all land -use applications while they develop their regulations and permitting processes. Most of these moratoriums are planned to last for 6 to 18 months, but there is potential for early resolution or extension. In the remainder of this report, Section 2 reviews background information on current developments impacting solar power deployment in Colorado. Section 3 presents the review method and key search topics. Section 4 reports the review results, which are discussed in Section 5, including variability in requirements found across Colorado counties and discussion of potential impacts on agrivoltaic deployment. Section 6 concludes. For more information on individual counties, detailed tables of the review results are available in the appendices. 3 4 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at vvvfwanrelagovipublicatIont 2 Background Colorado has multiple state, municipal, and corporate goals supporting the deployment of renewable resources to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution. Colorado previously established a renewable portfolio standard for 30% of electricity sold by investor -owned utilities to be produced from renewable resources by 2020 (U.S. Energy Information Administration [EIA] 2023a). Colorado has set a requirement for an 80% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from electricity by 2030 and a goal of achieving a 100% reduction in statewide greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 (Colorado General Assembly 2019, Colorado General Assembly 2023b). The governor's office published a faster roadmap targeting 100% renewable energy by 2040 (Colorado Energy Office 2019). Colorado's two largest investor -owned utilities are on track to meet the 2030 target, and Xcel Energy has also set a corporate target of 100% carbon -free electricity by 2050 (Black Hills Energy 2023; Xcel Energy 2023). As of 2019, fourteen counties and towns2 have also committed to their own 100% renewable goals (Colorado Energy Office 2019). As Colorado moves toward these renewable energy targets, solar PV installation in the state is rapidly increasing. Colorado has strong solar resource, particularly in the southcentral San Luis Valley and the southeastern plains (Figure 1). While there is limited electrical transmission from some of these high -resource areas to Colorado's Front Range urban load centers, a new set of transmission lines are currently in development to alleviate this limitation in the eastern plains (Xcel Energy 2021). Regions with available transmission capacity and sufficient land availability, particularly on the eastern plains, have a growing utility -scale solar market. 2 Denver, Pueblo, Boulder, Fort Collins, Summit County, Frisco, Aspen, Glenwood Springs, Breckenridge, Longmont, Lafayette, Nederland, and Golden 4 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. Installed PV Capacity by County (MWac) 1,136 100 to 150 50 to 100 10 to 50 <10 Transmission Existing Line ≥220 kV Average Annual (1998-2018) Global Horizontal Irradiance (kwhrmilday) 5A to 5.6 5.2 to 5.4 5.0 to 5.2 4.8 to 5.0 4r6to4.8 4A to 4.6 4.2 to 4.4 Figure 1. Average solar resource and utility -scale (>1 megawatt [MW]) solar deployed by county as of October 2023 (EIA 2023b). Installed capacity bubbles are centered in each county and are not indicative of actual distances from the solar power plants to the transmission lines. Illustration by NREL As of October 2023, 143 utility -scale (>1 megawatt alternating current [MWac]) solar projects have been deployed in 28 of Colorado's 64 counties (EIA 2023b). These plants have a combined capacity of almost 1.9 gigawatts alternating current (GWac), with another 1.3 GWac ac under construction or planned for installation by 2025 (EIA 2023b). Most of the existing capacity is concentrated in a few counties with very large solar power plants of tens to hundreds of MWac, with over half of the state's total solar capacity in Pueblo County alone (EIA 2023b, Figure 1). However, 43% of the total number of utility -scale plants are smaller CSGs with installed capacities of 1-4.8 MWac. Agrivoltaic applications are being explored across this range of scales in Colorado, including both large, utility -scale solar plants and CSGs. One of the first agrivoltaic installations in Colorado was Jack's Solar Garden, a 5 -acre, 1.2 -megawatt direct current (MWdc) CSG in Boulder County that includes crop production, grazing, and pollinator habitat within the solar array (InSPIRE 2023; Jack's Solar Garden 2023). On the other end of the spectrum, Garnet Mesa Solar, a 383 -acre, 80 -MW utility -scale plant in Delta County, is in preconstruction and plans to support grazing of 1,000 head of sheep within its array (Jaffe 2022b; Garnet Mesa Solar 2023). Other current and planned deployments include three sheep -grazed CSGs, several small-scale agrivoltaic crop research sites operated by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and Colorado State University, and a community -supported agriculture program planned for a solar array at the Denver Botanic Gardens Chatfield Farm (InSPIRE 2023; Vickerman 2022). 5 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.govipublications. On the policy front, Colorado passed Senate Bill 21-235 in 2021 allocating $150,000 to the "research, guidance, technical assistance, feasibility studies, and projects related to agrivoltaics" (Colorado General Assembly 2021). In 2023, Colorado passed another bill providing $500,000 in grants for more agrivoltaic demonstrations in the state and offering a personal property tax exemption for equipment used in agrivoltaic systems with novel designs (Colorado General Assembly 2023). Within this context, this report offers additional information for solar developers and policymakers interested in understanding how county -level land -use codes in Colorado might impact future agrivoltaic project development and ground -mounted solar project development in general. In addition to the commonly used accessory, conditional use, and special use permit categories, counties in Colorado also regulate solar power by a "1041 permit" unique to the state (Colorado Department of Local Affairs n.d.). Passed in 1974, the Areas and Activities of State Interest Act in the Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS § 24-65.1) created "1041" powers, named after the original legislation, Colorado House Bill 74-1041. These 1041 powers give local governments control over certain development projects in their jurisdictions that have statewide impacts (FindLaw Staff 2022). The bill includes 13 different areas and activities of statewide interest that communities can opt to regulate by identifying the areas and activities of interest that apply to their locality and adopting guidelines for their administration. One of these 13 areas and activities is the site selection and construction of major facilities of a public utility, which can include solar power plants. Therefore, this report also identifies which counties are opting to use this permitting process for solar power development. 6 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www nrel gov/publications 3 Methods To understand Colorado's county -level solar siting ordinances and land -use policies, we conducted a review of relevant publicly available data for each of the 64 counties. We first defined the review search criteria, then carried out a review for each Colorado county through document searches and by contacting planning departments and county commissioners, and finally categorized and mapped the data. The following subsections outline details for each step. Maps of these results are shown in Section 4. County -level findings are available in the appendices, and each county's land -use codes and other documents are listed in Appendix A. The document search occurred between April 5 and Nov. 1, 2023. Land -use code changes and moratoriums on solar developments passed or lifted after Nov. 1, 2023, are not included in this report, with the exception of Mesa County, which implemented a moratorium on solar applications starting Jan. 9, 2024, between the review completion and report publication. 3.1 Search Criteria We selected pertinent information to include in the Colorado county -based solar siting policy review through first reviewing available information from counties with recently enacted solar siting regulations. The first two counties selected were Boulder County, which revised its Land Use Code in 2018, and Weld County, which added new solar siting regulations in 2021. After reviewing each county's regulations, we drafted a list of relevant policies and policy categories. The list was iteratively revised throughout the data collection process based on other counties' regulations. Through this iteration, some counties were revisited to ensure all criteria in the final review list had been reviewed for all counties. The final list of policy review criteria is outlined in Figure 2 and includes categories regarding county -specific definitions and classifications, permitting processes, zone -specific requirements, and decommissioning requirements. Several of these criteria, including permitting, height, setback, decommissioning, and financial assurance requirements, were similarly reviewed in Guarino and Swanson's (2023) analysis of Illinois's county -level solar requirements. 7 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. lo County Solar Policy Review Scope Solar Policy and Solar Siting Policy Documentation Deployment Solar Deployment Definitions and Solar Definitions Classifications Categorization of PV Systems - 1041 Permitting Permitting Permitted Zones for Solar Development "1 --=- _- Permitting Requirements _. Application Requirement 1 Panel Height Restrictions Fencing Requirements - Zon- 4�_ -- - Vegetation Management - • `� "M p• Visual Impacts Setback Requirements Nuisance (Noise, Dust, Glare) Decommissioning Plans Financial Assurance for Decommissioning Figure 2. Policies and definitions reviewed for each Colorado county 3.2 Document Search With the list of solar siting policies selected, we conducted Google searches for publicly available information for each Colorado county. We reviewed documents like zoning ordinances, land -use codes, and comprehensive and master plans. In some cases, building codes were also reviewed, but because this report focuses on ground -mounted rather than rooftop solar, they were only relevant for certain items, such as panel height restrictions. In general, policies that were clearly intended to regulate rooftop solar were excluded, while policies that were ambiguous or applicable to both rooftop and ground -mounted solar were included. Policies addressing each element of the selected list of solar siting evaluation criteria by county were collected from the aforementioned documents. For counties with no solar -specific policies, we used a list of keywords to search for relevant policies that apply to solar development. Keywords included height, vegetation management, reclamation, decommissioning, setback, agriculture, glare, noise, erosion, dust, energy, utility, power plant, and 1041. For example, many counties have general nuisance regulations, such as a requirement that a "use does not create excessive or offensive noise, vibration, smoke, dust, odors, heat, glare or light noticeable or extending beyond the property." These regulations are not specific to solar but may have implications for construction and operation of solar arrays. 8 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at vwwv.nreigov/publications. 3.3 Contact With Planning Departments or County Commissioners Following the review of publicly ayailable documents we identified a county contact, such as a county planner in the planning or land -use departments, a county administrator, or a county commissioner, based on the county's organization structure. If any uncertainties or missing information were identified in the document search, we followed up with this contact via phone or email to confirm the information and/or ask any questions that remained. 3.4 Categorization and Mapping of the Data Once all the data were compiled, we focused on the following subset of topics from Figure 2 relevant to solar policy and development: • Solar definitions • Solar siting policy documentation and solar deployment • Categorization of P PV systems • Solar on agricultural land • 1041 permitting • Panel height restrictions • Fencing requirements • Vegetation management • Visual impacts • Decommissioning plans • Financial assurance for decommissioning. We then mapped the data for each of these topics in QGIS (version 3.23.3) to visualize the range of solar policy across all 64 Colorado counties. 9 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nreigovlpubllcations. 4 Results Here, we present the key results of our solar siting policy review (Figure 2) to highlight common themes across Colorado's 64 counties. The land -use documents referenced for each county are listed in alphabetical order in Appendix A, and additional county -level details of the review findings are reported in the other appendices. Notably, six counties (9%) have passed temporary moratoriums on applications for solar energy systems and were revising their land -use codes at the time of the review and/or report preparation. Moratoriums are typically put in place to allow county officials time to revise statutes, usually with a target timeline (e.g., 6 to 18 months), although some are open-ended. For example, the moratorium in Montrose County was expected to be in place for 18 months, ending in October 2024. Chaffee County has had a moratorium on all land development applications since 2022 while they revise their land -use code. This includes most solar power plants with some exemptions, so for this analysis Chaffee County was classified as a moratorium. Mesa County implemented a 6 -month moratorium on solar applications starting Jan. 9, 2024, after the review was completed; while no other land -use changes past Nov. 1, 2023, are reported, an exception was made to include Mesa here as under moratorium. For these six counties, we do not report any findings based on the previously adopted land -use codes, as we expect changes in the near future. 4.1 Solar Definitions Establishing clear definitions for solar energy systems, which can have a variety of configurations and applications, creates a foundation for applying the appropriate permitting and planning requirements. The text of a definition determines what is and what is not regulated, or to what degree it is regulated. In some counties, land uses that are not explicitly defined are prohibited, while in others, undefined land uses are tacitly permitted, which can create uncertainty for solar developers (Pascaris 2021). The review found solar -specific definitions in 38 Colorado counties (59%) (Figure 3). Most counties have unique definitions, which typically include a description of applicable technologies and/or a specification of what infrastructure is or is not included. For example, Pitkin County defines a Solar Energy Collector as "a device for the passive collection of solar energy for use in the heating of water or the generation of electricity, together with related wires and pipes necessary for operation." Many counties allow solar energy systems to include energy storage (e.g., Boulder, Chaffee, Crowley, weld), although Arapahoe County specifically excludes battery storage from its Small Solar System Facility definition. There is one county, Morgan County, with both a solar -specific definition and a definition of an agrivoltaic system: "A system designed for the simultaneous use of areas of land for both groundmounted [sic] solar collectors and agriculture." In 12 counties (19%), solar power plants are defined more broadly within the category of "facilities of a public utility." For example, Douglas County defines a power plant, which is one type of a major facility of a public utility, as "[a]ny electrical energy generating facility with an energy generation capacity of 50 megawatts or more, and Appurtenance(s)." Eight counties (13%) had no definitions relevant to solar siting. The full list of solar definitions is available in Appendix B. 10 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. Sedgwick Moffat Jackson Routt Rio Bianco Garfield Eagle Summit Mesa Delta Montrose' San sib/Lig:9e! Ouray Pitkin Gunnison Hinsdale San Juan Lake Chaffee Mineral Rio Grande Lagrimer Boulder Broomfield GU1iin Clear C=reek Park Fremont Weld Logan Phillips Adams Denver Arapahoe Washington Yuma Elbert Custer .\lainosa Pueblo Huerfano Lincoln Flowers °tern Kit Carson Bent Cheyenne -a I. Animas Baca, Solar Specific Definitions ' Solar and Agrivoltaic Definitions No Relevant Definitions R Solar Development Under Moratorium Public Utility Definitions Figure 3. Solar power or solar power zoning definitions in Colorado counties 4.2 Solar Siting Policy Documentation and Solar Deployment Comprehensive solar siting and permitting documentation sets clear expectations for all stakeholders and enables solar developers to manage risk regarding projects with substantial up- front investments and long development timelines. Additionally, higher solar deployment has been observed in localities with documented solar siting policies (Cook et al. 2016; Lopez et al. 2023; Lerner 2022). Here, we present which Colorado counties have adopted policies addressing some or all of the items listed in the review criteria (Figure 2), as well as the current level of solar deployment in those counties. As shown in Figure 4, 29 counties (45%) have detailed solar land -use regulations that address all the policies in Figure 2. One county, Gilpin, did not provide definitions for accessory or principal solar systems, but otherwise had detailed solar siting regulations using those terms. Another 10 counties (16%) have some solar land -use regulations, which address some but not all the policies outlined in the solar siting review. Other counties, 19 in total (30%), have no land -use code specific to ground -mounted solar or renewable energy resources. However, some of these counties have more general public utility, power plant, or general development regulations that are potentially applicable to ground -mounted solar, which are included in the findings in subsequent sections. 11 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. Detailed Solar Land Use Regulations Some Solar Land Use Regulations No Land Use Code Related to Solar W Solar Development Under Moratorium Figure 4. Identification of which Colorado counties have implemented land -use policies regulating solar installations By cross-referencing this data with the EIA data on solar deployments (EIA 2023b) shown in Figure 1, we found that 107 (75%) of Colorado's 143 utility -scale solar power plants3 are located in counties with detailed solar land -use regulations, accounting for 1,675 MWac or 89% of Colorado's utility -scale installed solar capacity (Table 1). Ten projects (154 MWac) are located in counties that had some solar land -use regulations, and 16 projects (40 MWac) are located in counties with no code related to ground -mounted solar. Finally, 10 projects (24 MWac) were sited in counties where the solar siting policies are currently under revision or a moratorium. These data only include projects that are currently operational and not those that are in the development pipeline. 3 While ground -mounted systems can also include arrays of <1 MW nameplate capacity, the vast majority of ground -mounted solar is utility -scale and data on smaller systems is not readily available. 12 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.govlpublications. Table 1. Number and Installed Capacity of Solar Power Plants Located in Counties With Different Levels of Solar Siting Policy Documentation County Documentation Project Project Count Installed Capacity Installed Capacity of Solar Siting Policies Count (% of Total) (MWac) (% of Total) Detailed Solar Land -Use Regulations 107 75% 1,675 89%© Some Solar Land -Use Regulations 10 7% 154 8% No Code Related to Ground -Mounted Solar 16 11% 40 2% Under Development, Revision, or Moratorium 10 7% 24 1% Total 143 1,892 4.3 Categorization of PV Systems Within their solar ordinances, many Colorado counties implement a variation of permitting requirements, based on the expected impact of a solar array. For example, "medium" -sized arrays might require an administrative or minor impact review, while "large" arrays might require a major impact or special use review,4 including one or more public hearings and approval by the Board of County Commissioners. Many counties also have simplified permit requirements for "small" solar energy systems designated as accessory to the primary land use, which are likely targeting rooftop systems, although some counties specifically allow ground - mounted systems as accessory uses (e.g., Eagle and Larimer counties). We found large diversity in how these permitting categories are implemented across Colorado counties, resulting in variability of potential requirements for PV systems of similar scale and use cases. Three distinct methods for categorizing arrays were found in the review of Colorado counties: categorizing based on the installed capacity of the array (megawatts), based on the land area of the array footprint (acres), and/or based on the intended end uses for the electricity produced by the array. This final method could include categories for PV arrays intended to export electricity to the power grid for profit or for on -site self -consumption. For some counties, these categories are designated by the number of end users (e.g., one or more). Counties that regulate solar PV plants through existing public utility regulations applicable to multiple electricity generation technologies, rather than solar -specific ordinances, typically specify requirements based on the plant's installed capacity (in megawatts). Thirty-nine percent of Colorado counties categorize their permit requirements based on one of these three methods, including ten counties (16%) categorizing solar arrays based on installed 4 The names of these permits differ by county, and include Modified Administrative Land Use Permit, Minor or Major Impact Project, Land Development Agreement, Major Impact Review, or Limited Impact Special Review. 5 In this case, intended end -use refers to the interconnection method, such as behind -the -meter and front -of -the - meter solar systems. 13 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. capacity, eight counties (13%) categorizing based on the intended end use of the electricity, and seven counties (11%) categorizing based on the land area (Figure 5). In addition, 30% of counties apply two or more of these methods together. The remaining 14 counties (22%) not under moratorium do not define different categories of PV systems. This group includes counties with no PV permitting information available as well as counties implementing a single permitting process regardless of the solar energy system dimensions and use case. MI Land Area (acres) EIN Installed Solar Capacity (MW) Rio Blanco San N1i�uel Dolores Garfield Otirav Routt Hinsdale San Juan Jackson Summit Boulder ;Broonitielc.l ear @reek r > Arapahoe Jefferson 1)ouulas Fremont Custer I�1 inerat Rio Grande lamosa Archuleta Conejos Castilla Logan Lincoln f4 'iunla Kit Carson nor relies enne Bent Huerfario I Ls Animas I No Categorization : : Solar Development Under Moratorium Electricity End -Use Figure 5. Colorado counties' methods for categorizing solar power installations to determine which requirements to apply during the permitting process. Figure 5 includes some categorization methods that are ambiguous about whether they apply to both ground - mounted and rooftop solar systems. However, the figure might exclude some permit categories specifically for rooftop solar due to this review's focus on ground -mounted systems. 4.4 1041 Permitting (Areas and Activities of State Interest) Some Colorado counties require certain solar development applicants to complete a 1041 permit rather than a more standard accessory use, conditional use, or special use permit. 1041 regulations are delegated powers from the state of Colorado to local jurisdictions to regulate matters of statewide concern, including utility infrastructure development. Additionally, these regulations serve as a means to safeguard particular geographical areas holding historical, cultural, or natural resources of statewide importance. Permitting processes per 1041 regulations are generally more expensive and rigorous and have a higher level of scrutiny than special review permitting processes, although requirements vary from county to county. Our review found two ways that Colorado counties have implemented 1041 regulations that might apply to solar power plants. First, 1041 permits might be required for the site selection and 14 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. construction of a "major facility of a public utility," including power plants. Twenty-four counties (38%) in Colorado have adopted 1041 regulations for power plant siting that are or might be applied to ground -mounted solar power plants (Figure 6). Of these, 21 counties apply their 1041 regulations based on the power plant's generation capacity, acreage, or both, where power plants that exceed a threshold go through the 1041 permit process, and power plants under the threshold go through some other permit process. The threshold for power plant generation capacity varies from 0.5 MW to 50 MW,6 and the threshold for land area varies from 0.25 acre to 320 acres. The remaining four counties (6%) have adopted 1041 regulations for siting of a major facility of a public utility, but do not specify what types or sizes of facilities would qualify. Some counties have explicitly integrated 1041 requirements into solar -specific permitting processes, while others have not, so there can be ambiguity about whether, in some instances, counties might choose to apply their 1041 regulations over a parallel solar permitting process. Mesa Moffat Rio Blanco Garfield Montrose San Miguel Dolores Chi ra San Juar Monteiuma J La Plata '' Routt Pitkin Gunnison Jackson Summ 'Chaffee Boulder Broomfield Gilpin TDen'er Clear Creek Arapahoe Jefferson f— t/Douglas .r� Custer 4 Alamosa (o ilia Land Area (acres) Required with No Minimum Acreage or Capacity 1 No Applicable 1041 Regulations Morgan Lincoln Las Animas Phillips Kit Carson Chet cline Prowers Installed Capacity (MW) Development on Irrigated Land Solar Development Under Moratorium Figure 6. Solar power plants might trigger a 1041 permit requirement in some Colorado counties. While green, yellow, and red all indicate counties that have implemented 1041 regulations for siting a power plant or major facility of a public utility that might apply to solar, counties in red have not adopted capacity or acreage minimums to define the size of the facilities that qualify for the requirements_ Separate from 1041 regulations on siting of a major facility of a public utility, our review found that some counties have implemented 1041 regulations that might apply to solar power plants specifically when sited on agricultural land. 1041 permits can be required for developments of any type on historically irrigated land that plan a partial or complete "dry -up" of the land or 6 While some counties specify solar DC (or nameplate) capacity, many 1041 regulations are applied to power plants based on the "MW" capacity size, regardless of generation technology. This is a source of potential ambiguity in cases where DC vs. AC capacity has not been specified. 15 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. development of the land for any purpose other than irrigated agriculture, potentially impacting local water rights in the long term. Six counties (9%) require 1041 permits for any development on historically irrigated land, with minimum thresholds ranging from 3 acres to 10 acres of irrigated land. Five of these counties also have a power plant capacity and/or acreage threshold for 1041 permits, regardless of irrigation status. The full list of requirements for counties that have adopted specific capacity, acreage, and/or irrigated land development thresholds is available in Amendix C. Not all counties or localities have adopted 1041 regulations. There are 33 counties (52%) that have either no 1041 regulations for any of the areas or activities of state interest, or no 1041 regulations specifically for site selection or the construction of major facilities of public utilities or development of irrigated land. 4.5 Solar on Agricultural Land Current or former agricultural land has many of the conditions favorable to solar development, including large, cleared parcels with strong solar resource and flat, stable ground (Ark Carrion et al. 2008; Adeh et al. 2019). Renewable development offers many potential local benefits, including job and tax revenue growth (The Western Way 2022). However, there are also concerns about siting solar development on agricultural lands,, including potential impacts on food production, irrigated prime farmland, water rights, and local community character (Hunter et al. 2022). Therefore, Colorado counties are balancing these competing needs in their land -use codes, and some have instituted specific restrictions regarding solar development on agricultural lands in addition to the 1041 requirements for development of irrigated land discussed in Section 4.4. In 40 (63%) of Colorado's counties, a solar energy system is allowed on agriculturally zoned or designated land (Figure 7), provided that the appropriate permit process is completed based on the zone and categorization system in Section 4.3. In addition to the permitting process, 11 counties (17%) have implemented specific policies that protect farmland in relation to solar energy development, which are detailed in Table 2. Two counties (3%), Fremont and Kiowa, do not allow solar energy systems on agriculturally zoned lands. Five counties (8%) do not have agriculturally zoned or designated lands and similarly have no related stipulations. 16 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.govlpubltcaattions. xi Allowed with Appropriate Permit Specific Policies Protecting Agricultural Land Not Allowed F1 No Zoned or Designated Agricultural Lands gn Solar Development Under Moratorium Figure 7. Regulation of solar power plants on agricultural land in Colorado counties Table 2. County Policies Specifically Protecting Agricultural Lands From Solar Development Counties Policy or Statement Arapahoe, Pueblo Allow solar on some agriculturally zoned districts but not others. Boulder Restrict total disturbed areas associated with the ground -mounted PV system to 7 acres on parcels smaller than 70 acres in size, or 14 acres on parcels larger than 70 acres in size. Any application for a ground -mounted solar energy system with disturbed area greater than 0.5 acres on lands designates as Significant Agricultural Lands must include a Solar Energy System Development Report. Broomfield, Larimer Only allow solar on agricultural land as an accessory use for on -site consumption. Cheyenne, "Distributed and Utility -Scale Solar Energy Systems are encouraged to locate Phillips, Sedgwick, o Y n 9 Yuma on predominantly (more than 60 ) non -prime farmland. Kit Carson, Morgan "Protection of Agricultural Lands. The Wind or Solar Energy Facility shall not have a significant adverse impact on agricultural lands and agricultural operations above what is allowed for under landowner lease agreements? 17 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. 4.6 Panel Height Restrictions Some local authorities impose height restrictions on solar panels to maintain the visual harmony and aesthetics of a community and/or to ensure the safety of solar panel installations under high wind loading or extreme weather events. Restricting the height of solar panels can help mitigate these risks. Restrictions on solar panel height vary across counties in Colorado (Figure 8). There are 33 counties (52%) that do not have specific height restrictions for solar panels. These include counties with no publicly available policies regarding height restrictions in general as well as counties where the height restriction for ground -mounted solar is determined by the general building height restriction for the underlying zoning district. For these counties, building and/or structure height restrictions range from 25 to 75 ft for principal use within the zone, which would typically not be a constraint for ground -mounted solar. Moffat brir vv'Sr.V r N_?� Rio Blanco A mesa • :�:.. Chaffee Delta Niontrose San Miguel Montezuma Ouray Routs Pitkin Gunnison Hinsdale San Juan Mineral Jackson Grand Summit Saguache Rio Grande Gilpin Clear`Creck Park Boulder' [3room t elc4 s- r; , Deny er Jefferson Login yki Phillips Morgan TI i \Wa%harn ton - Arhus) Douglas Teller Custer Alamosa Archuleta Con jos Costilla l 1.• r- - --p Elbert I Lincoln Kit Carson Cheyenne Pueblo 9 r . Vi 4+fir. Otero Kiowa Bent Prow e s Lets Animas Baca ME Maximum of 10 ft Maximum of 15-25 ft I-71 Maximum of 25 ft or greater Determined on a Case -by -Case Basis BM No Restriction Specific to Solar :•: Solar Development Under Moratorium Figure 8. Maximum allowable height of solar panels in each Colorado county. For counties with no restrictions specific to solar, the maximum allowable height typically defaults to the maximum building height in the underlying zoning district. Ten counties (16%) have solar panel height restrictions of 25 ft or greater, typically in the range of 25 to 35 ft. Eleven counties (17%) have maximum allowable heights of 15 to 25 ft, and one county, Rio Grande County, restricts free-standing (i.e., ground -mounted) solar panels to 10 ft in height. Morgan County has different height restrictions for traditional solar projects (30 ft) and agrivoltaic projects (35 ft). There is also variability across the counties as to what aspect of the solar array is used to determined compliance with height restrictions. For example, Washington County measures the height from the equipment base to its highest point during operation, whereas Arapahoe County measures the height to the solar panel mounting point, 18 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. Three counties (Dolores, Douglas, and Huerfano) regulate panel height on a case -by -case basis. In Dolores County, the height restriction is determined during the land -use agreement process. Similarly, Douglas County determines maximum height during the use by special review process. Huerfano County's Board of Commissioners may exempt solar projects from maximum structure height restrictions on a case -by -case basis during the review process. Panel height can also impact setback requirements in certain counties. In Boulder County, solar panels are restricted to 15 ft in height, unless a project has a site -specific need and has been approved through the review process. If taller panels are approved, setbacks are then increased by 75 ft from all property lines unless adequate vegetative screening can mitigate visual impacts. In Kiowa county, there are no height restrictions, but setbacks must be 1.2 times the height of the solar panels. 4.7 Fencing Requirements Solar arrays are typically fenced for protection, both to protect people and animals from the electrical equipment and to protect the solar array from accidental or intentional damage. However, fencing can also have negative impacts on wildlife habitat and migration patterns (Lovich and Ennen 2011; Sadoti et al. 2017). Fifteen counties (23%) have specific requirements for fencing around solar arrays (Figure 9). Of these, four counties (Adams, Gilpin, Las Animas, and Washington) provide specific information about height and type of fencing, while the other counties require a fence, but do not provide height specifications. Mother 17 counties (27%) have fencing policies that might apply to ground -mounted solar arrays. The remaining 26 counties (41%) that are not under moratorium have no requirements for fencing. 19 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. le Solar -Specific Fencing Policy I - I- Fencing Policy Might Apply to Solar No Fencing Policy NE Solar Development Under Moratorium Figure 9. Fencing requirements for solar power installations in Colorado counties 4.8 Vegetation Management Vegetation management policies describe how vegetation such as trees, shrubs, and other plant life should be managed and/or preserved during a change in land use or the development of a property. The specifics of vegetation management can vary widely depending on local land -use codes and zoning regulations, but the general goals are to balance the preservation of natural landscapes and ground cover with the needs of development, while also managing stormwater runoff effectively. 20 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. Moffat Garfield Ouray Gunnison Hinsdale San Juan Solar -Specific Vegetation Management Policy Vegetation Management Policy Might Apply to Solar t Archuleta Summit Lake ;Chaffee Saguhe J jacZ Gilpin Clear Greek Denver Arapahoe Jefferson Douglas Teller r Fremont Alamosa Castilla El Paso Pueblo Huerfano Washington Lincoln Crowley, Otero Sedgy{ ick Philips Cheyenne Kiowa Prowers No Vegetation Management Policy Solar Development Under Moratorium Figure 10. Vegetation management requirements for solar power installations in Colorado counties. About a quarter of Colorado counties (15 out of 64) have specific requirements regarding vegetation management during or after the construction of solar arrays (Figure 10). Another 8 counties (13%) have general vegetation management regulations for specific permits or general development standards that could be applied to the construction of solar arrays. The other 35 counties not undergoing a moratorium do not have specific policies relating to vegetation management. Most of these vegetation management policies (18 out of 22) relate to minimizing disturbances (like grading, soil compaction, or vegetation clearing), revegetation requirements after construction to minimize erosion, and noxious weed management. Examples include Boulder County's Solar Energy System Development Report, which has plans to maintain or improve soil quality and agricultural integrity, and Chaffee County's Restoration and Revegetation of Disturbed Areas policy, which requires revegetation within one season using a mix of native, adaptive, and drought -tolerant grasses and groundcovers to prevent soil erosion and weeds. Five counties have specific policies relating to wildfire mitigation and fuel reduction caused by vegetation. For example, Adams County requires a plan to keep vegetation to minimal levels around the facility perimeter through treatment, mowing, or other fuel reduction methods. Finally, two counties have requirements to retain existing trees and vegetation where possible. Archuleta County regulations state, "Significant vegetation, including dominant or mature trees and shrubs and endangered species, should be retained where possible and in accordance with Community Wildfire Protection Plan requirements." 21 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. 4.9 Visual Impacts Common community concerns about solar PV arrays include visual changes in the landscape and aesthetic concerns (Carlisle et al. 2015). Proper siting, design, and mitigation policies, including visual screening through fencing or vegetation, can help minimize the perceived negative visual impacts. There can also be concerns about glare from solar panels impacting neighbors, motorists, and aviation, although PV is typically coated in antireflective materials, and research addressing these concerns has demonstrated that solar PV has similar reflectivity to smooth water (Riley and Olson 2011; Day and Mow 2018). Twenty counties (31 %) across Colorado have policies regulating the visual impacts of solar arrays (Figure 11). An additional 16 counties (25%) have visual impact policies that might apply to solar arrays. Three counties may require visual impact plans and mitigation on a case -by -case basis for specific sensitive locations or the size of the solar array. Other counties have visual impact policies applicable to any development within their jurisdiction that are not specific to solar. The other 22 counties (34%) not under a moratorium did not have any requirements related to visual impacts of new developments. Moffat Rio Blanco San Miguel Dolores Montezuma Solar -Specific Visual Impact Policy i 1 Visual Impact Policy Might Apply to Solar Garfield Ouray Routt Pitkin Gunnison Hinsdale San Juan Plata Archul€ta Jackson Grand Summit Chaffee LiH mer Boulder Broomheld Gilpin (.fear &reek Denier Arapahoe Jefferson Douglas Teller t Custer Conejos / Costilla El Paso Pueblo Huerfano No Visual Impact Policy KN Solar Development Under Moratorium Phillips Figure 11. Visual impact requirements applicable to solar power installations in Colorado counties Seven counties require a visual impact plan or report as part of their permitting process. Lincoln County has the most extensive requirements, including multiple visual simulations for developments in a sensitive viewshed or with structures taller than 30 ft, and projects may be denied if significant visual impacts cannot be sufficiently mitigated. Thirteen other counties have visual impact policies related to nearby properties or rights -of -way. For example, Yuma County's policies state: "All Solar Energy Systems shall not have an adverse visual impact on the natural features or character of the surrounding area and shall be located to minimize glare on 22 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.govlpublications. adjacent properties and roadways." This is typical for counties that state that the solar array should not impact nearby land use but do not prescribe specifically how that should be done. 4.10 Decommissioning Plans Proper planning for decommissioning from the outset of a project can help mitigate potential environmental, financial, and regulatory challenges associated with the eventual end of the array's operations. Decommissioning plans state when and how solar array infrastructure is to be removed once it is no longer operational. Decommissioning plans can dictate how materials (steel, solar panels, wires, concrete, gravel, etc.) are to be handled upon removal (e.g., recycled, landfilled, or donated), expectations of the land's quality after decommissioning, and who is ultimately responsible for these costs (Curtis et al. 2021). Twenty-seven counties across Colorado (42%) have policies related to solar array decommissioning and reclamation (Figure 12). Within this group, six counties mention decommissioning or reclamation in their solar specific policies, but do not have specific requirements and rely instead on the developer to formulate an adequate plan during application. The other 21 counties have specific requirements for decommissioning plans. Cheyenne, Yuma, and Sedgewick counties have the most extensive requirements for decommissioning, which include structure and cabling removal and soil and vegetation restoration. These policies also provide clear guidelines of the owner or operator's financial and legal obligations and the county's power to review and approve the decommissioning plan or, if necessary, complete the decommissioning if it does not proceed in compliance with the plan. Rio Blanco Jackson Garfield Eagle _ Clear Greek Montrose K r1► Dolores Solar -Specific Decommissioning/Reclamation Requirement PR Decomn lsisioning Requirements Might Apply to Solar Ouray Gunnison Hinsdale San Juan La Plata Jefferson Douglas Chaffee Saguache '`Archuleta wConelos Costilla No Decommissioning or Reclamation Requirements Washington Solar Development Under Moratorium Sedgwick flullips Kit CN arson 'Cheyenne Kiowa Figure 12. Decommissioning and reclamation requirements for solar power installations in Colorado counties 23 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www_nrel_gov/publications. Nine other counties require a reclamation or decommissioning plan for any development within their jurisdiction, not just specific to solar energy systems. The other 22 counties not under moratorium did not have any decommissioning requirements relevant to solar arrays. 4.11 Financial Assurance for Decommissioning In addition to a decommissioning plan, a form of financial assurance is often required to ensure for the removal of the solar array infrastructure at the end of its useful life, even if the plant operator faces financial hardship or bankruptcy in the interim. Financial assurance can take various forms like a self -bond, bond, federally insured certificate of deposit, government -backed securities, corporate guarantee, letter of credit, or cash. Financial assurance is usually a certain percentage of the total value of the project or a valuation of the funds needed to remove the solar equipment minus its salvage value. Several counties, including Cheyenne, Lincoln, and Sedgwick counties, require this value to be reevaluated every 3 to 5 years, starting either postconstruction or toward the middle of the project's lifespan after 10-15 years. Financial assurance or decommissioning bonds are required for solar energy facilities in 18 Colorado counties (28%) (Figure 13). For example, El Paso County requires a financial assurance deemed acceptable to the county equal to the cost of decommissioning, as estimated by a professional engineer. Some counties require financial assurance from the outset, while other counties such as Kit Carson do not require the financial assurance until partway through the system's lifespan (e.g., 10 years), unless there is abandonment or decommissioning of the project prior to that time. An additional 19 counties (30%) have financial assurance in their land - use code that is not specific for solar energy facilities but may be applicable to them. Park County's policies are not specific to solar, but state: "The County may require monetary deposits, bonds, and/or written agreements to provide for a sufficient financial guarantee, as determined by the County, for restoration and cleanup of site access or other County property or interests." The remaining 21 counties (33%) not under moratorium do not have any requirements for financial assurance in their land -use codes. 24 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at wwvv.nrel.gov/publications. r Rio Blanco r Garfield Routs Eagle" Pitkin Gunnison Summit Lake 'Chaffee Our�Iy Saguacle San Miguel Hinsdale Dolores San Juan Mineral Rio Grande Archuleta (wo rteil.R1. Boulder Broomfield Jefferson Douglas Teller tFremont Custer Alamosa Costilla Pueblo Huerfano LusiAnimas Ofie Kit Carson al Solar -Specific Financial Assurance Requirement [I Financial Assurance Requirement Might Apply to Solar No Financial Assurance Requirement Solar Development Under Moratorium Figure 13. Financial assurance requirements for decommissioning solar power installations for Colorado counties 25 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. 5 Discussion Our review of Colorado's county -level solar ordinances and land -use codes illustrates that there is currently high variability in requirements and permitting rigor for ground -mounted solar across Colorado. Depending on the county, solar arrays of similar size, configuration, and application might be required to complete one of various permitting requirements up to and including 1041 permits (e.g., Prowers County) or might not require a permit at all (e.g., Baca County, which is Prowers County's neighbor). This regulatory landscape for ground -mounted solar is also continuously evolving, with six county moratoriums currently in effect, many of which were motivated in part by community concerns about solar. Counties that have already adopted solar - specific ordinances commonly include requirements addressing community concerns, including visual impacts, safety, and changes to agricultural land. Dual -use agrivoltaic systems are one approach to address community concerns about converting agricultural land to solar, and agrivoltaics have been deployed in multiple Colorado counties, although only Morgan County has codified a definition for agrivoltaics thus far. Our review of regulations finds that some county -level policies might impact the feasibility of agrivoltaic deployments, while other policies protecting irrigated land might be more compatible with agrivoltaic deployments than traditional utility -scale solar arrays that include a permanent dry -up. In this section, we discuss some of these major findings, including the interactions between solar deployments and the adoption of solar -specific ordinances and moratoriums, variability in solar ordinances across Colorado, and potential impacts of county -level regulations on agrivoltaic deployments and state -level renewable energy targets. 5.1 Solar -Specific Ordinances, Deployment, and Community Response We found that the majority of Colorado's utility -scale' solar power plants (75%) and installed capacity (89%) are located in counties with documentation on all of the policies we reviewed (Figure 2). This is consistent with other analyses that find correlation between localities with solar ordinances and where solar is being deployed (Day 2015; Cook et al. 2016; Lopez et al. 2023; Lerner 2022). Additionally, Lerner (2022) notes that counties tend to adopt renewable energy ordinances when their neighbors adopt ordinances or begin building renewable energy projects. There are potential interactions between solar ordinances and solar deployment, where the demand for solar deployment can motivate solar ordinance adoption, which can in turn enable further solar developments. Solar projects require substantial up -front investments and often have long development timelines. A typical utility -scale solar PV project can take up to 4- 5 years from planning to the completion of an operational solar energy facility (SEIA 2013). Regulation changes or revisions can disrupt project planning and execution; therefore, documented permit and planning requirements enable interested landowners and solar developers to make informed decisions and manage project risk. To investigate the interdependence of solar ordinances and adoption, we reviewed the timeline of solar ordinance adoption for the five counties with the highest number of utility -scale solar ' While ground -mounted systems can also include arrays of <1 MW nameplate capacity, the vast majority of ground -mounted solar is utility scale, and data on smaller systems are not readily available. 26 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. projects and the five counties with the highest installed capacity (Figure 14).8 The dates of solar ordinance adoption and amendment are compared to the year that utility -scale solar capacity became operational in that county; note that the year of operation likely lags the year each solar power plant was first proposed to the community due to permitting and construction timelines. Figure 14 illustrates that these Colorado counties typically adopted solar -specific ordinances after one or more solar power plants were planned in their jurisdictions. Garfield, Alamosa, El Paso, and Arapahoe counties adopted regulations around the same time as their first few solar power plants were becoming operational and then implemented amendments a few years later as more and larger solar power plants were developed. Adams, Weld, and Pueblo counties allowed for the permitting and construction of several projects prior to the adoption of solar -specific regulations. While the regulatory certainty from documented solar siting policies might reduce permitting risk for future solar developments, this analysis does not address other factors influencing solar developers to target land in these counties, such as solar resource, available interconnection capacity, land prices and availability, or expectations about community response. Garfield 1.5 1 13 1,5 8.2 1� ;� Alamosa IC •- El Paso Arapahoe Adams Weld Pueblo 2 2 1.5 1.6 '[6 can 5i5 1.5 3 1.8 2q4 12 8 t2 3 11,8 3 8e.7 8 V8 211, 3 3 6 X3.9 10.6 8 1 120 1;';i 240 ale 573 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 • New Solar Capacity Operational (MWac) * Solar Ordinance or Definition Adoption Amendment Figure 14. Timelines of solar deployment, adoption of solar -specific ordinances or definitions, and amendments to those ordinances for Colorado counties with high solar deployment to date. Solar ordinance and amendment dates were determined by a review of county documents and personal communication with county officials. Blue dots show when a utility -scale solar power plant became operational according to the EIA (ER 2023b), which lags the date that the project applied for county permitting. The top five counties in the EIA data in terms of number of projects (Adams, Weld, Alamosa, Arapahoe, Garfield) or installed capacity (Pueblo, Alamosa, Adams, El Paso, Weld) are shown. Once a county starts receiving applications for solar power plant permits, there appear to be two common drivers motivating the adoption of solar -specific regulations: community response and clear gaps in the existing land -use code. More recently, from 2022 to 2023, several counties, including Morgan, Phillips, Washington, and Logan, have enacted and resolved temporary moratoriums on solar power plant applications to provide land -use departments with sufficient 8 Three of the counties (Adams, Alamosa, and Weld) are included in top five counties for both number of projects and installed capacity, so only seven counties were reviewed. 27 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nreigov/publications. time to draft suitable regulations for local needs. Current moratoriums are in effect for Chaffee, Delta, Montrose, San Miguel, Rio Blanco, and Mesa counties. Chaffee County has had an ongoing moratorium for multiple land -use categories while it completes broader updates to its land -use code (Ark Valley Voice Staff 2022; Chaffee County 2022); the other five counties instituted moratoriums soon after large solar power plants were announced for development or solar permit processes were resolved, as shown in Figure 15 (Chaffee County 2022; Montrose County 2022b; Delta County Board of Commissioners 2022; Tuttle 2023; Mesa County 2024; Turner 2023b; SolarGen 2022; McDermott 2023; Garnet Mesa Solar 2023; Bunton 2023; NextEra Energy 2023; Sida 2023). Moratorium for broader land use code updates Chaffee 80 MW: 383 acres Delta ),C 140 MW: 1,052 acres Montrose • 100 MW: 600 acres San Miguel 550 acres Rio Blanco �C 48 MW! 150 acres Permit modification from 2 MW to 5 MW Mesa ,K �C i aft < 1/4-1 cei u. 2 < 2023 a, a, o► �. o d v3 V Z g: I 2024 • Solar Project Announced *1 Solar Permit Approved ■ Solar Moratorium Figure 15. Timelines of current county -level solar moratoriums in Colorado, including public announcement or permit approval of key solar power plants planned in each county. The planned capacity and/or acreage of each solar plant is indicated. This timeline focuses on key developments and is not intended to be a comprehensive review of solar developments in each county. Chaffee, Montrose, Rio Blanco, and Mesa also had relatively small (1-8 MWac) solar power plants developed in 2012-2020 (EIA 2023b) prior to this 18 -month timeline. Several of these solar projects elicited strong community response, both positive and negative, and county officials reported feeling that their existing land -use code was insufficient to address concerns (Witowski 2022; Bunton 2023; Turner 2023a; McDermott 2023; Sida 2023). In Delta County, an 80 -MW solar project that was initially rejected by county commissioners for concerns of losing farmland was approved after the addition of sprinkler and drip irrigation to support agrivoltaic sheep grazing below the panels (Jaffe 2022a, Witowski 2022). Two weeks after the approval, the county commissioners implemented a moratorium on all utility -scale solar projects to develop relevant solar policy for future projects (Delta County Board of Commissioners 2022). Similarly, a few weeks after a large-scale solar project was proposed in Montrose County, county commissioners enacted a 6 -month moratorium on all solar projects, or "until appropriate facility standards are incorporated into the Montrose County zoning regulation, whichever comes first" (McDermott 2023; Montrose County 2022b). In San Miguel County, a solar project proposal caused locals to raise concerns around visual impacts and impacts on recreation, hunting, and wildlife (Bunton 2023). Amid feelings at the county that the existing code is "lagging behind," San Miguel County commissioners approved a 6 -month 28 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at vvww.nrel.gov/publications. moratorium 1 week later to make the application process fair and "to respond intelligently for both our citizens (and) also for future applicants" (Bunton 2023; Tuttle 2023). In this ordinance development process, each county is balancing local needs, and many counties have implemented solar -specific policies to proactively address community concerns, such as visual impacts (310% of counties). However, a side effect of this county -by -county approach is that the solar permitting landscape across Colorado is varied, resulting in a regulatory variance that can present a challenge to solar developers and interested landowners where there are ambiguities and gaps in local ordinances. 5.2 Variability in Solar Permitting Across Colorado's Counties Due to the county -by -county approach to developing ordinances, there is variability of permitting rigor for solar power plants across Colorado. Counties commonly apply varying permitting requirements for different types of PV systems, categorized based on installed capacity (MWdc, MWac, or MW), land area (acres), and/or electricity end use (self -consumption vs. grid export). Additionally, some counties have adopted 1041 regulations that are explicitly integrated into solar -specific permitting processes, while in other counties there is ambiguity about whether legacy 1041 regulations apply. For example, a few counties have adopted 1041 requirements without further definitions of what constitutes a "major facility of a public utility," while many other counties have defined specifications of which power plants qualify. In aggregate, this presents a variance of potential requirements across the state for landowners and solar developers interested in developing projects. At the same time, the three commonly used permitting categorization methods have potential gaps or limitations that might inadvertently impact the types of solar deployments a county is intending to support. When considering the installed capacity, PV systems have two ratings to consider: the DC capacity (MWdc), which is the total capacity of the PV modules, and the AC capacity (MWac), which is the rating of the inverters that interface between the PV modules and the electric grid. Due to the higher relative cost of inverters, PV systems are commonly built with a DC -to -AC capacity ratio of 1.3 or more, although including energy storage can increase this ratio (Bolinger et al. 2023). Some counties specifically define which capacity they are referring to in their solar permitting regulations, such as Garfield and Lincoln counties, but other counties simply refer to the "MW" capacity without clarifying their definitions. While the DC installed capacity is commonly referenced by the solar industry, this ambiguity in definitions may be more prevalent for counties that use the same permitting processes across multiple types of power plant technologies, for which the AC capacity is the default rating under consideration. When categorizing based on either land area or installed capacity, permitting requirements and land -use restrictions might not be applied as intended for new and emerging solar configurations. Currently, utility -scale solar arrays require an average of 5.75 acres per MWdc9 of installed solar capacity, equating to a capacity density of 0.17 MWdc/acre (U.S. Department of Energy 2021). However, there is variability in this capacity density due to topography and technology choices; for example, optimized tracking systems can enable higher densities. In other cases, lower 9 Solar Futures Study reports typical land use requirements of 7.5 acres/MWac and inverter loading ratios of 1.3, which are converted here into acres per MWdc. 29 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. densities are intended and desired„ such as in agrivoltaics configurations with wider row spacing to prioritize use of arable land and improve access for labor and equipment (Macknick et al. 2022). In very widely spaced arrays, the system might include far fewer PV module rows and have a lower impact on the land compared to a traditionally configured array on the same area, leading to smaller energy generation per acre when compared to traditional utility -scale designs. Further, advances in PS/ technology, including module efficiency, layout, and tracking optimization, could continually impact the solar capacity density that is considered typical. Due to the variability in capacity density, establishing requirements based on either land area or installed capacity may result in situations that may or may not align with the original intention of the regulations. For example, a county that requires 1041 permits for any plant greater than 5 acres might require a 1041 permit for both a l -Mwdc ('5.75 acres) traditional utility -scale solar plant and a O.5-MWdc agrivoltaic plant with twice the row spacing. When categorizing PV systems based on the expected electricity end use, such as commercial vs. noncommercial use or self -consumption vs. electricity export to the grid, counties are potentially balancing private property rights and expected land impacts. While PV systems for noncommercial use or self -consumption might typically be expected to be small rooftop mounted systems, there are also emerging applications for large ground -mounted, off -yid PV systems. These include large commercial and industrial customers, such as data centers, mining operations, or indoor agricultural grow centers, powering their own on -site operations (Peacock 2021; Schoenberg 2020; Sandfire 2024). These applications could impact significant land areas but may or may not fall into the intended permit category based on an end -use categorization. Finally, many counties categorize IN systems based on some combination of these three methods, which might be a source of ambiguity or confusion, particularly as new IN configurations and use cases emerge, and counties might need to update their approaches to match their intended outcomes. At the state level, this variance in local permitting regulations has raised concerns within the legislature about uneven deployment and the impact on broader statewide goals for renewable energy deployment, including Colorado's target to achieve 100% renewable energy by 2040 (Brasch 2024; Colorado Energy Office 2019). In response to concerns about the rate of deployment,, Colorado lawmakers are currently drafting legislation that would establish a standardized process for local government reviews of renewable energy proposals, including limits on the durations of moratoriums and setback restrictions (Brasch 2024). With a similar approach, Illinois passed a law in 2023 mandating review procedures, timelines, and standards for county -level permitting of utility -scale wind and solar projects (Granholm, Antoniolli, and Montgomery 2023). Other states, including Connecticut, Maine, Michigan, Ohio, New Hampshire, New York, Oregon, and Vermont, have opted to establish state -level siting authorities for new energy -generating facilities over a certain capacity or acreage (Ellison and Otter 2023; State of Oregon 2024; Farm and Energy Initiative 2024; Ohio Power Siting Board n..d.). For example, New York has a state -level process for renewable projects larger than 25 MW, while Vermont's Public Utilities Commission has authority over all solar array siting (Farm and Energy Initiative 2024). In Oregon, large PV systems are subject to siting by the state, depending on the acreage and whether the proposed location is on farmland (State of Oregon 30 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.govfpublications. 2024). It is likely too early to assess the efficacy of these state approaches compared to county - based approaches in meeting state goals for renewable deployment. Separately from the development of state -level siting boards, other efforts have focused on developing model land -use codes and educating local officials on best practices in solar permitting regulations. These programs include the U.S. Department of Energy's SolSmart program, which provides no -cost technical assistance to local governments to implement best practices and offers Bronze through Platinum designations based on the locality's processes (SolSmart 2023), and International City/County Management Association's Solar@Scale program, which helps local governments overcome common barriers to utility -scale solar deployment (ICMA 2024). A variety of other organizations have developed model solar ordinances, which often target a particular state (Energy, Policy, and Innovation Center n.d.; Dillemuth and White 2013). While the Colorado Energy Code Board has published a Solar Ready Code package that targets rooftop solar, there is not currently a state -level model ordinance package for utility -scale solar in Colorado, although the Colorado Department of Local Affairs plans to release a Template Land Development Code in 2024 that includes some specifics on ground -mounted solar systems (personal communication). Additionally, the Colorado Solar & Storage Association has published a recommended guide of best practices from a solar developer's perspective (Colorado Energy Office 2024; Colorado Solar & Storage Association 2022). While each locality has unique circumstances to consider, there are many commonalities and standardized practices that can decrease the burden of code development for resource -limited local governments while also decreasing permitting uncertainty for solar developers. 5.3 Agrivoltaics and Solar Land -Use Code Agricultural land is often well suited for solar development (Adeh et al. 2019), yet 5 out of the top 10 agricultural producing counties in Colorado currently have no deployed solar (Yuma, Kit Carson, Prowers, Washington, and Phillips counties) (Colorado Department of Agriculture n.d.; U.S. Department of Agriculture [USDA] NASS 2017; Figure 1). Demand for solar development in some of these counties may increase with the completion of the Colorado Power Pathway, which will expand transmission capacity to the southeastern corner of Colorado (Xcel Energy 2021). Solar development restrictions or challenges often arise from local land -use policy or lack of community acceptance (Carlisle et al. 2015; Kolbeck-Urlacher 2023; Lopez et al. 2023). To address these challenges, agrivoltaics has been proposed as a potential solution to keep agricultural land in production and increase local acceptance of solar projects (Pascaris et al. 2022). However, some Colorado county -level policies may unintentionally restrict agrivoltaics by limiting solar development on agricultural land and/or restricting panel height. These two topics are each discussed below, including considerations and potential impacts. Solar Development on Agricultural Land Agricultural land made up 48% (31.8 million acres) of Colorado's land in 2017 (USDA NASS 2017). Farm and ranchlands are abundant in Colorado and are often available at a lower cost than other land types. An average acre of commercial or residential land costs $11,600 in Colorado (Morris 2023) compared to $1,770/acre for agricultural land (USDA NASS 2022). This contributes to making farms and ranches attractive options for solar developers who require large 31 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. contiguous areas for their installations. However, converting agricultural land into solar arrays can have multiple trade-offs. Communities across the state have debated the use of agriculturally zoned land for solar projects, as it could compete with food production, raise rental prices for farmers and ranchers, and increase development around rural communities (Hunter et al. 2022). Due to these concerns, some local governments have enacted policies that restrict the development of solar arrays on agriculturally zoned land. Such policies restrict the size/output of solar arrays, add permitting requirements, or ban solar energy systems on agricultural land altogether (e.g., Fremont and Kiowa counties). Counties that prohibit solar energy infrastructure on agricultural lands also prevent the addition of agrivoltaics. Some counties do not ban solar development of farmland but restrict or discourage solar development on "prime"' or "significant" 11 agricultural lands (Cheyenne, Phillips, Sedgewick, Yuma, and Boulder counties). In 2017, Colorado had 1.4 million acres of prime farmland (National Resource Conservation Service 2017) and in 2016, the state had 5.6 million acres of nationally significant agricultural land (American Farmland Trust n.d.). Policies that limit solar development on prime farmland might also impact the deployment of agrivoltaic systems. Further, six counties (Alamosa, Bent, Cheyenne, Otero, Prowers, and Sagauche) have irrigated land clauses in their 1041 regulations that may also impact agrivoltaic deployment. These clauses are intended to prevent the sale of water rights separately from the land and prevent the dry -up of irrigated agricultural land. However, the water redistribution and lower evaporation rates under solar panels could allow for decreased irrigation or the cessation of irrigation altogether. A recent study found that for semiarid C3 grassland growing beneath an agrivoltaic system in Colorado, the aboveground net primary productivity was reduced by only 6%-7% with no irrigation in the past 3 years (Kannenberg et al. 2023). Permitting that allows for the dry -up of land but continued agricultural production, such as grazing and hay production, would allow agrivoltaic systems to be developed on these lands. In addition, agrivoltaics has shown to provide local community and farmer benefits. Solar panels redistribute moisture to the edges of their panels that can enable deeper soil moisture retention (Sturchio et al. 2023). Solar panels also provide shade to the ground, which can lower soil and plant temperatures while reducing evaporation rates from the soil (Barron -Gafford et al. 2019). These benefits are especially important in semiarid climates like Colorado because they can help lower irrigation requirements. The shade and lowered air temperatures may assist with lowering health -related illnesses in farmworkers (Ghosh 2023). However, solar panels may come with trade-offs, such as lowering the total amount of arable land to farming or impacting current farming practices due to the placement of the structures (Pascaris et al. 2020). Early collaboration with farmers during the project design phase can help mitigate these impacts (Macknick et al. 2022). Policies that forego any possibility of solar development on agricultural 1Q USDA designation of high -quality farmland of major importance in meeting national needs for food and fiber production, including cultivated land, pastureland, and forestland. " Nationally significant agricultural land is the "land best -suited to long-term, intensive crop production" (American Farmland Trust n.d.). 32 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at vvww nrel gov/publications land can inadvertently prevent landowners from accessing solar land leases for agrivoltaic systems that potentially allow for greater farm viability and more diversified income. Panel Height Agrivoltaic systems often require alternative configurations to traditional utility -scale PV designs to permit agricultural activities (Macknick et al. 2022). This can include various design changes, such as increasing the height of panels. In cropping systems, some agrivoltaic designs are elevated up to 12-15 ft to allow for maximum crop growth height, larger agricultural equipment (Marrou et al. 2013; Weselek et al. 2019), and optimal diffusion of sunlight for plant growth (Faizi et al. 2022). Some agrivoltaic orchards are built even higher, with panel heights up to 16.4 ft (Juillion et al. 2022). In orchards, elevated solar panels may offer the additional benefit of hail protection to the crops (Willockx et al. 2024). For grazing systems, most solar arrays of traditional height will accommodate the integration of sheep, but panels often require higher elevation for the integration of cattle (Macknick et al. 2022). Cattle are an important market for Colorado farmers and ranchers, valued at $2 billion in 2020 (USDA NASS 2021). In 2021, Colorado had 2.7 million head of cattle but only 445,000 head of sheep (USDA NASS 2021), leading to a smaller agrivoltaic grazing market if panel height is restricted. The panels also offer potential benefits to cattle, such as access to shade, reduced radiant heat load (Maia et al. 2020), and lower respiration rates and body temperatures (Sharpe et al. 2021). In one study, cattle preferred the shade of the panels over a shade cloth (Maia et al. 2020). Some Colorado counties limit the panel height of solar panels (e.g., a 10 -ft restriction in Rio Blanco County and a 15 -ft restriction in Pitkin, Arapahoe, and Larimer counties). This restriction could potentially limit the types of agrivoltaic systems that could be incorporated into the PV structure, such as taller cropping systems (e.g., fruit trees) and cattle grazing. All other county panel restriction heights are higher than 15 ft and would have a low probability of interfering with agrivoltaic systems. While allowing flexibility for solar designs can be important to the success of agrivoltaic projects, it is important to note that there can be trade-offs for alternative designs, such as increased costs (Horowitz et al. 2020) and increased risk in areas with high wind or snow loads (Macknick et al. 2022). 5.4 Future Research Extensions to the Current Report on Colorado's County Policy Landscape While this report focused on reviewing and summarizing the current county policies applicable to ground -mounted solar development, additional analyses quantifying the impacts of these local policies on land availability for solar development would be a valuable extension, similar to those in Lopez et al. (2023) and Owusu-Obeng,Mills, and Craig (2024). This review focused on many of the key policies of interest for siting and permitting ground -mounted solar, but there are additional policies that would be valuable to add, including lot coverage restrictions, impact fees for heavy machinery use on roadways during construction, and wildlife impact mitigation requirements, which can be a significant factor in the permitting process (e.g., Park County Board of County Commissioners 2021). Future research area could also include actual or expected impacts on zoning differentiation on deployment patterns throughout Colorado. Finally, a review of recent solar permit applications denied by counties could provide valuable lessons 33 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. learned for other counties and solar developers to understand and prepare for key issues that are arising across the state. Comprehensive Analysis of Local Solar Regulations in the United States While analysis of local solar regulations has been completed in Illinois (Guarino and Swanson 2023), the Great Lakes region (Owusu-Obeng, Mills, and Craig 2024), and now Colorado, data are limited across the United States. Comprehensive state -by -state analysis of local solar regulations could help inform developers and policymakers of local solar policies and their potential diversity. Lopez et al. (2023) have performed a similar analysis that examines local setback requirements across the United States, but further variables explored in this report (e.g., panel height restrictions, vegetation management plans, decommissioning requirements) could be relevant to add. This analysis could also include the impact of statewide regulations that have been used to create consistency for solar regulations throughout other states (e.g., Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, New York [Farm and Energy Initiative 2024]) to understand the impact of statewide versus local codes on solar development. As evidenced by the Colorado example, the solar industry is rapidly expanding, and state and local governments are presently trying to update their codes and regulations to match this pace of development. Future analyses and overviews of local policies would be most useful in a dynamic format that could be readily adjusted as states and counties update their policies. Socioeconomic Solar Analysis While research has been limited, several studies have reviewed the impact of solar policy or solar deployment on environmental justice or socioeconomic factors (Si and Stephens 2021; Lukanov and Krieger 2019). Si and Stephens (2021) found that while low-income households were represented in the 2020 Solar Massachusetts Renewable Target (SMART) Emergency Regulation, they had less political power and representation than other groups (e.g., corporations). Lukanov and Krieger (2019) found that solar adoption levels were disproportionally lower in disadvantaged communities in California. High-level state and county data comparisons of renewable energy deployment and environmental justice factors have also been initiated by the Deployment Gap Model Education Fund (2023) through their found that 82% of Dashboard. Using a similar but more detailed and policy -related framework, socioeconomic analysis throughout the cities and counties of Colorado could help to determine the impact of local solar regulations on inclusivity of environmental justice and disadvantaged communities in policymaking and solar deployment. This analysis could include use of EPA's Environmental Justice Screening and Mapping Tool to evaluate local variables such as environmental justice indexes, pollution and sources, socioeconomic indicators, health disparities, climate change data, critical service gaps, and demographics (EPA 2024). 34 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. 6 Conclusion The state of Colorado has experienced the rapid expansion of solar projects over the past few years (EIA 2023a). Solar policy across Colorado counties can impact the types, sizes, and locations of solar projects approved, the complexity and cost of the permitting and construction process, and ability to incorporate agrivoltaic systems. This report presents an overview of the status of county -level solar policy across the state of Colorado as of November 2023. By reviewing county documents, such as land -use codes, zoning ordinances, and comprehensive and master plans, this report summarizes regulations that can impact the permitting, design, and viability of ground -mounted solar arrays. These policy topics include regulation requirements, 1041 permitting, solar on agricultural land, panel height restrictions, fencing requirements, vegetation management, visual impacts, and decommissioning plans and financial assurance. While we found that the majority of counties have some solar -specific definitions in their land - use code, less than half have documented requirements on all the policy topics reviewed here. The vast majority (89%) of Colorado's utility -scale installed solar capacity is located in counties with at least some documentation of the policies reviewed. Some counties also regulate solar projects on a case -by -case basis, which presents unclear requirements and guidelines for solar development. As solar power plants have long development timelines from planning to completion, regulation changes or revisions can disrupt project planning and execution. Therefore, documented permit and planning requirements enable interested landowners and solar developers to make informed decisions and manage project risk. Colorado's policy landscape is also continually evolving, with many counties adopting and amending solar -specific code in the last few years. Additionally, six counties had moratoriums on solar development in effect during the review to allow time for county staff to review and update land use.12 Due to Colorado's county -by -county approach to regulating solar, we also found variation in solar permitting requirements across the state. Counties often apply different permitting requirements to PV systems based on their installed capacity, land area, and/or electricity end use. Due to gaps or ambiguity in definitions, these groupings might not be applied as intended for new and emerging solar configurations, such agrivoltaic systems with low capacity density (MW/acre) or large off -grid commercial and industrial applications. There are also potential ambiguities in permitting requirements from overlap with legacy 1041 regulations, in some instances requiring developers to complete both a 1041 permit and a conditional use or special use permit (e.g., County of Elbert 2018) at the expense of additional developer and county time and resources. Lopez et al. (2023) show that certain local permitting policies have the possibility to affect solar deployment, which could impact broader state-wide goals for renewable energy deployment, such as the Colorado governor's goal of 100% renewable energy by 2040 (Colorado Energy Office 2019). In response to similar concerns about meeting state renewable goals, other states have opted to either regulate and standardize local permitting requirements or establish state - level siting authorities for large renewable projects (Granholm, Antoniolli, and Montgomery 12 Including Mesa County, which instituted a moratorium after the review had completed but during the report preparation period. 35 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. 2023; State of Oregon 2024; Farm and Energy Initiative 2024) As of February 2024, Colorado lawmakers are drafting legislation that would establish a standardized process for local government reviews of renewable energy proposals, including limits on the durations of moratoriums and setback restrictions (Brasch 2024). While it is likely too early to assess the efficacy of these state approaches compared to county -based approaches, we expect solar policy in Colorado to continue to evolve alongside the expansion of solar energy in the state. Finally, this report also considered the potential impact of county policies on agrivoltaics deployment. While agrivoltaics projects have been deployed in multiple Colorado counties, only Morgan County has a definition for agrivoltaics in its land -use code. In other counties, certain policies might limit the deployment of agrivoltaics. This includes four counties that restrict solar on some or all agricultural zones, several counties that consider agricultural impacts in the solar review process, four counties with 10 -15 -ft panel height limits, and six counties with higher permitting stringency for any development on irrigated land. 36 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/pubf cations. Glossary Term Agrivoltaics Dry -up Ground -mounted solar Prime farmland Utility -scale solar Definition Co -location of agriculture and solar photovoltaics on the same land. Permanent cessation of irrigation. An array of solar photovoltaic modules mounted on a racking system on the ground, as opposed to a rooftop -mounted system. USDA designation of high -quality farmland of major importance in meeting national needs for food and fiber production, including cultivated land, pastureland, and forestland. Solar generators for electric utilities with nameplate capacity of 1 MW or greater. Almost all utility -scale solar is ground -mounted, but ground -mounted solar can also include small or off -grid applications. 37 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrei.gov/publications. References Adeh, Elnaz H., Stephen P. Good, M. Calaf, and Chad W. Higgins. 2019. "Solar PV Power Potential Is Greatest Over Croplands." Scientific Reports 9 (1): 11442. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-47803-3. American Farmland Trust. n.d. "Colorado Data and Statistics." Accessed December 11, 2023. https://farm land info.org/statistics/colorado-statistics/. Aran Carrion, J., A. Espin Estrella, F. Aznar Dols, M. Zamorano Toro, M. Rodriguez, and A. Ramos Ridao. 2008. "Environmental Decision -Support Systems for Evaluating the Carrying Capacity of Land Areas: Optimal Site Selection for Grid -Connected Photovoltaic Power Plants." Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 12 (9): 2358-80. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.rser.2007.06.01 1. Ark Valley Voice Staff. 2022. "Temporary Moratorium Adopted for Certain Chaffee County Land Use Applications," June 7, 2022. Ark Valley Voice. Accessed February 2, 2024. https://arkval leyvoice.com/temporary-moratorium-adopted-for-certain-chaffee-county-land-use- applications/. Barron -Gafford, G. A., Pavao-Zuckerman, M. A., Minor, R. L., Sutter, L. F., Barnett -Moreno, I., Blacken, D. T., Thompson, M., Dimond, K., Gerlak, A. K., Nabhan, G. P., & Macknick, J. E. 2019. "Agrivoltaics provide mutual benefits across the food -energy -water nexus in drylands." Nature Sustainability 2(9): 848-855. haps://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0364-5. Bessette, Douglas L., Ben Hoen, Joseph Rand, Karl Hoesch, Jan White, Sarah Banas Mills, and Robi Nilson. 2024. "Good Fences Make Good Neighbors: Stakeholder Perspectives on the Local Benefits and Burdens of Large-scale Solar Energy Development in the United States." Energy Research & Social Science (Print) 108 (February): 103375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2023.103375. Black Hills Energy. 2023. "2030 Ready: Our Colorado Clean Energy Plan." Accessed December 7, 2023. https://www.blackhillsenergy.com/billing-and-payments/residential-rates-and- regulatory-information/2030-ready-our-colorado-clean. Bolinger, Mark, Joachim Seel, Julie Mulvaney Kemp, Cody Warner, Anjali Katta, and Dana Robson. 2023. Utility -Scale Solar, 2023 Edition: Empirical Trends in Deployment, Technology, Cost, Performance, PPA Pricing, and Value in the United States. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/utility-scale-solar-2023-edition. Brasch, Sam. 2024. "Colorado Lawmakers Prep Legislation to Limit Local Power over Wind and Solar Projects. Colorado Public Radio. Accessed on February 9, 2024. https://www.cpr.org/2024/02/08/colorado-lawmakers-prep-legislation-to-1 In it -local -power -over- wind -and -solar -projects/. Bunton, Ashley. 2023. "Pumping the Brakes on Solar Power, County Drafts Moratorium." Telluride Daily Planet, May 25, 2023. Accessed February 2, 2024. https://www.telluridenews.com/news/article_184072b4-fb54-1 1 ed-89cf-8f3e6c6b7ff1html. 38 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. Carlisle, Juliet E., Stephanie L. Kane, David Solan, Madelaine Bowman, and Jeffrey C. Joe. 2015. "Public Attitudes Regarding Large -Scale Solar Energy Development in the U.S." Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews 48 (August): 835-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.047. Chaffee County. 2022. "Temporary Moratorium Adopted for Certain Land Use Applications During County's Code Update Efforts." Together Chaffee, June 7, 2022. Accessed February 5, 2024. https://www.togetherchaffeecounty.org/post/luc- moratorium`?sa=D&source=editors&usg=AOvVaw31 XeiFUdOfUe- 914OmKa8K&ust=1706902982228055. Colorado Department of Agriculture. n.d. "Colorado Agriculture." Accessed December 8, 2023. https://ag.colorado.gov/sites/ag/files/documents/Colorado%20Agriculture%20Brochure.pdf. Colorado Department of Local Affairs. n.d. "1041 Regulations in Colorado." Accessed November 20, 2023. https://dlg.coflorado.gov/1041-regulations-in-colorado/. Colorado Energy Office. 2019. "Polls Administration's: Roadmap to 100% Renewable Energy by 2024 and Bold Climate Action." https://energyofce.colorado.gov/sites/energyoffice/files/documents/ROADMAPTO100%25 RE NEWABLE.pdf. Colorado Energy Office. 2024. "Energy Code Board." Accessed February 20, 2024. https://energyoffice.colorado.gov/buildings/building-energy-codes/energy-code-board. Colorado General Assembly. 2021. Stimulus Funding Department Of Agriculture Efficiency Programs. SB 021-235. https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2021 a_ 235_signed.pdf. . 2019. Climate Action Plan to Reduce Pollution. HB 19-1261. https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb19-1261. . 2023a. Agricultural Producers Use of Agrivoltaics. SB 023-092. https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb23-092 . 2023b. Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Measures. SB 23-016. https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb23-016. Colorado Solar & Storage Association. 2022. "Becoming Utility -Scale Solar Ready: Principles and Best Practices for Colorado's Local Governments." Accessed February 20, 2024. https://cossa.co/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Uti lity-Scale-Best-Practices-for-Colorado-Govts- 220301.pdf. Cook, Jeffrey J., Alexandra Aznar, Alexander Dane, Megan Day, Shivani Mathur, and Elizabeth Doris. 2016. Clean Energy in City Codes: A Baseline Analysis of Municipal Codification across the United States. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. NREL/TP-6A70-66120. https://www.nrel.govidocs/fyl7osti/66120.pdf. 39 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www. nretgov/publications. County of Elbert. 2018. "Resolution 2018-09." Accessed March 18, 2024. https : //e l b e rt c o u n t y - co.gov/DocumentCenter/View/552/Resolution-2018-09-PDF. Curtis, Taylor L., Ligia Smith, Heather Buchanan, and Garvin Heath. 2021. A Survey of Federal and State -Levu' Solar System Decommissioning Policies in the United States. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. NREUTT 6A2O-7965 0. https://doi.org/10.2172/1836657. Daniels, T., and Hannah Wagner. 2022. Regulating utility -scale solar pojects on agricultural land Philadelphia, PA: Kleinman Center for Energy Policy, University of Pennsylvania. https://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/research/publications/regulating-utility-scale-solar-projects- on-agricultural-land. Day, Megan. 2015. "Local Solar." American Planning Association. Accessed March 13, 2024. https://www.planning.org/planning/2015/dec/localsolar.htm. Day, Megan, and Benjamin Mow. 2018. "Research and Analysis Demonstrate the Lack of Impacts of Glare from Photovoltaic Modules." NREL Accessed December 14, 2023. https://www.nrel.gov/state-local-tribal/blog/posts/research-and-analysis-demonstrate-the-lack-of- impacts-of-glare-from-photovoltaic-modules.htm 1. Delta County Board of Commissioners. 2022. "Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Delta, State of Colorado." Delta County Citizen Report. Accessed February 2, 2024. http://www.citizenreport.info/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/solar- moritorium.pdf. Deployment Gap Model Education Fund. 2023. "Clean Build Dashboard." Accessed March 27, 2024. https://www.deploymentgap.fund/clean-build-dashboard. Dillemuth, Ann, and Darcie White. 2013. Integrating Solar Enery into Local Development Regulation". American Planning Association. https://www.planning.org/publications/document/9148295/. Dinesh, I-larshavardhan„ and Joshua M. Pearce. 2016. "The Potential of Agrivoltaic Systems." Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews 54: 299-308. https://doi.ot 10.101 j.rser.2015.10.024. ETA. 201k. "Colorado State Energy Profile." Accessed November 4, 2023. https://www.eia.govistate/print.php?sid=CO#139. . 2023b►. "Preliminary Monthly Electric Generator Inventory (based on Form EIA-860M as a supplement to Form ETA -860)." Accessed November 30, 2023. https://www.eia.govielectricity/data/eia860m/. Ellison, Garret, and Ben Orner. 2023. "Michigan House Votes to Restrict Local Authority over Wind, Solar Farms." mlive. Accessed February 9, 2024. https://www.mlive.com/public- interest/2023/11/m ichigan-house-votes-to-restrict-local-authority-over-wind-solar-farms.html. 40 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel. goer/publications. Energy, Policy, and Innovation Center. n.d. "Model Solar OrdinanceResources!' Georgia Institute of Technology. Accessed February 20, 2024. https://epicenter.energy.gatech.edu/model- solar-ord inance-resources/. EPA. 2024. "EPA's Environmental Justice Screening and Mapping Tool." 2024. Accessed February 2, 2024. https://ejscreen.epa.gov/mapper/. Faizi, Mohd. Adil, Vyas Maharshi Sandipkurnar, Abhishek Varna, Suntan, and V. K. Abhishek. 2022. "Design and Optimization of Solar Photovoltaic Power Plant in Case of Agrivoltaics." Springer Proceedings in Physics. Vol. 256. Farm and Energy Initiative. 2024. "Understanding Land Use & Energy Permitting." 2024. Accessed February 8, 2024. https://farmandenergyinitiative.org/projects/farmland-solar- pol icy/pol icy-design-toolkit/land-use-perm itting-processes/. FindLaw Staff. 2022. "Colorado Revised Statutes. Title 24. Government State § 24-65.1-101. Legislative declaration." https://codes.findlaw.com/co/title-24-government-state/co-rev-st-sect- 24-65-1-101 /. Gagnon, Pieter, An Nam, Wesley Cole, Sarah Awara, Anne Bayles, Maxwell Brown, Patrick Brown, Vincent Carag, Stuart Cohen, Anne Hamilton, Jonathan Ho, Sarah Inskeep, Akash Kannakar, Luke Lavin, Tr ieu Mai, Joseph Mowers, Matthew Mowers, Caitlin Murphy, Paul Pinchuk, Anna Schleifer, Brian Sergi, Daniel Steinberg, and Travis Williams. 2023.2023 Standard Scenarios Report: A U.S. Electricity Sector Outlook Golden, CC): National Renewable Energy Laboratory. NR L/ T'P'- A40-87724. https://www.nrel.gov/does/fy24ost1/87724.pdf. Garnet Mesa Solar. 2023. "Garnet Mesa Solar." Accessed December 8, 2023. https://garnetmesasolar.com/. Gaut; Vasundhara, Corey Lang, Gregory Howard, and Ruth Quainoo. 2022. "When Energy Issues Are Land Use Issues: Estimating Preferences for Utility -Scale Solar Energy Siting." Land Economics 99 (3): 343-63. haps://doi.org/10.3368/1e.99.3.111221-0130r1. Ghosh, Arita. 2023. "Nexus between Agriculture and Photovoltaics (Agrivoltaics, Agriphotovoltaics) for Sustainable Development Goal: A Review." Solar Energy 266 (December): 112146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2023.112146. Granholm, Ryan C., Amy Antoniolli, and Jane E. Montgomery. 2023 "Illinois Standardizes Permit Laws For Solar and Wind Energy Facilities." National Law Review. Accessed March 18, 2024. https://www.natlawreview.com/article/illinois-enacts-new-law-to-standardize-local- perm thing -renewable -energy -facilities. Guarino, Jessica, and Tyler Swanson. 2023. Aggr1vohta1cs In Illinois; A Regulatory and Policy Guide. Champaign, IL: Bock Agricultural Law & Policy Program, University of Illinois Urbana - Champaign. https://www.agrisolarclearinghouse.org/agrivoltaics-in-illinois-a-regulatory-and- policy-guide/. 41 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at wwv . nreigov/publ ana. Hernandez, Rebecca R., Alona Armstrong, Jennifer Burney, Greer Ryan, Kara Moore-O'1r, Ibrahima Diddhiou, Steven M. Grodsky, et al. 2019. "Techno--Ecological Synergies of Solar Energy for Global Sustainability." Nature Swtal b ii 2 (7): 560-68. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0309-z. Horowitz, Kelsey, Vignesh Ramasamy, Jordan l acknick, and Robert Margolis. 2020. 'Capital Costs for Thal -Use Photovoltaic Installations: 2020 Benchmark for mound -Mounted PV Systems With Pollinator -Friendly Vegetation, Grazing, and Crops." https://doi.org/10.2172/1756713. Hunter, M, A. Sorensen, T. Nogeiro-1 e , S. Beck, S. Shuns, R. Murphy. 2022. Fauns Under Threat 2040: Choosing an Abundant Future. Washington, D.C.; American Farmland Trust. https://farm land info.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2022/08/A FTFUT_Abundant-Future- 7_29_22-WEB.pdf. InSPIRE. 2023. "Agrivoltaics Map." Accessed December 7, 2023. https://openei.org/wiki/InSPIRE/Agrivoltaics_Map. International City/County Management Association (iCMA). 2024. "Solar@cafe." 2024. Accessed April 3, 2024. https./cma.o rog rams-and-projects/solarsccale. Jack's Solar Garden. 2023. "Jack's Solar Garden." Accessed December 6, 2023. https://www.jackssolargarden.com. Jaffe, Mark. 2022a. "Delta County Thought That Solar Panels Were a Baaaaad Idea. But What If There Were 1,000 Sheep Grazing under Them?" The Colorado un, August 15, 2022. hap://coloradosun.com/2022/08/ 15/delta-county-solar-panels-dmea-guzman-shee,/. Jaffe, Mark. 2022b. "Delta County Leaders Reverse Course, Say 'Shear Thing' to Plan for Big Solar Project on Land Where Sheep Graze." The Colorado Sun. http://coloradosun.com/2022/08/17/delta-county-so lar-panels-guzman-sheep/. Juillion, Perrine, Gerardo Lopez, Damien Pumey, Vincent Lesniak, Michel Gerrard, and Gilles Vercambre. 2022. "Shading Apple Trees with an Agrivokaic System: Impact on Water Relations, Leaf Morphophysiological Characteristics and Yield Determinants." . cientla Ht licul 306 (December): 111434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2022.1 1 1434. Kannenb►erg, S.A., Sturchio, M.A., Ventura', M.D. et al. 2023. Grusland carbon -water cycling is minimally impacted by a photovoltaic array. Common Egnh Luton n 4, 238 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-023-00904-4. Kol e-Urlaeher, Heidi. 2023. "Policy Approaches for Dual -Use and Agrisolar Practices." AgriSolar Clearinghouse. https://www.cfra.org/sites/defaubillles/publications/agrisolar dual- use-solar.pdf. 42 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at ter. nrel. irubllc ns. Kurnpmalaisatit, iMianoch, Worajit Setthapun, Hathaithip Sintuya„ Adisak Pattiya, and Surachai Jansri. 2022. "Current Status ofAgrivoltaic Systems and Their Benefits to Energy, Food, Environment, Economy, and Society." Sustainable Production and Consumption 33 (September): 952-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2022.08.013. Lerner, Michael. 2022. "Local power: Understanding the adoption and design of county wind energy regulation_" Review of Policy Research 39, no. 2: 120-142. https://doi.org/10.111 1 /ropr.12447. Lopez, Anthony, Wesley Cole, Brian Sergi, Aaron Levine, Jesse Carey, Cailee Mangan, Trieu Mai, Travis Williams, Pavlo Pinchu and Jianyu Gum 2023. "Impact of siting ordinances on land availability for wind and solar development." Nam Energy. 8: 1034-10 43. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-023-01319-3. Lovich, Jeffrey E., and Joshua R. Ennen. 2011. "Wildlife Conservation and Solar Energy Development in the Desert Southwest, United States." Bio cience 61 (12): 982-92. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2011.61.12.8. Lul anov, Doris, and Elena M. Krieger. 2019. "Distributed Solar and Environmental Justice: Exploring the Demographic and Soda -Economic Trends of Residential LW Adoption in California." Energy Policy 134 (November)! 110935. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.110935. Maclmicl , Jordan, Hartmann, Heidi, Barron -Gafford, Greg, Beatty, Brenda, Button, Robin, Seok-Choi Chong, Davis, Matthew, et. al. 2022. The 5 Cs of . l lc Success Factors in the United States: Lessons from the ASPIRE Research Study, Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. NREI I'FP-6 0-83566. https://doi.org/10.2172/1882930. Mala, Alex Sandro Campos, Eric De Andrade Culhari, Vinicius De Franca Carvalho FonsOca, Hugo Fernando Mafia Milan, and R. G. Gebremedhin. 2020. "Photovoltaic Panels as Shading Resources for Livestock." Jones of Cleaner Production 258 (June): 120551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120551. Mamun, Moharnntad Abdullah Al, Paul Dargusch, David Wadley, Noor Azv a Zulkarnain, and Ammar Abdul Aziz. 2022. "A Review of Research on Agrivoltaic Systems?' Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews 161 (June): 1123 51. https:I/doLorll 0.101 '.tser.2022.112351. l arrou, Helene, Jacques War, Lydie Dufour, and Christian Dupraz. 2013. "Productivity and Radiation Use Efficiency of Lettuces Grown in the Partial Shade of Photovoltaic Panels." European Journal of Agnorny44 (January): 5446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2012.08.003. McDermott, Tyler. 2023. "Moratoriums Threaten Utility -Scale Solar on the Western Slope." Western Colorado Alliance, Marc. 2, 2023. Accessed February 2, 2024. https://westerncoloradoalliance.org/moratori urns -threaten -utility -scale -solar -on -the -western - 43 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at wvay.nrel.g /publl ofa. Mesa County. 2024. "Commissioners Approve Resolution Imposing a Temporary Moratorium on the Submission, Acceptance, Processing, and Approval of Any New Land Use or Business That Engages or Operates as a Commercial Solar Farm," January 11, 2024. Accessed January 18, 2024. https://www.mesacounty.us/news/commissioners/commissioners-approve-resolution- imposing-temporary-moratorium-submission. Montrose County. 2022b. "Resolution No. 71." October 20, 2022. Accessed February 5, 2024. https://www.montrosecounty.netlDocumentCenter/View/ 18328/Resolution-71-2022- Moratorium-on-Appl ications-for-Power-Generation-Facilities. Morris, Kathy. 2023. "How Much an Acre of Land Costs in Each State." Zippia. July 12, 2023. Accessed January 8, 2024. https://www.zippia.com/advice/acre-land-costs-each-state/. National Resource Conservation Service. 2017. "RCA Data Viewer: Prime Farmland," Accessed March 27, 2024. https://publicdashboards.dl.usda.gov/t/FPACPUB/views/RCADVPrimeFarmlandNRI20171/Sta tePrimeFarmland?%3Adispla count=n&%3Aembed—y&%3AisGuestRedirectFromVizportal=X &%3Aorigin=viz_share_link&%3AshowAppBanner=false&%3AshowVizHome=n. NextEra Energy. 2023. "NEXTERA ENERGY — FAQ: WHITE RIVER VALLEY SOLAR PROJECT." The Herald Times. Accessed March 18, 2024. https://www.theheraldtimes.com/wp- content/uploads/2023/05/NextEra-White-River-Val ley -So lar-Project-FAQ25304367.8-002.pdf. Nilson, Robi, Ben Hoen, and Joseph Rand. 2024. Review of Utility -Scale Wind and Solar Developers Report. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Lab. https://emp.lbl go�v/ publications/review-utilit scale -wind -and -solar. "Ohio Power Siting Board." n.d. Accessed March 14, 2024. https://opsb.ohio.gov/. Ong, S., C. Campbell, P. Denholm, R. Margolis, and G. Heath. 2013. Land -Use Requirements for Solar Power Plants in the United States. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. NREL/TP-6A20-56290. https://doi.org/10.2172/1086349. Owusu-Obeng, P. Y., S. B. Mills, and M. T. Craig. 2024. "Implications of Zoning Ordinances for Rural Utility -Scale Solar Deployment and Power System Decarbonization in the Great Lakes Region." arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.16626. Accessed March 14, 2024. https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxivipapers/2401/2401.16626.pdf. Park County Board of County Commissioners. 2021. "A resolution denying the application of Hartsel Solar LLC for a 1041 wildlife habitat areas permit for the Hartsel Solar Preserve, located in Park County, Colorado." Accessed March 18, 2024. https://parkco.us/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Item/9268?filelD=4514. Pascaris, Alexis S. 2021. "Examining existing policy to inform a comprehensive legal framework for agrivoltaics in the U.S." Energy Policy Volume 159: 112620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112620. 44 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. Pascaris, Alexis S., Chelsea Scheily, and Joshua M. Pearce. 2020. "A First Investigation of Agriculture Sector Perspectives on the Opportunities and Barriers for Agrivoltaics." Agronomy 10 (12): 1885. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10121885. Pates, Alexis S., Chelsea Schelly, Mark Rouleau, and Joshua M. Pearce. 2022. "Do Agrivoltaics Improve Public Support for Solar? A Survey on Perceptions, Preferences, and Priorities." Green Technology, Resilience, and Statainability 2 (1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44173-022-00007-x. Peacock, Bella. 2021. i ff rid Data Center Powered Exclusively by PV in Australia." PV Magazine International. https://www.pv-magazine.com/2021 /09/ 15/off-grid-data-center- powered-exc l usive ly-by-pv-in-austral ia/. Richardson, Jesse, Peggy Kirk Hall, and Whitney Morgan. 2022. "Land Use Conflicts Between Wind and Solar Renewable Energy and Agricultural Uses." WVU College of Law Research Paper No. 2022-004, https://ssrn.com/abstract=4042235. Riley, Evan, and Scott Olson. 2011. "A Study of the Hazardous Glare Potential to Aviators from Utility -Scale Flat -Plate Photovoltaic Systems," lSRN Renewable Energy 2011: 1-6. https://doi.org/10.5402/2011/651857. Sadoti, Giancarlo, Miranda E. Gray, Matthew L. Farnsworth, and Brett G. Dickson. 2017. *Discriminating Patterns and Drivers of Multiscale Movement in Herp fauna: The Dynamic and Changing Environment of the Mojave Desert Tortoise." Ecology Evolution 7 (17): 7010-22. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3235. Sandfire. 2024. "Renewable Energy." Accessed March 18, 2024. https://www.sandfire.com.au/sustainabi 1 ity/esg-framework/cl imate-change/renewable-energy/. Schoenberg, Shirt 2020. "Marijuana Businesses Find Ways to Be Environmentally Friendly." Mass Live, Accessed February 9, 2024. https://www.masslive.com/news/2020/01 /growing-off- the-grid-marij uana-businesses-1 ike-solar-therapeutics-find-ways-to-be-environmentally- friendly.html. Schr*ter, Iris, Niels Pfittschneide, and Marcus I iergenthaler. 2023. "Visual Perception and Acceptance Of Agrivoltaic In An Eye- Tracking Experiment In Germany." International Jour'' on Food System Dynamics 101-15. hup://dx.doi.org/10.18461/pfsd.2023.2309 SETA. 2013. "Development Timeline for Utility -Scale Solar Power Plant." Accessed February S, 2024. https://www.seia.org/research-resources/development-timeline-utility-scale-solar power - plant. Sharpe, Kirstcn, Brad Hens, Eric Buchanan, and Michael Reese. 2021. "Evaluation of Solar Photovoltaic Systems to Shade Cows in a Pasture -Based DairyDainr Herd." Jourof Dafry Science 104 (3): 2794-2806. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2020-18821. 45 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at w w w.nrel.gov/publications. Si, Yutong, and Jennie C. Stephens. 2021. "Energy Justice Through Solar: Constructing and Engaging Low -Income Households." Frostders in Sustainabk Cities 3 (April). https://doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2021.632020. Sida, Cristian. 2023 "Mesa County Commissioners Approve Proposed Solar Panel Farm, Leaving Many Landowners Upset." KKCO 11 News. Accessed Feb. 8, 2024. https://www.kkcollnews.com/2023/1 I /15/mesa-county-commissioners-approve-proposed-solar- panel-farm-leav ing-many-landowners-upset'. SolarGen. 2022. "SolarGen's New 150 -Acre Solar Farm in Grand Junction." CCD Magazine. Accessed March 18, 2024. https://ccdmag.com/project-updates/solargen-solar-farm-grand- junction/. SolSmart. 2023. "Introducing SolSmart." Accessed November 21, 2023. • ,/sotsmart-solsrt� State of Oregon. 2024. "Energy Facilities & Safety is Energy Facility Siting." Accessed February 9, 2024. https://www.oregon.gov/energy/facilities-safety/Pages/default.aspx. Sturchio, Matthew A., Jordan Macknick, , reg A. Barron -Gafford, Anping Chen, Cavin Alderfcr, Kathleen V. Condon, Olivia L Hajek, et al. 2022. "Grassland Productivity Responds Unexpectedly to Dynamic Light and Soil Water Environments Induced by Photovoltaic Arrays." Ecosphere 13 (12). https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.4334. Sungu, Minder inder Singh. 2011. "Growing Energy: Amending the Williamson Act to Protect Prime Farmland and Support California's Solar Energy Future." San Joaquin 4gr1c. L Rev. 21(321). https://www.sjcl.edu/images/stories/sjalrivolumes/V21N 1 C 11.pdf. The Western Way. 2022. "A Tale of Two Counties: The Fiscal Impacts of Pro -Growth Renewable Energy Policies at the Local Level." Accessed January 22, 2024. https://static l .squarespace.com/static/5734c171 b6aa60fb98e9I bf2/t/63a5e6abdfe53e33bb0942b9 /1671816878076/TW W Tale+of+Two+Counties_v2.pdf. Turner, Lucas. 2023a. "Debate over Proposed Solar Farm Continues," The Herald Times, Accessed February 8, 2024. https://www.theheraldtimes.com/debate-over-proposed-solar-farm- continues/rio-blanco-county/. Turner, Niki. 2023b. "County Beat: Moratorium on New Wind/Solar Projects Approved," The Herald Times," Accessed February 8, 2024. https://www.theheraldtimes.com/county-beat- moratorium-on-new-wind-solar-projects-approved/rio-blanco-county/. Tuttle, Regan. 2023. "County Approves 6 -Month Moratorium on Solar, Major Utili ► Projects." Telluride Daily Planet. Access Fe rry g, 2024. https://www.telluridenews.com/norwood post/article 28e 1 c4f4-0001-1 1 ee-ab6a- 93892eb32d60.htm 1. U.S. Department of Enter. 2021. Solar Futures Study. https://www.energy.gov/sites/defau It/ti les/2021-09/Solar%20Futures%20Study.pdf. 46 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nreLgov/publi tions. U.S. Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service (USDA NASS). 2022. "Land Values: 2022 Summary." 1949-1867. Accessed January 8, 2024. https://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/lodaysReports/reports/1and0822 .pd ii . 2021. "Colorado Annual Bulletin, 2021." 2021. Accessed December 12, 2023. https://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics by State/Colorado/Publications/Annual_ Statistical Bulleti n/Bulletin202I .pdf. 2017. Census of Agriculture. www.nass.usda.gov/AgCensus. Vickerman, Lam. 2022. "Sustainable Collaboration: Agrivoltaics at Chatfield Farms." Accessed December 8, 2023. https://www.botanicgardens.org/blog/sustainable-collaboration-agrivoltaics- chatfield-farms. Weselek, Axel, Andrea Ehmann, Sabine Zikeli, Iris Lewandowski, Stephan Schindele, and Peter HOg'. 2019. "Agrophotovoltaic Systems: Applications, Challenges, and Opportunities_ A Review." Agronomy r Sustainabk Development 39 (4). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-019- 0581-3. willocka„ Brecht, Thomas Rehr, Cu Lavaert,, Bert lierteleer, Bram Van Ike Poel, and Jan Cappello. 2024. "Design and Evaluation of an Agrivoltaic System for a Pear Orchard." Applied Energy333 (January): 122166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j .apenergy.2023.122166. Witowski, Frank M. 2022. "Garnet Mesa Solar Farm Gets Green Light." Montrose Daibit Press. August 29, 2022. https://www.montrosepress.com/garnet-mesa-solar-farm-gets-green- light/article 04a38e 1 e -I dc2-1 1 ed-81 af-ef08c5b 199f4.html. Xcel Energy. 2023. "Lading the Clean Energy Transition Brief_" Accessed November 21, 2023. https://www.xcelenergy.com/staticfiles/xe- responsive/Company/Sustainability%20Re Dort/2022%20SR/Leadin Clean Energy Transition_ SR.pdf. . 2021. "Colorado's Power Pathway: Virtual Project introduction Meeting." Accessed November 20, 2023. https://www.coloradospowerpathway.com/wp- content/uploads/2021 /07/Pathway_ Virtual lntroMtgs_JuneWebsiteFINAL.pdf. 47 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/pubii tions. Appendix A. County Land -Use and Permitting References Table A-1. County Documents Referenced in the Review Results County References Warns :ounty Adams County Colorado. 2023. "Development ndards & Regulations." Accessed April 5, 2023. his:/Ian►gov.ora/ vel ment4tandards regulartions. Alamosa County Alamosa County. 2023. `Land Use & Development.' Accessed November 29, 2023. httos:llalamosaccur .coloradagovfdeaa ents/land-yse r �d-�k Mina/land-use- development. 2020. 'Alarnosa County Land Use & Development Code.' Accessed November 29, 2023. httos://drive.google.contrne14124bDrizpLAB2Lr11 bIMhxFr7 BMQrYTzMa f . �. n.d. "Utility -Scale Solar Quick Reference.' Accessed March 18, 2024. httcs:lldri e. le.corni ileldll rive -A LJ1 fPOL4 icibV3V8PkQF ►l . Arapahoe County Arapahoe County. 2022. `Arapahoe County, Colorado: Land Development Code Accessed April 5, 2023. D l r nttzonino/Land%20[ el ment % Ar untv%2OLC C ORsv% 11- - 2Oboortarks 202302091728444611.pd Archuleta County Archuleta County Colorado. 2023. `Land Use Regulations." Accessed November 29, 2023. ,ht ps:Itw r.arjyleta untv,ora/247/Land-Use-Regulattions. Baca County Baca County Colorado. 2019. 'Land use Letter.' Accessed November 29, 2023. httpsflwww.ba ountyco.,goy _ n019 3/Laand-Lase-Letter1odf. Bent County Bent County Colorado. 2021 ® "Guidelines and Regulations for Areas and Activities of State Interest County of Bent State of Colorado/ Accessed November 29, 2023. httos:ll s3.nevi e. mlreviz nerd ounty/Final% Amgpded' 0Bent 20 unty%20104 1 2ORegulations%0-%206 9-21.pdf. . 2020. "Planning and Zoning Manual." Accessed November 29, 2023. mol . . Boulder County Boulder County Community Planning & Permitting Department. 2023. 'Land UN Code." Accessed April 5, 2023. httos:llassets.bouldercounty.gov p-content/uoloud 017 'lapd- us e -code■ odf. . Broomfield County Municode Library. 2023a. `The City and County of Broomfield Municipal Code.' Accessed November 29, 2023. https:11library.municode.c rrtl 1broomffeldf d municipal code. Chore County Chaffee County. 2023. "Chaffee County Land Use Code.' Accessed November 29, 2023. httos:livwvw lanni c- n zgnino-Ind-Use- a--�-r- 2012. "1041 Regulation.' Accessed November 29, 2023. httus://www.co.cleare cr.ca.0 i l /PrIntable 1 1 Rlations?bidId=f Cheyenne County, Colorado. 2022. "Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordnance: e: Cheyenne Accessed November 29, 2023. County h#t :l�Iwr r. .chevenne.co us/countydeoartment vning Comprehensive Plan and Zo ping Ordinance(202'2) . odf. 48 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at w ww4 nrel.gov/publicattions. County References Clear Creek Clear 3tm2!r' Creek Coup Zoning Regulns. CCle co s/Docu nnteriNt 7��- * e _ in R =w, - "big dd=. November Conejos County Conejos. County. 2005. `Conejos County Land Use Code." Accessed November 30, 2023. httosliconeioscounty4c4olorado. v/site onelb /co want la nd use.. cod 'A f., Costllla County Costtlla County. 2023. "Planning & Zoning Resources.' Accessed July 7, 2023. htta:llcostilla untv.colorado. video nnings-zonin l i-roninow- r+ererounc n* 2013. "Costilla County Land Use Code, Division 1 Zoning.' Accessed July 7, 2023. orntlend.t rr si builder+u nn en#I$r a ui rliluelland uecode 201 Crowley County, 2013. 'Crowley County Planning and Zoning Manual." Accessed Crowley November 30, 2023. County httes'1cr unty.colorado. lsitea raw u nly1fll Planninn nd 20ZZoning 20Manual Custer County Delta County 3. • Custer County, 2023. 'Planning and Zoning.' Accessed April 5, 2023. httos:rnAwAf.custerectiliiveco.novioz. �-. 2022. "Custer County Zoning Resolution." Accessed April 5, 2023. httos:llwww.custercounty- .ot l fil+esluod182bgd1 01080 42 Delta County Colored°. 2023. 'Energy.' Accessed November 30, 2023. ht :M ,delta untyco.gov 7/Enerev. 2021. 'Delta County Land Use Code." Accessed November 30, 2023. bttjjrnvw.deftacountvco.gov/Docu mentCenter l h124 I -and- e -Code --4 �5- 2021?bi dld=. -�-�. 2018. 'Delta County Master Plan.° Accessed November 30, 2023. httos:I/ mw.delta untyco.aov/DocumentCenter lew/5613iDlia-Ceuta-M er-Plan. Delta County Board of Commissioners. 2022. 'Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Delta, State of Co[ radoi `° Delta County Citizen Report, Accessed February 2, 2024. h1 :l ww.citizenreoortinfohvp- o tluoloadsl2�8 lair-reriurr odf. Denver County City and County of Denver. 2023a. "Community Planning & Development Building Permit Policy: Commercial Solar Photovoltaic (PSI) Energy Systems Permits." Accessed November 301, 2023. saldenvemov.o iiiesiaese ►publiclvl°il u i l_ Ini t -and- davreloomentldocume nts/dalbuild ing-c 51b+aliciesaO23-n 390. DOf. ebb—. 2023b. 'Community Planning & Development Building Permit Policy: Residential Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Energy Systems Permits.' Accessed November 30, 2023. iitt :ilwww.denvergov.o lesiaasetsicubl vl ommyniLv-olannino nd- de ioomentl ume�ntsldslbuilding-ocde liciesldreer'324 2023-nec.Ddf. 2023c. `Comprehensive Plan 2040.' Accessed November 30, 2023, h :ll ar.denverggv, nm entl e►nciee-Deoa nts-C r en s- Depa a fi Dir rviConnmuni aP riino-arm elooment/PlanninglComorsehensive-Plan4 0. 2023d. 'Denver Zoning Code.' Accessed November 30, 2023. :if nninaeand- dqyIooui.ent/docu rnents/zonl paldonvor-zon I na- lel molet) denver zoning code.odf. 49 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.govfpublicationt County References Dolores County Douglas County Eagle County Dolores County. 2012. "Dolores County Development and Land Use Regulations.' Accessed July 12, 2023, h :// I n ocum Use-Regu lation s, p4f. Douglas County, Colorado. 2023. `Zoning Resolutions' Accessed July 7, 2023. httosfilovw.cloysips.causiolanninardeveloomentereviewareoulationtrathoti witgislEt2t Eagle County, 2023. "Land Use Regulations." Accessed April 27, 2023. https• iwww Co rtme c ommuni ev lo m n d user lations.eho#outer-1841. r El Paso County Municode Library. 2023b. "El Paso County Land Development Code." Accessed July 13, 2023. https iillbrpry, municode,comicoiel ono county/codes/land �nlopment code?nodeldM PXBGUF EARACSTIN H . Elbert County Elbert County. 2022. 'Elbert County Zoning Regulations Article WII." Accessed November 30, 20236 httos:i elbertcountr-co. / gcurnent nterllliieNw/2l1 'EC -1 1 - Revised -09142022. 2016. 'Adoption of Elbert County Zoning Regulations Amendment #4.' Accessed November 30, 2023. htt ,(/.+elbertcounty-co.ov/Docum+ent nterNiewl1254 nin Roauiations AmondmeNnt-4-PDF. Fremont Fremont County, 2020. 'Fremont County, Colorado Zoning Resolution," Accessed D November 30, 2023. httos://www.fremontco_acomifilesiolannina-and- CountY n``i .clesioiannina-and- jonin zoni I n. f. Garfield County Garfield coup y 2020. "Solar Permitting Requirements in Garfield County.' Accessed November 30, 2023. hittas;unity- develop_ =11_ i lesuccoisIte s/ 12/ otar-oprnnittlna-reauirer ent ch list-202O.oif. 2013. "Land Use and Development code." Accessed November 30, 2023. htl :/�. r ld-c ounbi.co i ccrlroun -dey r sit 12/LLJD ! p e-05a1_1.2t . Gilpin County Gilpin County. 2021. *Zoning Regulations, Final." Accessed January 29, 2024. Itittos://olloincquntvorasshanwoint.co iloincqunt r.shareooint.+aoMrn, i es� „ ,a it hared 0 curve Websiite uni t+0Deve►iopment FPlopnnina 0" '° _ nino%2F2 ni no 0$eaulati ons1%2Ep Jf&oar+ent=' Fsites F G trite 2FShared%20[ uments° FGenena I F ommunItri620 iogmst FPlanninq%20° 2 rptg =trued=1. Grand County Grand County. 2022. "Grand County Zoning Regulations." Accessed November 30, 2023. his:/ .ro.+arandeco.0 ocumentConterNievr/ fining-Regulr i ons?bidith. Gunnison Gunnison county, 2023. 'Land Use Change Permits.' Accessed November 30, 2023. httas �vr.ounniso►ncounty.orifll anodes ja& P'+armits#:County as:tMer�ct= 'here 0is'°Xaf20no 2 oninin 2 nn • Hinsdale County ---... 2023c. PlanningCommission.* Accessed November 30, 2023. htttas:/ hins+daleco •coloradp.oa rlDianninission-4, �. 2023d. "Zoning & Planning Regulations." Accessed November 301 2023. ht ilti i nsdalecaunty. lorado. govlme+diarl2011. 2006. "Lake City & Hinsdale County Community Plan.' Accessed November 30, 2023. 50 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at w w v.nretgov/publicabions. County References I lesid me mmunity 20P1 an%20adooted.. Huerfano County. 2023a. "Land Use.'' Accessed No mber 30, 2023. Huerfano L httos://h uerfa t. do. _ deoadmcnts/land-use. County— 2023b. "Land Use Regulations.' Accessed November 30, 2023. httos:RRdrive.google. 4 riveifolOrsil haCSASBYYF83Vbf4aUFKONWdt6nG9ryks Jackson County Jackson County, Colorado. 2022. "Zoning Resolution.' Accessed July 5, 2023. Jefferson County. 2022. 'Zoning Resolution.' Accessed November 30, 2023. I ' r.iMefbo.ussDocumerrtCenter 1182 anina-Resolution d -I mber- Jerson 6-2022.PDF Idids . County 2021. "Section 18 - Alternate Energy Resources.' Accessed November 30, 2023. httcs:l�r.ieli .usiD! cumunrityrt r r 2 8�ction-'1 rnat+ Enemy-Resources- MF? , idld=. County Kiowa County. 2023. "reprehensive Plan, Zoning Resolution." Accessed November 30, 2023. ihtt el/drive. Kit Carson County. 2023a. "Kit Carson County Land Use Code." Accessed November 30, 2023. ht s://kit rsancouni ►.co1or o.a: • Inikicarsoncour tIfilesidooumer i parson rth%20229 202023.odf. Kit Carson —. 2023b. `Kit Carson County Land Use Permit Application.' Accessed November 30t County 2023. httcs:I/kitcarsoncountv.colorado. lsit esft oncoun ie cu r j C%20- %2'Land P-rrn 3%29 ----W-�. 2000. "kit Carson County Comprehensive Plan.' Accessed November 30, 2023. hftos://kitomson •. • unty loradn.00v/site&kitcarsoncounty/files/2018- 08/landuse 2000k r ♦ • orehensiv ep an,pit La Plate County La Raba County Colorado. 2015. "La Plata CountyCode.* Accessed March 18, 2024. http : /online.enc lus. m! sila-olata-d o dorviewer.a x. La Plata County Colorado. 2017. °Compr+ehens ve Plan.' Accessed March 15, 2024. https://0 591ii1es,r izap) flIanningl2017 20Comorahen vde 20PIan.odf. Lake County Lake County. 2023. 'Land Development Oxle Accessed November 30, 2023. httcs:f .Iak untvoo.com/200/LanddsDevelooment wode. Latimer County Lorimer County,. 2021, "Land Use Code." Amami November 30, 2023 https:lMw'w.Iorimer.o 'sltd '�d 021/Iarimer luc addootiondraft final 1. df. Las Animas County Las Animas County. n.d. "Land Use Regulations." Accented November 30, 2023. • D i . do CO ov fill II Or — n.d. "Las Animas County Submittal Requirements for Special Use Permit.' Accessed November 30, 2023. https://Iasanlr scaunty Colorado. /sitesilasani untvfil documen#s/suo submittal reauirements.odf. Lincoln County Lincoln County. 2023. 'County Land Use.' Accessed November 30o 2023. Jflps://liiqcc1ncourity.cplorado.gov/cou ntyelandulorado. ovil -la druse. 51 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.ga+r/publitatlons. County References Logan County Logan County. 2023. "Resolution? Accessed November 30, 2023. https ://logancounty.colorado.gov/sites/logancounty/files/2023- 27%20Amending%20Logan%20County%20Zoning%20Resolution%2obv%20Adoption%20 of%20Regulations%20for%20lssuance%20of%20Permits%2afor%20Sola r%20Energy%20 Facilities%20in%20Unincorporated%20Logan%20County.pdf. . 2019. "Zoning Resolution." Accessed November 30, 2023. hops://logancounty.colorado.gov/s itesil ogancounty/files/Zoning%20Regulations%2 0%2 $Updated%20August%202019%29.pdf. Mesa County Mesa County. 2024. "Commissioners Approve Resolution Imposing a Temporary Moratorium on the Submission, Acceptance, Processing, and Approval of Any New Land Use or Business That Engages or Operates as a Commercial Solar Farm," January 11, 2024. Accessed January 18, 2024. https://www.mesacounty.us/news/commissioners/commissioners-approve-resolution- imposing-temporary-moratorium-submission. . 2020. "2020 Land Development Code? Accessed November 30, 2023. https://www. mesacounty. us/sites/default/files/2023- 06/Land%20Development%20Code%20-2020%20%28Amended%2006-14-23%29.pdf. Mineral County. 2023. zoning Regulations of Mineral County." Accessed November 30, Mineral 2023 County https Jim ineralcounty.colorado. gov/sites/mineralcounty/files/Mineral%20County%20Zoning %20Regulatians%202023%20edited%20revision 0.pdf. Moffat County Moffat County. 2023. "Zoning Districts." Accessed November 30, 2023. https://moffatcounty.colorado.gov/government/departments/planning-deoartment/zoning- districts. Montezuma Montezuma County. 2020. "The Montezuma County Land Use Code." Accessed November County 30, 2023. https://montezumacounty.orq/wp-content/uploads/2020/11 /LAND-USE-CODE- Resolution-21-2020-11.17.2020.pdf. Montrose County Montrose County. 2022a. "Resolution of the Montrose County Board of County Commissioners Amending the Montrose County Zoning Resolution." Accessed November 30, 2023. https:/Iwww.montrosecoun.net/DocumentCenterNiew/17270/Zoning- Req u lations-and-Resol ution. . 2022b. "Resolution No. 71." October 20, 2022. Accessed February 5, 2024. https://www.montrosecounty.net/DocumentCenterNiew/18328/Resolution-71-2022- Moratorium-on-Applications-for-Power-Generation-Facilities. Morgan County Morgan County. 2023. "Zoning Regulations? Accessed November 30, 2023. https://morgancounty.coloradosoov/sites/moroancounty/filesidocuments/Zonino%20Reoulat ions%20-%20012323. pdf. Otero County Otero County. 2020. "Guidelines and Regulations for Areas and Activities of State Interest: 1041 Regulations? Accessed November 30, 2023. https://oterocounty.colorado.gov/sites/oterocounty/files/documents/1041 %20Requlations.od f. . 2013. "Otero County Land Use Code." Accessed November 30, 2023. https://oterocounty.colorado.govisites/oterocounty/f les/documents/Otero%20County%20La nd%20Use%20Code.pdf. pdf. 52 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. County References Ouray Counly Ouray County. 2023. "Land Use Code" Accessed November 30, 2023. httos: iou cou ntvco.ctov1214 se -Code. Park County Park County. 2023. 'Land Use Regulations.' Accessed November 30, 2023. ht s lloarkco.usll89a. Phillips County Phillips County. 2022. 'Section 12: Wind Energy Facility." Accessed November 30, 2023. J :/IDhll auntv1 radorgov s Wphffhi q nd 2CRauietians PhiWog gjavaraignanalgt Pain County Pidcin County. 2023. "County Code.' Accessed November 30, 2023. tittos:llpljkln untv.corn/4 County -Cod. 2020. "Ordinance No 017-2020.' Accessed July 10, 2023. httas:llaitkincounty.corriDocument nterNiew rt545lboccord0172020. Prowers County Prowers County. n.d. "1041 Application.' Accessed November 30, 2023. J'ittosf/cjpsjfiles. on ▪ n.d. 'Solar Regulations.' Accessed November 30, 2023. httosJlwww.gro rsoounter.n Pr rs ountvi62OSo r' 2i ul tiens' 20DF T '205.docx. • 2022. "Resolution No. 20►22-21.' Accessed November 30, 2023. httos://cms1 films, revize.comarprovienicourthilLand%2Qtaise%2OReauhdions%20Arnendment Oi lui i . 2017. "Guidelines and Repulsions for Areas and Activities of State Interest County of Mtwara State of Colorado.' Accessed March 18, 2023. rn nt ce BANAL 2008. 'Prrrers County Zoning Regulations.' Accessed November 30, 2023. httpsficmsitiles.reyizercorniorowerscouotyikogya center/L andUserloning 2 eoula$i ans'201 2,-18.ndf. Pueblo County Rio Blanco county Rio Grande County Routt County Sagueche County Pueblo County. 2023. 'Title 17 - Land Use. Accessed April 5, 2023. ■ eble. elannina-an . a 2022. "Pueblo County Code Solar Regulation Amendments.' Accessed April 8, 2023. :1'oountv.au+ebl+o,or olannir~nand-d locment ouQblo-count ® ersoiar- reoulation-amendments. Rio Blanco County. 2023. "Planning Division.' Accessed September 7, 2023. Jittps i trtc.0 '314/Plannina. Rio Grande County. 2023. `Rio Grande County Land Use," Accessed November 30, 2023. https:J nw iogran untv.orgiland-use. Route County. 2011. `Zoning Regulations." Accessed June 20, 2023. J',ttosiiWww.co. mutco..psD umep = rd /14 on ing-Regulations. Saguache County. 2022. 'Saguache County Land Development Code.' Accessed November 30, 2023. IMaaldrive.ac le.+ fil&djl c _ - FbREN154mInmkajvitCB3oUgiview. 2020. "1041 Resolution No. 2020.' Accessed November 30, 2023. httos:!!drive. , . letc_ornifileidilLmHmuilDd-zcoRzaGLIoCIZOKKVIONboVview0 53 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nreLgov/publications. County References San Juan San Juan County. 2020. "Zoning ning and Land Use Reguiation�� Accessed November 30, Spun 2023, h1 :llsanjuancouygy, rlaltes/ pluar un rni� 0-O4/3-4- 17 land us s *. e -,searchable comoressed.odt, San Miguel San Miguel County. 2023. 'San Miguel County Land Use Code.' Accessed November 30, M , V•La Cou n - Sedgerwick County Sedgwick County. 2022. 'Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance VAnd and Solar Amendment? Accessed November 30, 2023. listedgwielccountytcolpraw esov its 'Occ ntvffilesidocumentstrivind solar rag uie_tiortsaat • 2003. 'Zoning Rulatons." Accessed November 30, 2023. h . !'aed r t . t dotaovM t s'ada t unty /file ni.r nul lions f. Summit Summit County, 2023. "Summit County Land Use & Development Code.' Accessed May County 25, 2023. hone:/lwww.surnmi/2551'Land-Us I anent e. Teller County Teller County. 2023a. 'Land Use Regulations.' Accessed Novernber 30, 2023. h ailiwvwe.teller unty.gc124 4Land-Use- ula ns. --�. 2023b. 'Plans & Regulations? Accessed November 30, 2023. httosilwvnttellercounty.govil RiPlansats. Washington County. 2002. "Use By Special Review Application for Solar Power Production Facility. Accessed November 30, 2023. Washington ht# :/Miashins r aur,calorada.gor/sitesAyashingtoncour �iIe&documer lar%ZQ o County wer° r 1icatian z , . 2002. 'Weshingb3n County Master Plan." Accessed November 30, 2023. https://washinatoncounty.coloradoar%20Pktn.pdf. Weld County Municode Lbrary. 2023c, `veld County Charter and County Code; aivlsion 4 - Uses by Special Review.'' Accessed April 5, 2023. - m 23ZO _ARTNPRPt Pff4USSPRI. --�--. 2023d. 'Weld County Charter and County Code; Sec. 23-4455. Submittal requirements and standards for Solar Energy Facilities less than five (5) Acres.' Accessed April 5, 2023. �lli .m cod=?rood = id= H DI'PERE • EIVF i - ' Fl 465SURESTSCENFAIELFISACSACSEI Yuma Yuma County. 2020, 'Yuma County Land Use Code. AccessedJune 6, 2023. County ittpsifyumacounty.nctiverscontent/uoloads o21 101"1.. �d-Ll� Se.. ". 0 54 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at wry►, nreigov/publlcations. Appendix Be Solar Definitions by County Table Sal quotes each county's solar definitions, which are presented in the review results in Section 4.1. Definitions include solar -specific definitions as well as definitions applied more broadly to public utilities and/or power plants. Definitions are gathered from the references listed for each county in Appendix A. Table a-1. Solar Siting Definidons by County County Solar Definitions Adams County Solar Energy System. Any device or structural design feature whose primary purpose is to provide for the collection, storage, or distribution of solar energy for space heating, space cooling, electricity generation, or water heating. Solar Energy System, Small Scale. Solar Energy Systems that encompass less than 35 acres of surface area. Solar Energy System, Medium Scale. Solar Energy Systems that encompass greater than 35 and less than 320 acres of surface area Solar Enemy System, Large Scale, Solar Energy Systems that encompass 320 acres or more of surface area. Alamosa County Utility -Scale Solar Facility in Allan County is defined as either covering more than 5 acres or producing mom than 10 megawatts. Power Plant. Any electrical energy generating facility which either utilizes more than 5 acres of land regardless of its generating capacity, or any electrical enemy generating facility with a generating capacity of greater than or equal to 10 mega or more, regardless of how much acreage Is utilized, and any facilities appurtenant thereto, or any addition thereto Increasing the existing design capacity of the facility by a combined 10 megawatts or more. Solar panel field. An experimental, demonstrational, or commercial facility wing energy to produce other forms of energy, including but not limited to: equipment used to capture solar energy (e.g., photoelectric panels, mire; equipment that converts solar power to other power, including electrical generators; ancillary and associated equipment, including water treatment plants, power lines, substations, coating equipment and any other equipment or facility necessary for the successful operation of the facility, Utility, minor. All utility facilities not considered major, including, but not limited to neighborhood -serving facilities such as pump stations, to y ' one each-trges, lift stations, electric su g«t ration: and storm water detention facilities, or any similar use. Utility, major. A large-scale utility such as electrical generation plant; solar or wind energy farms; experimental, demonstration or commertial energy generation facilities Arapahoe County Small Solar System Facility or Facilities. A definable area where an Applicant has disturbed or intends to disturb the land surface in order to locate a solar power generating facility designed to produce electricity with a maximum capacity of 5 Megawatts (MWac) alternating current, or MW capacity whichever is greater. A small solar system does not include battery storage equipment of facilities. SOLAR FACILITY OR FACILITIES. Is a ility or facilities that use solar energy to generate electricity through the use of solar panels, racking structures, Inverters, transformers, overhead or underground wiring, and associated roads intended to generate power for a utility, A solar facility or facilities does not include any facility or facilities that exceed two megawatts (2 MIA) In power generation or twenty (20) acres in size. Archuleta County Electric Power Onsite Generation. A typical Accessory Use, electric energy generating facility with capacity of ten (10) kWh [kilowatt-hours] or less, and any appurtenant facilities thereto 55 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nreigov/publications. County Solar Definitions Electric Power Distributed Generation. Any electric energy generating facility with capacity between ten (10) kWh and ten (10) megawatts, and any appurtenant facilities thereto Electric Power Generation Facility. Any electric energy generating facility with capacity of ten (1 0) megawatts or more, and any appurtenant facilities thereto Baca County No relevant definitions present. Bent County No relevant definitions present. Boulder County Large Solar Energy System. A system composed of a solar energy collector which may include an energy storage facility, and components for the transmission and distribution of transformed energy, and which may be used for one or more users...the system has a rated capacity greater than 2 MW but does not meet the Land Use Code definition of Power Plant. Medium Solar Energy System or Solar Garden. A system composed of a solar energy collector which may include an energy storage facility, and components for the transmission and distribution of transformed energy, and which may be used for one or more users... the rated capacity of the system will be at least 500kw but not more than 2 MW. Small Solar Energy System or Solar Garden. A system composed of a solar energy collector which may include an energy storage facility, and components for the transmission and distribution of transformed energy... the system will have a rated capacity of 100 kW or less. Power Plant. An electrical energy generating facility with generating capacity of more than 50 megawatts and any appurtenant facilities. Broomfield County Public Utility. Any person, firm or corporation operating heat, power or light systems, communication systems, water, sewer or scheduled transportation systems, and serving or supplying the public under a franchise granted by the City. Chaffee County Power Plant. A facility that converts one or more energy sources, including but limited to water power, geothermal resources, fossil fuels, nuclear, wind, or solar power into electrical energy or steam, for commercial uses. A power generation plant may also perform either or both of the following: (a) operation of a transmission system that conveys the energy from the generation facility to a power distribution system; (b) operation of a distribution system that conveys energy from the generation facility or the transmission to the final consumers. Solar Energy Device. A device which converts the sun's radiant energy into thermal, chemical, mechanical, or electric energy. Solar Energy System. A system composed of a solar energy collector, an energy storage facility, and components for the distribution of transformed energy, which may be attached to a residence or other structures. Small Scale Renewable Energy System. A renewable energy system including wind, solar, hydro -electric or geothermal sources that are primarily intended to serve the on -site use, but which may be grid -connected Electric Power Generation Facility. Any electric power generating facility and appurtenant facilities with generating capacity of ten (10) megawatts or more Cheyenne County Small. Single residential or small business -scale solar energy conversion system. A system consisting of roof panels, ground -mounted solar arrays, or other solar energy fixtures, and associated control or conversion electronics with a rated capacity of less than 500 kW, occupying no more than 2.5 acres of land, and that will be used to produce utility power to on -site uses. Medium. Distributed solar energy system. Solar electrical power generation that occurs 56 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. County Solar Definitions close to where the power is con su m and is primarily used on site by the system owner. A private on -site solar energy conversion system consisting of many ground -mounted solar arrays in rows or roof panels, and associated control or conversion electronics, ompying more than 2.5 acres and no more than 30 acres of land, and that will be used to produce utility power to on -site uses Large, Utility -scale solar energy conversion system. A system ref nsistrng of many ground - mounted solar arrays In rows, and associated control or conversion electronics and includes substations, MET stations ,, byres, energy sty, a and other buildings and structures accessory to such facility, .occupying more than 30 acres and that will be used to produce utility power to off -site customers. Generative Facility (Commercial). A facility capable of producing electricity by means of gas, oil, steam:, nuclear fuel, waterpower, solar energy, or wind power. Generative Facility (Private), A small facility capable of producing electricity is be used on4ite, as specified in Colorado HS -1160 Solar Energy System. Related equipment that relies upon direct sunlight es an energy source, a substantial purpose of which is to transform solar energy into thermal, mechanical, chemical, or electrical energy, Small Solar Energy System. A solar energy system that is used to generate thermal, mechanical, chemical, or electrical energy accessory to the use(s) on the same parcels) of land. It may be free-standing, or attached to an emoting permitted structure. Clear Creek Distributed Solar Energy System. A solar energy system that is used to generate thermal, county mechanical, chemical, or electrical energy that is used to produce energy for more than one (1) user. Such systems may be fire -standing, or attached to an existing permed structure. Utility Scale Solar Energy Facility. A power plant that directly converts solar energy into usable theme, mechanical, or electrical energy, Including such devises as solar energy systems and supporting structures and such directly connected equipment as generators, alternators, inverters, batteries and associated control equipment Conejos County Major Electrical or Natural Gas Facilities. Major electrical or natural gas fables include one or more of the following: 1... Electrical generating facilities. 2. Substations used for switching, regulating, transforming, or otherwise modifying the characteristics of electricity. 3. Transmission lines operated at a nominal voltage of sixty-nine thousand volts or greater. 4. Structures and equipment mated with such electrical generating tacit, substations, or transmission lines. 6. Structures and equipment utilized for the local distribution of natural gas service including, but not limited to, compressors, gas mains, and gas laterals. (Considers solar plants of the community solar garden size and larger to be Major Electrical Facilities) Major Facility of a Public or Private Utility,. My electric transmission lines, power plants, or substations of electric utilities; major gas regulator stations, transmission and gathering o tills pipelines, and storage areas of utilities providing natural gas or petroleum derivatives; and County their appurtenant facilities. Major electrical or natural gas facilities include one or more of the following: 1. Electrical generating facilities, including wind and solar facilities 1...1 rly County Public Utility and Public Service Structures. Private energy genon structures, including wind, solar, nu r, coal, natural gas, and geo-thermal facilities, and all rtgoenary snubs aloe . as regulator Mations, communications equipment and buildings, pumping gation land reaexeCtirk. transmission lines and pipelines* 57 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.ncel.govlpublications. County Solar Definitions Solar Ate. The ability to receive sunlight across real property. Solar Energy Device. A device which converts the sun's radiant energy into thermal, chemical, mechanical, or electrical energy. Solar Energy System. A system comprised of a solar energy collector, an energy storage facility and components for the distribution of transformed energy, which may be attached to a residence or other structures Solar Panels, Solar Arrays (Boyar Energy). A device consisting of solar cells that convert light into electricity (panel), or an electrical device consisting of a large array of connected solar cells (arrays) Custer County No relevant definitions present. Renewable Energy Facility. Commercial facility for the production of more than 100 kW of renewable energy (e.g., solar, wind, or geothermal). Renewable energy facilities include Delta County necessary transmission. The phrase °reneewable energy facility' does not include the generation of renewable energy to cover the energy demands of the principal land use, even lithe demands exceed 100 kW. Denver County Major impact utility. including solar generating stations with a gross site area of 10,000 square feet or greater (SIC group 4911) Minor impact utility. Above -grade utilities of less than 10,000 square feet of gross site area that have a located impact on surrounding properties and are necessary to provide essential sere s, including 4911 Electric services Duns County Public or private tfailities7 major facilities and utility lines. Utilities Include suppliers of water, electric, natural and other gases, petroleum products of any kind, telephone communication and television broadcasts. Utility - Major Facility: Power Plant. Any electrical energy generating facility with an energy generation capacity of 50 megawatts or more, and Appurtenance(s); Douglas Utility Service Facility. Any Neighborhood Substation, Personal'Melees Communication County Facility, Water Storage/Treatment Facility: • Neighborhood Substation: Any facility used for the purpose of reducing voltages to levels of 115 kV. or less, for distribution to individual users; Ancillary Solar Energy System. Any Solar Energy System which purpose is to provide up to 120% of the energy to slipped other structures and/or on -site uses contained upon a subject property. Such systems are incidental to other primary us s) on the property and may be structure -integrated ed or ground mounted_ Solar Energy System,. A system of solar collectors and associated equipment to provide for the collection, conversion, storage, and transmission of radiant energy from the sun for Eagle County electricity generation, space heating, space cooling or water heating. Solar Farm. Parcel or land area primarily utilized as a Ground -mounted Solar Energy Systems Ground -Mounted Solar Energy System. A Solar Energy System which is freestanding and constructed upon a natural and/or improved surface, including but not limited to p w : metal mounted collects, tracking devices, including associated infrastructure and site . impravem' nt El Paso County Solar Ervergy Generation Facsilityt. A large-scale electrical energy generation facility with a minimum energy generation capacity of 500 kilowatts typically consisting of photovoltaic panels, heliostats (mirrors), collection towels), turb►ine(s),a colic lines, electrical substation(s), transmission line(s), and other appoacant faolities. -- 58 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. County Solar Definitions Energy Generation Facilities. An electrical energy generating facility with generating capacity of less than 50 megawatts for commercial delivery and any appurtenant fadlitiea. Elbert County Solar Power Plant The entire exterior or perimeter envelope, or outermost boundary for a solar power plant facility, to include all infrastnacture and equipments including exterior fencing Soler Energy System, Accessory, Facilities are generally generating electricity from sunlight primarily to reduce onsite consumption of utility power for residential or agricultural applications Solar Energy System, Small Commercial. Facilities are generally generating electricity from sunlight primarily to reduce onsite consumption of utility power for commercial, and industrial applications Fremont County No relevant definitions print. Garfield County Solar Enemy System, Accessory. A device and/or system that has a combined name plate DC rating of less than 15 kilowatt and includes the equivalent kilowatt measurement of energy for systems other than photovoltaic that converts the sun's radiant energy into thermal, chemical, rrechanical, or electric energy. Solar Energy System, Small. A device and/or systemthat has a combined name plate DC rating of 15 kilowatt to 500 kilowatt and includes the equivalent kilowatt measurement of energy for systems other that photovoltaic that converts the sun's radiant energy into thermal, chemical, mechanical, or electrical energy. Solar Energy System, Large. A device and/or systern that has a combined name plate DC rating of greater than 500 kilowatt and includes the equivalent kilowatt measurement of energy for systems other than photovoltaic thet converts the sun's radiant energy into thermal, chemical, mechanical, or electric energy. Gilpin you SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM, PRINCIPL°° P ' SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM, ACCESSORY Grand County Public Utility. The term public utility includes every common carrier, pipeline corporation, gas corporations, electrical corporation, telephone corporation, water corporation, person, or municipality operating for the purpose of supplying the public for domestic, mechanical, or public uses and every corporation, or person declared by law to be affected with a public ingest Gunnison County Solar -Generated Electricity, The production of electric current in a solid material with the aid of sunlight by direct conversion of light into :electricity by use of phut It is (P' cells Hinsdale County No relevant definitions present Huearno County Solar energy device. A solar collector or other device or a sbuotural design feature of a structure which provides for the collection of sunlight end which comprises part of a system for the conversion of the sun's radiant energy into thermal, chemical, mechanical or electrical energy. Jackson County No relevant definitions present. 13 Baler El)ergY System, Principal and Accessoty, are both listed without a specific definitions 59 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at wrww.nreigovipubiicatiorls. County Solar Definitions Jefferson County Energy Conversion Systems (ECS). includes Solar Energy Conversion Systems (SECS). Solar Energy Conversion System. A system whose purpose is to harvest energy by transforming solar energy into another form of energy or transferring heat from a collector to another medium using mechanical, electrical, or chemical means. Non-commercial ECS. This ECS shall only serve the principal and accessory uses of the property and shall not be designed with the intention of generating excess energy that can be sold to neighboring properties or to the public utility. However, this provision shall not be interpreted to prohibit the sale of excess energy generated from the system back to the public utility Commercial ECS. This ECS shall have the primary purpose of research and development of ECS technology, or the generation of electrical power for sale, resale, or off -site use. Kiowa County Power Plant means (a) any electrical generating facility regardless of power source or generating capacity, including but not limited to wind, solar, or geothermal generating facilities, which utilizes more than five (5) acres of land; (b) any electrical generating facility which has a generating capacity of ten (10) megawatts or more regardless of how much acreage is utilized; and (c) any addition to, or modification of, any existing electrical generating facility which addition or modification has the effect of increasing the existing design capacity of the facility by a combined ten (10) megawatts or more Kit Carson County Solar Energy Facility. An electricity generating facility consisting of one or more solar panels under common ownership or operating control, and includes substations, cables/wires and other buildings accessory to such facility, whose main purpose is to supply electricity to off -site customer(s) with equal to or greater than 100 kilowatts in total nameplate capacity. La Plata County Solar Energy Facility. Those solar energy facilities defined in C.R.S. § 39-4-101 or any solar energy facility utilizing more than five (5) acres of land regardless of generating capacity. Power Plant. Any solar energy facility or wind energy facility which either utilizes more than five (5) acres of land regardless of its generating capacity, or any solar or wind electrical energy generating facility with a generating capacity in excess of two (2) megawatts, regardless of how much acreage is utilized and any appurtenant facilities thereto, or any addition or series of additions thereto increasing the existing design capacity of the facility in excess of two (2) megawatts. Lake County Solar Energy Device. A solar collector or other device or design feature of a structure which provides for the collection of sunlight and which comprises part of a system for the conversion of the sun's radiant energy into thermal, chemical, mechanical or electrical energy. Solar Energy Equipment. Items including, but not limited to, solar panels, lines, pumps, batteries, mounting brackets, framing, and foundations used for or intended to be used for the collection of solar energy in connection with a building. Solar energy equipment and its use is accessory to the principal use of the property. Larimer County Small Solar Energy Facility. A facility which is used for the production of electrical energy from energy collected by the sun including solar energy collectors, power generation facilities, facilities for storing and transforming energy, other appurtenant facilities, and any transmission lines, which is developed for the purpose of supplying or distributing electrical energy to users, a customer, or customers. (Note: this could include a solar garden that has a disturbed area of five or fewer acres.) Solar Garden. A community solar garden as defined in section 40-2-127 (2) of the Colorado Revised Statues [sic] Power plant. A facility designed, constructed and operated to generate electric power by steam, wind, solar, water or other means. 60 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications: County Solar Definitions Solar Energy System. A system which is used for the production of electrical energy from energy collected by the sun including solar energy collectors, power generation facilities, facilities for storing and transforming energy, and any other appurtenant facilities, which is designed to supply power to principal use(s) on the lot. Las Animas County Las Animas uses its wind farm regulations to regulate solar Small wind energy system. A wind energy conversion system consisting of a wind turbine, a tower and associated control or conversion electronics, which has a rated capacity of not more than one hundred (100) kW and which is intended to primarily reduce on -site consumption of utility power Wind farm. A single wind -driven machine or a collection of wind -driven machines or turbines that convert wind energy into electrical power for the primary purpose of sale, resale or offsite use Solar energy device. A solar collector or other device or a structural design feature of a structure which provides for the collection of sunlight and which comprises part of a system for the conversion of the sun's radiant energy into thermal, chemical, mechanical or electrical energy Lincoln County Community solar garden. A solar electric generation facility with a nameplate rating of two megawatts (2 MWDC) or less that is located in or near a community served by a qualifying retail utility where the beneficial use of the electricity generated by the facility belongs to the subscribers to the community solar garden. There shall be at least ten subscribers. The owner of the community solar garden may be the qualifying retail utility or any other for-profit or nonprofit entity or organization, including a subscriber organization that contracts to sell the output from the community solar garden to the qualifying retail utility. A community solar garden shall be deemed to be "located on the site of customer facilities. Small scale solar. Development systems with a 50 kWDC generation capacity or less serving a single user Large scale solar facility. A system with a nameplate rating of greater than two megawatts, Direct Current (2 MWDC) generation capacity providing power to one or more users, which may include components for the transmission and distribution of energy Logan County Solar Energy Facility. An electricity generating facility consisting of one or more solar panels under common ownership or operating control, and includes substations, cables/wires and other buildings accessory to such facility, whose main purpose is to supply electricity to off -site customer(s) with equal to or greater than 100 kilowatts in total nameplate capacity. Mesa County Private Utility. A business or service which is engaged in regularly supplying the public with some commodity or service which is of public consequences and need, such as electricity, gas, transportation or communication Mineral County Alternative Energy System. a form of energy derived from a natural source, and includes all but not limited to, solar, wind and hydro power. Moffat County Solar Collector. For the purpose of this Resolution; Solar collector, heat pump, storage facilities and distribution components for space heating and cooling and water heating, whether attached or unattached to a structure 61 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. County Solar Definitions Montezuma County No relevant definitions present. Montrose County Solar Energy Facility. A generation facility which uses solar energy and the required components to distribute the transformed solar energy. Power Generation. An electrical generating facility for the purpose of generating power for public use. This does not include alternative onsite energy generation (distributed solar is included In this category) Morgan County Agrivoltaic Systems. A system designe.d for the simultaneous use of areas of land for both ground -mounted solar collectors and agriculture. Solar Collector A photovoltalc (PV) panel, array of panels or other solar energy device, the primary purpose of which is to provide for the collection, inversion, steerage, and distribution of solar energy for electricity generation, space heating, space cooling, or water heating. mound -mounted solar collector includes agrnitaic systems and parking canopy solar systems when installed on surface parking lots. Building -mounted solar collector includes parking canopy solar systems when installed on the roof of a parking garage. Solar Energy Device., A device which converts the sun's radiant energy into thermal, chemical, mechanical or electric anew. Solar Energy System. A system composed of a solar energy collector, an energy storage facility and components for the distribution of transformed energy, which may be attached to a residence or other structures, Solar Panels, Solar Arrays (Solar Energy). A device consisting of solar cells that convert oterno you light into electricity (panel), or an electrical device consisting of a large array of connected solar cells a s) � �Y "pow plant". means any electrical energy generating facility which either utilizes more than five (5) acres of land regardless of its generating capacity, or any electrical energy generating facility with a generating deity of greater than or equal to ten (10) megawatts or more, regardless of how much acreage is utilized, and any facilities appurtenant thereto, or any addition thereto increasing the exiting design city of the facility by a combined ten (10) megawatts or more. Ouray Public Utility. Transmission, generation and storage and treatment facilities of providers of County electrical, water, gas, and other like services. Park County Small Solar Energy System Equipment that converts solar energy into electrical energy solely for consumption by a lawful use on the lot that the equipment is located on, except that if the lot is connected to a distribution line owned by a utility company excess energy not needed for the lot's primary use may be used by the utility company (i.e. net metering) Utility Facility, Major. An underground, surface or overhead structure or facility or an area of land used to generate, store, transrnf, distribute or regulate electricity, oil, gas, or water to pump or chemically treat water, sewage or solid waste; or for storm water drainage exceeding one hundred and twenty square feet in area. A major utility facility may include accessories such as poles, wires, mains, drains, vaults, culverts, sewers pipes, signals or pumps. Specifically included as a major utility facility are transmission lines capable of the transmission of electricity more than 115 kilts (KV), water pipelines with a capacity of more than 15 cubic feet per second, and water storage facilities with a capacity of 30,000 gallons or more of water. (Although this definition does not say ft includes solar, any array with distributed energy and built for more than one user is considered a major utility facility according to the senior planner). 62 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nretgovlpubl ` ns. County Solar Definitions Phillips County Solar Energy System, Residential. A single residential or small business -scale solar energy conversion system consisting of roof panels, ground -mounted solar arrays, or other solar energy fixtures, and associated control or conversion electronics with a rated capacity of less than 500 kW, occupying no more than 2.5 acres of land, and that will be used to produce utility power to on -site uses. Solar Energy System, Utility -Scale. A utility -scale solar energy conversion system consisting of many ground -mounted solar arrays in rows, and associated control or conversion electronics, occupying more than 30 acres and that will be used to produce utility power to off -site customers. Solar Energy Collector. means a device for the passive collection of solar energy for use in the heating of water or the generation of electricity, together with related wires and pipes necessary for operation. Ground -Mounted Solar Energy Collector. means any solar energy collector that is not directly attached to a building via any ancillary development (racking assembly, balancing Pitkin n County system, etc.) Solar Farm. means any collection of ground -mounted solar generators that occupies one - quarter (1/4) acre of land or more but generates less than two (2) Mega -Watts (MW). Solar Facility. means any ground -mounted solar generators that occupy one -quarter (1/4) acre of land or more and generates two (2) Mega -Watts (MW) or more. Solar Facilities are considered Major Public Utilities. Prowers Solar Energy Facilities. Solar collector or other device that provides for the collection of County sunlight for the conversion of sunlight to energy. Solar Facility, Small -Scale. A solar facility of less than one (1) acre. This size is approximately equivalent to a rated capacity of about ten (10) kilowatts (kW) to 250 kW alternating current. Facilities are generally generating electricity from sunlight primarily to reduce onsite consumption of utility power for residential, agricultural, commercial, and industrial applications. Solar Facility, Medium -Scale. A facility between one (1) acre and ten (10) acres. This size Pueblo is approximately equivalent to a rated capacity of about 250 kW to one (1) megawatt County (MW) alternating current. Facilities are generally generating electricity from sunlight primarily to reduce onsite consumption of utility power for commercial and industrial applications. Solar Facility, Utility -Scale. A solar facility of more than ten (10) acres. This size is approximately equivalent to a rated capacity of about one (1) MW alternating current or greater. Facilities are generally generating electricity from sunlight to provide electricity to a utility provider. Major Electrical or Natural Gas Facilities. (Article 14 - Areas and Activities of State Rio Blanco Interest only) Major County electrical or natural gas facilities include one or more of the following: 1. Electric power generation... Rio Grande County Solar Energy Facility. A solar energy collector and the required components to the distribute the transformed solar energy. Public Utilities. Electricity, natural gas, water and wastewater service, wire telephone service, and similar public services. The term "public utilities" does not include wireless telecommunication facilities. Production Facility, Renewable Energy. Production Facilities, Renewable Energy are Routt County relating to the operation of solar° wind, hydrologic, bio-fuels or other energy production not based on fossil fuels such as coal, oil, gas or coal bed methane (see also Solar Energy System) • 63 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at vvww.nret.gov/publications. County Solar Definitions Solar Energy System. A system composed of a solar energy collector which may include an energy storage facility and components for the transmission and distribution of transformed energy sized to 120% of the average annual load of the use by right and/or an approved use. Public Utilities — Major Facilities. Major facilities of electrical utilities including: 1) Electrical generating plants and associated facilities designed for, or capable of, operation at a capacity of ten megawatts or more. Saguache County Power plant. means any electrical energy generating facility with a generating capacity of fifty (50) megawatts or more, and any facilities appurtenant thereto, or any addition thereto increasing the existing design capacity of the facility by fifty (50) megawatts or more, with a generating source of natural gas, coal, geothermal resources or solar energy. San Juan County No relevant definitions present. Renewable Energy Facility (solar, wind). A facility designed to produce energy, through, San Miguel either (a) A series of solar photovoltaic cells in panels used to convert sunlight into County electricity (often integrated with agriculture) Solar Energy Collector. Solar panels used to power a farm, home or business. Sedgewick County Distributed Solar Energy System. Solar electrical power generation that occurs close to where the power is consumed and is primarily used on site by the system owner. A private on -site solar energy conversion system consisting of many ground -mounted solar arrays in rows or roof panels, and associated control or conversion electronics, occupying more than 2.5 acres and no more than 30 acres of land, and that will be used to produce utility power to on -site uses. Residential Solar Energy System. A single residential or small business -scale solar energy conversion system consisting of roof panels, ground -mounted solar arrays, or other solar energy fixtures, and associated control or conversion electronics with a rated capacity of less than 500 kW, occupying no more than 2.5 acres of land, and that will be used to produce utility power to on -site uses Solar Energy System. A system that converts the sun's radiant energy into thermal or electrical energy. For purposes of this Code, solar energy systems are classified as follows: Summit a. Small Scale: Small scale solar energy systems shall be used primarily for on -site County purposes. Excess power may be sold back to a utility company, but is not the primary purpose of the system. b. Large Scale: Large scale solar energy systems generate power primarily to be sold for use off -site. Public utility. Every common carrier, pipeline corporation, gas corporation, electrical corporation, telephone corporation, telegraph corporation, water corporation, or person, individual, firm, partnership, other corporation, or other entity, operating for the purpose of Teller County supplying the public for domestic, mechanical, or public uses; and every person, individual, firm, corporation, partnership, and/ or other entity, declared by law to be affected with a public interest; each of which is subject to the jurisdiction, control, and regulation of and by State and /or Federal law. Washington County Solar Power Production Facility (SPPF). A utility on an area of land over one-half acre designated for the purpose of producing photovoltaic electricity with a nameplate capacity of over 1/2 megawatt (500,000 kilowatts [sic]) and includes, but is not limited to, an assembly of solar panels and solar equipment that convert sunlight into electricity and 64 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. County Solar Definitions then stores and/or transfers that electricity. Solar Power Production Facilities may include mechanical buildings, transmission lines, and other uses that are typical to a SPPR, however offices and other commercial uses are prohibited. Solar Energy Facility. means a commercial facility whose primary purpose is to supply electricity and consists of one or more solar arrays and other accessory structures, equipment, including substations, switchyards, battery storage, electrical infrastructure, generators, transmission lines, communications infrastructure, and other appurtenant structures and/or facilities. Large scale solar facility. A facility which is used for the production of electrical energy Weld County from energy collected by the sun including solar energy collectors, power generation facilities, facilities for storing and transforming energy, other appurtenant facilities and any transmission lines, which is developed for the purpose of supplying or distributing electrical energy to users, a customer or customers and will have a rated capacity greater than thirty (30) megawatts. This designation shall not include roof and/or ground mounted solar systems located on permitted principal and accessory buildings and designed to supply power to the principle use(s) on site. Yuma County Residential Solar Energy System. A single residential or small business -scale solar energy conversion system consisting of roof panels, ground -mounted solar arrays, or other solar energy fixtures, and associated control or conversion electronics with a rated capacity of less than 500 kW, occupying no more than 2.5 acres of land, and that will be used to produce utility power to on -site uses. Distributed Solar Energy System. Solar electrical power generation that occurs close to where the power is consumed and is primarily used on site by the system owner. A private on -site solar energy conversion system consisting of many ground -mounted solar arrays in rows or roof panels, and associated control or conversion electronics, occupying more than 2.5 acres and no more than 30 acres of land, and that will be used to produce utility power to on -site uses. Utility Scale Solar Energy System. A utility -scale solar energy conversion system consisting of many ground -mounted solar arrays in rows. and associated control or conversion electronics, occupying more than 30 acres and that will be used to produce utility power to off -site customers. 65 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. Appendix C. 1041 Permit Thresholds by County As discussed in Section 4A, some Colorado counties have adopted thresholds triggering a 1041 permit under their 1041 power to regulate the siting of major facilities of a public utility. Additionally, some counties also have adopted 1041 regulations about the development of historically irrigated land for purposes other than irrigated agriculture, including development causing permanent or partial cessation of irrigation and/or transfer of water ruts. Some counties have included their 1041 requirements as part of a solarrspecific permitting process,, while others have 1041 regulations in parallel with a solar -specific permitting process, which might or might not be applied to a given project, Table Cal reports counties that have adopted specific thresholds that might impact the permitting of solar power plants. Data are gathered from the references listed for each county in Appendix A. Table Cl. Colorado County Thresholds Potentially Triggering a 1041 Permitting Process for Solar Power Plants in Those Counties 1041 Thresholds for a Solar Power Plant or "Major Facility of a Public Utility" County Generation Capacity (MW) Land Area (acres 1041 Threshold for Development of Irrigated Land (acres) Alamos' 2 MW n/a 3 acres Arapahoe 5MW n a n/a Bent nla n a 10 acres Boulder 50 MW Cheyenne 10 MW 5 acres 3 acres Clear Creek 1 MW n/a n/a El Paso 0.5 MW (5pD kW) nip Na Elbert 1 MW 10 acres r/a Huertano 50 MW nla Required, no minimum itiowa 10 MW acres n/a La Playa 2 MW 5 acres n/a Latimer rt/a 6 acres n/a This report i avaiiable a 66 n.costfrom the etional f ene h tcf , `' at WNW. uu ��',� fib 1041 Thresholds for a Solar Power Plant or "Major Facility of a Public Utility" County Generation Capacity (MW) Land Area (acres) 1041 Threshold for Development of Irrigated Land (acres) Las Animas 50 MW14 r/"a nia Morgan 50 MW nia rile Otero 10 MW 5 acres 3 acres Pitkin MW i acre n/a Prowers 25 MW 5 acres 5 acres Pueblo 1 MW 1 acre on some agricultural zones ri/a Routt 10 MW n/a n/a Saguache 5 MW ri/a 3 acres Weld 30 MW • "160 to 320 acres (zone me '4 Las Animas currently permits solar power plaits through its wind power plant regulations. Wind power plants are specifically exempted from this 1041 permit requirement. However, 1041 permit would also be required on some zoning districts. 67 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nreigovlpublications. Appendix D. Panel Height Restrictions by County Table l) -1 lists the review data on panel height restrictions presented in Section 4.6. Data are gathered or quoted from the references listed for each county in Appendix A. Some counties reference specific solar definitions related to panel height restrictions, where each county's solar definitions are available in Appendix B. This table only includes restrictions specific to grounds mounted solar. Neither height restrictions pertaining to rooftop systems i.e., restrictions on height above a root) nor general structure height restrictions, which are typically 35 ft or greater, are included. Counties without relevant height restrictions are omitted. Table D-1. Height Restrictions on Solar Panel Heights by County County Maximum Panel Height Restrictions Adams 20 ft measured from the highest grade below each solar panel Arapahoe 15 ft at the solar mounting point for Small Solar Systems Boulder 15 ft Systems exceeding 15 ft in height require an increased setback of 75 ft from all property lines unless visual Impacts are mitigated In no case shall a system exceed 25 ft in height Clear Creek 35 It Dolores Determined through the Land Use Agreement Process Douglas Determined through the use by special review process specific to each site Eagle 15 ft measured from the highest point of the Improvement to existing or finished grad, whichever is more restrictive El Paso 15 ft Garfield 15 ft for Accessory solar systems, which is not directly applied to utility - scale systems. Utility -scale system need only demonstrate structure can support wind load (Personal Communication). Gilpin 20 ft measured from highest grade below each solar panel Jefferson 25 ft measured from the average natural ground level adjacent to the base of the array to the highest point of the array Kiowa No height restrictions but the solar array must be 1.2 times the maximum height from the property lines Kit Carson The height and location of any structure within the Wind or Solar Energy Facility shall be subject to FAA approval La Plata 20 ft This ort is a iJ a 1 l !e at no 0 the ation 68 Renewable Ene '�_nb r i at wvvitiv.nrrAgovipub. at o R County Maximum Panel Height Restrictions Lake 25 f t Larimer 15 It molt 35 ft Montezuma 35 ft Morgan The maximum height of the solar panels shall not exceed 30 feet in height or 35 feet in height for agrivoltaic s when oriented at maximum tilt Ouray 35 ft My project located within 1.5 miles of the centerline of roads or highways is allocated a maximum of 5 "points" to use for size and height. For height, the project gets .3 points for each ft of the maximum height structure and for size, .1 points for 100 sq. ft. Pitkin 15 ft measured from natural grade or finished grade, whichever is more restrictive, except to accommodate site specific needs If approved through special review Pueblo Solar Facility Narrative must contain an inventory with description of all proposed structures and uses including Battery Energy Storage Facilities, inverters, substations, and all structures over 60 ft, in height. Rio Grande 10 ft Summit 25 ft Washington 20 ft measured from grade at the base of the equipment to its highest point during operation Weld 25 ft measured from the highest grade below each solar panel to the highest extent of the solar panel notation 69 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.govipublicstions. Appendix E. Fencing Table E-1 lists the review data on fencing requirements presented in Section 4.7. Data are gathered or quoted from the references listed for each county in Appendix A. This table includes both fencing requirements specifically intended for ground -mounted solar, as well as fencing requirements intended more generally for different types of development, which might include solar. Some counties reference specific solar definitions related to fencing restrictions, where each county's solar definitions are available in Appendix B. Counties are omitted in cases where the review did not find relevant fencing requirements. Table E-1. Fencing Requirements by County County Fencing Requirements Adams Alamosa Arapahoe All solar panels and equipment (excluding poles and wires necessary to connect to facilities of the electric utility) shall be enclosed by a fence at least six (6) feet high. Wildlife -friendly fence options are encouraged. No standard requirements but off -site impact is considered during permit process; fencing/screening has been required for some permits Landscaping or fencing around the perimeter of the land occupied by the Facility shall be installed concurrently with the Small Solar System Facility's completion. The screening shall be designed to minimize visual impacts from adjacent properties and the nearest streets. Bent In the special review process: Uses with unsightly aspects, odors, or noise are set back a sufficient distance from adjacent property boundaries and proper fencing or screening is provided to that adjacent property is not adversely affected Boulder In areas where the facilities will have a substantial visual impact on the surrounding area, landscaping or screening of the site, or the use of less intrusive equipment, may be required. Specific landscaping or screening requirements may include, but are not necessarily limited to, establishing and properly maintaining ground cover, shrubs, and trees; shaping cuts and fills to appear as natural forms; designing the operation to utilize natural screens; or constructing fences for use with or instead of landscaping. Cheyenne For large solar energy systems: Fencing or other barriers acceptable to the County shall be installed to prevent unauthorized access to solar collectors and equipment and BESS battery enclosures Clear Creek Screening techniques should be considered and utilized depending on site conditions, including landscaping, berming, camouflaging, screening, and fencing, where appropriate. Denver In development intended for nonresidential uses and located near or abutting Residential Zone Districts, provide fences, walls or year-round screen planting when necessary to shield adjacent residential districts from parking lot illumination, headlights, fumes, heat, blowing papers and dust and to reduce the visual encroachment of commercial architectural, signs and activity on residential privacy and residential neighborhood character. Eagle The project applicant shall demonstrate through visual impact analysis, materials, and/or screening to the extent practicable, that the project will not create adverse visual impact to neighboring properties, surrounding 70 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. County Fencing Requirements areas, and community buffers as further detail nary to support Section 5-2503A Design Minimizes Adverse impact. El Paso Requirements for fencing will be determined during the permitting process. Garfield Mere proposed development is located next to existing agricultural operations, partition fences must either exist or be installed to separate the proposed development from adjoining agricultural land or stock drives. Gilpin All solar panels and equipment (excluding poles and wires necessary to connect to facilities of the electric utility) shall be enclosed by a fence at least eight (8) feet high. Wildlife friendly fence options are encouraged. Grand Fencing may be required as determined during the permitting pro m Gunnison Fencing or plant material can be used to fulfill screening and buffering requirements: Every land use change that Is classified as Minor or Major Impact Project...shall provide landscaped buffering between adjacent uses when topographical or other natural barriers do not provide rea onable screening and when the county finds that: a. NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. There is a need to shield neighboring properties from any adverse external effects of a proposed land use change; or b. ADVERSE IMPACTS. There is a need to shield the land use change from negative impacts or adjacent land uses in high -density land use changes, and/or when building design and siting do not provide privacy. Jefferson County Required In site plan: warning signs, fencing, and access restrictions kit Carson Fencing, or other barriers acceptable to the county, shall be installed to prevent unauthorized access to the 'Wind or Solar Energy Facility substations. All access doors to Wind Turbine towers or Solar Energy Facilities and electrical equipment shall be lockable Lorimer Ground -mounted mechanical equipment located within view of customer entrances or public rightsciainway shall be integrated into the overall site design, the architectural design of the building, and screened from public view using one or a combination of the following: 1) Decorative wall, fence or enclosure that is constructed of materials that are compatible with the overall architectural design of the development and of a height that is not less than the height of the equipment to be screened; or 2) Landscaping that is of sufficient height at maturity and of opacity to effectively soften and screen the equipment, and that is integrated into the overall landscape plan. Las Animas Determined during the permitting process, based on recommendations by state parks service based on wildlife in the area Lincoln For large solar energy sys,- sm An appifipriate security/livestock fence height and matarbal to be establintted thFev gh the eve by special review 71 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. County Fencing Requirements Logan Mesa Mineral Moffat Montrose Morgan process) shall be placed around the perimeter of the solar power plant and maintained by the facility operator. Determined during the permitting process, and other bafflers as acceptable to the County may be used in place of a fence. Determined during the permitting process Might be required during Conditional use process Uses permitted under a Conditional Use Permit which are found to be obnoxious or offensive because of odor, dust, smoke, gas, noise or vibration may require fencing or screening to a minimum height of 8 feet. Any combination of setbacks, berms, fencing, landscaping, and arrangement of uses on the site to effectively insulate adjacent uses from adverse impacts of the commercial uses. The setback requirement from inhabited structures may be reduced if appropriate screening through landscape or an opaque fence is installed. Phillips Fencing or other barriers acceptable to the County shall be installed to prevent unauthorized access to solar collectors and equipment. Pitkin Any ground -mounted solar energy collecting system using a quarter (114) acre of land or more shall be considered a Solar Farm and be subject to special review pursuant to section 2-40-20 (with total land used calculated by accounting for total land area needed to develop the ground -mounted system, including but not limited to, storage sheds, access, grading, fencing, revegetation, mounting equipment, panels, etc.). Prowers The Solar Energy Facilities shall be enclosed with a security fence as approved pursuant to a fencing plan submitted to the Prowers County Land Use Administrator, Appropriate signage shall be placed upon such fencing that warns the public of the high voltage therein. Routt Proposed landscaping, screening, fencing and other visual impact mitigation shall be approved by the Planning Director, Planning Commission or Board of County Commissioners prior to operation. San Juan In order to minimize visual impacts to view sheds and view corridors, additional setbacks, landscaping, screening or design requirements may be required by the County to preserve the natural beauty and historical resources of the area. Teller Appropriate screening, fencing, enclosing, and buffering of certain uses, primarily Special Review Uses, is required in order to adequately screen the use from public rights -of -way and adjoining and/or adjacent properties. It may be that if the proposed use can not be adequately screened, the site is not an appropriate location for that use. Washington SPPFs shall be screened or shall be enclosed by fencing a minimum of six (6) feet in height. Screening and/or fencing shall be consistent with the surrounding character and utilize landscaping and/or native vegetation strategies to screen the facility from routine view of public right-of-way or adjacent residential property. When fencing is used, the type and stvhe of 72 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. County Fencing Requirements fencing shall also reflect any safety concerns specific to the general public and adjacent wildlife. Entrances must be gated and locked Weld Small Solar System - shall be enclosed with a security fence as approved pursuant to a fencing plan submitted to the Department of Planning Services. Yuma Utility Scale Solar Energy Systems: Fencing or other barriers acceptable to the county shall be installed to prevent unauthorized access to solar collectors and equipment. 73 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications. From: LINNEA RIEBSCHLAGER<linnea.riebschlager@comcast.net> Sent Thursday, July 11, 2024 11:16 AM To: Diana Aungst Subject Solar Farm Near Metro Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Good Morning, I know this is a bit late, but I want to also voice my concern for a solar farm being put next to my property. I greatly oppose this action and would like to be kept in notice, as I was lucky enough for a neighbor to let me know about this possible farm. I would like to attend any meetings on this issue and or get any other info on this issue if possible as it effects us greatly. I live at 33610 County Rd 6, Keenesburg. Here is what I see that bothers me: I have received your notices about the USR24-0012 and USR24-0013 projects. Listed here are my concerns. My property borders both projects on two sides for a combined 1 mile. This has quite significant impact. This property represents the most valuable asset I own. I was planning to subdivide it into at least 4 individual parcels. As an adjacent landowner, I am likely to face a disproportionate share of the cumulative impacts from the solar farm development, with my property bearing the brunt of the effects. Property Value Impacts: Visual Effect - The large-scale solar arrays will likely have a significant visual impact on your property, as they will be prominently visible. This can detract from the aesthetic appeal and rural character of the area, negatively affecting property values. Aesthetics - The industrial appearance of the solar farm infrastructure will be disruptive to the natural landscape and visual character of the surrounding area, diminishing the aesthetic appeal. Stigma - There is a documented "solar farm stigma" that can further depress nearby property values, regardless of actual impacts. Environmental Damage: Water Runoff - The large impervious surfaces of the solar panels can increase water runoff and potentially impact local drainage and groundwater recharge. This could lead to change in the water table affecting existing water wells. Leaching - With an estimated 3.6 million panels, there is a significant risk of leaching of toxic hazardous materials over time, such as cadmium, lead, copper and others into the soil and groundwater over time. Hazardous Waste - Solar panels are considered hazardous electronic waste at the end of their lifespan, which poses challenges for disposal and recycling. Chemical Spills - There is a risk of chemical spills from maintenance activities or equipment failure, 1 which could contaminate the surrounding environment. Dust - The construction and ongoing operation of the solar farm can generate significant dust, which can negatively impact the surrounding area. Noise and Vibration: Construction Noise - The heavy equipment and construction activities will generate substantial noise and vibration, which will disrupt the tranquility of the area. Ongoing Noise - The operation of inverters, transformers, and other equipment can produce persistent low-level noise that may be noticeable to nearby residents. Traffic - The increased truck and worker traffic during construction and ongoing maintenance will likely cause disruptions and safety concerns for the local roads and community. Glint and Glare - The reflection of sunlight off the solar panels can create harmful glint and glare effects, which can be a disturbance to nearby residents and potentially impact aviation safety. Heat Effects - The large-scale solar arrays can generate localized heat effects, potentially impacting the microclimate and vegetation in the surrounding area. Inadequate Screening - from the current plan diagram, the screening and setback buffering measures are insufficient, the visual and other impacts of the solar farm will be more pronounced for my property. Electromagnetic Interference - The electrical infrastructure of the solar farm can potentially interfere with radio, television, and other communication signals. Light Pollution - Nighttime lighting for the solar farm can contribute to light pollution, negatively affecting the rural character and ambiance of the area. Conflicts with Future Land Use Plans - The solar farm development may be incompatible with the existing or planned land use for the surrounding area, creating long-term conflicts. Psychological Effects: Stress and Anxiety - The proposed large utility -scale solar farm and its impacts is already causing significant stress and anxiety for myself and nearby residents, affecting their quality of life. Change in Quality of Life - The disruption to the rural character and tranquility of the area can result in a diminished quality of life for me and other neighboring residents. Here are a few studies that have found negative impacts of utility -scale solar farms on nearby real estate values: North Carolina State University Study (2020): This study analyzed home sales near 11 utility -scale solar facilities in North Carolina. The researchers found that homes within 0.5 miles of a solar farm sold for 7-8% less than similar homes farther away. East Carolina University Study (2021): This study examined home sales near 9 utility -scale solar farms in North Carolina and found a 5-7% decrease in home values for properties within 1 mile of a solar facility. Illinois State University Study (2022): This recent study looked at home sales near 13 solar farms in 2 Illinois and found a 7-9% reduction in home values for properties within 0.5 miles of a solar facility. "Solar Farms and Property Values: A Study of the Impact of Solar Farms on Residential Property Values in Nevada" by the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (2013) This study found that solar farms can decrease property values by 5-10% within a 1 -mile radius. here are a few more relevant studies that suggest significant negative impacts, especially in rural areas: "The Impact of Utility -Scale Solar Farms on Rural Property Values" (2017) by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory: This study found that large-scale solar farms can reduce property values by 7-8% within a 1 -mile radius in rural areas. The negative impact was most pronounced for agricultural and vacant land properties. "Assessing the Impact of Solar Farms on Rural Property Values" (2019) by the University of Massachusetts Amherst: This study analyzed 391 rural properties in Massachusetts and found that properties within 0.5 miles of a solar farm experienced a 10-15% reduction in value. The negative impact was greatest for agricultural and vacant land properties. "The Effect of Utility -Scale Solar Farms on Surrounding Property Values" (2020) by the Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics: This study, which focused on rural areas in North Carolina, found that properties within 0.5 miles of a solar farm experienced a 10-20% reduction in value. The negative impact was more pronounced for agricultural properties compared to residential properties. These studies suggest that large-scale solar farms can have a severe negative impact, often exceeding 10%, on property values in rural and agricultural areas, particularly for properties in close proximity to the solar installations. Thank you for your time. Linnea Riebschlager lager 3 From: Sent: To: Subject: Breanne Nolan <bnrodlin@gmail.com> Tuesday, July 9, 2024 6:49 PM Diana Aungst Resident Comments on Prospect Solar PV & Bess Project Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. To Whom it May Concern at the Weld County Planning Department: As a resident in Southeast Weld County who lives approximately 0.5 miles North of the proposed Prospect Solar PV & Bess Project, I was disappointed to learn I did not receive notices about the USR24-0012 & USR24-0013 projects. Though I did not receive the notices, I do believe, as someone who owns property that will be greatly impacted by these projects, my comments should be sincerely considered. Thanks to resident Lad Nemecek, I have contact information to submit the below comments. Property devaluation due to close proximity of solar farm (PV field). I purchased my home at 1083 County Road 67 in June of 2022 and it is approximately 0.5 miles from the proposed projects. Based on a statistical study by Saima Elmallah, UC Berkeley, it was estimated that properties within 0.25-0.5 miles from a PV field had a devaluation of 1.5% and residences within 1 mile saw devaluation of 0.85%. As an individual with a degree in STEM, I understand that a 1.5% is statistically insignificant; however, as a property owner in Weld County, a loss of up to $25,000 on a home sale price is incredibly significant to an individual's livelihood. Though there may only be 4-5 residences within 0.25 miles of these projects, there may be well over 20 within a 1 mile radius. If each home holds an average of 3 people, this project could negatively impact up to 60 lives; while there is 0 data provided from the County or Horus Energy stating public benefit of how many lives may be benefited by this PV field, or even where, this solar energy will tie into the current electrical grid. Construction of solar project According to US Li1ht Energy, it takes anywhere from 8-18 months to construct a solar farm. Of these maximum eighteen months, over three-quarters of the timeline will be spent delivering equipment, construction materials and traveling skilled and/or unskilled laborers to prep the construction site. This mass increase in travel along County Roads 67, 73 & 75, as well as State Highway 79 poses major safety concerns for residents who travel these roads, as well as farmers who must carefully move equipment through these areas. Residents - including myself - walk along these dirt roads and increased traffic of workers who are unfamiliar with their surroundings, or are under pressure due to strict deadlines enforced by contractors and investors, may fail to drive as carefully in rural areas; putting lives like mine at risk. In addition to increased safety risks, this burdensome traffic of semis and heavy equipment may cause increased damage and deterioration to already hard -to -maintain dirt roads. The Weld County Roads in these areas are already minimally maintained and we have constant issues of wash outs, wind ruts, and eroded ditches that will surely be further run-down by increased traffic. Based on recent observations, it seems as if Adams County Roads 160th and Harback may be undergoing pavement construction but I certainly hope this is not to aid in the ease of access for a solar company and its contractors who may or may not be providing funds for these projects in a county that will not be impacted by benefits of electrical grid supplementation by the solar farm. 1 While the solar panels, inverters, access roads, fences, landscaping, and other project inputs are being constructed, there will undoubtedly be an increase in noise, vibration, and disturbance to what is typically a quiet country farmscape. The crop fields that are within very close proximity of these projects on County Road 67 will potentially see negative effects of increased vibration and grading of the ground nearby while civil construction is done. These adverse effects could be heightened erosion, incorrect management of watersheds (such as the contractors in AL, IL & ID who violated the Clean Water Act while building solar farms), and soil separation which could have devastating impacts on the corn, wheat, and sunflower fields that feed the people of this very County. Not only are there active crop growing sites nearby, but the Prospect Lateral Ditch and its irrigation supplies are also within close proximity of these construction sites. If the solar projects are - unfortunately - approved, residents can only hope that strict management practices will be promulgated by Weld County during these construction phases to keep crops, water supplies to these crops, and land stewardship safe. Impacts of solar farms on local regions Once a solar farm is constructed, especially as large as the ones proposed in USR24-0012 & USR24-0013, there can be environmental impacts to the immediate region. There have been limited studies on "heat island" effects of PV power plants. The most recent study, performed by Columbia University, cites that heat at the center of a PV field can reach up to 1.9 Celsius above the ambient temperature but that the heat dissipation to only 0.3 Celsius above ambient temperature will occur approximately 300 meters from the PV field perimeter. Based on the project schematics provided to a very limited number of residents, the perimeter of the Prospect PV fields are only 500 ft or 150.4 meters away from dwellings and crop fields. It can only be assumed with this shortened distance between dwellings/fields and PV field perimeters, that increased ambient air effects will be felt by people, plants, and animals alike. I appreciate the Weld County Planning Department's consideration of public comment prior to issuing USR24-OO12 and USR24-OO13. I understand the need for solar power and integration of this power into our current grid; however, I believe there are better locations for this project where there would be much fewer residents, crops, and landscapes that are negatively impacted. Thank you, Breanne Nolan 2 Diana Aun ' s From: Amber <adavisfarms8l ©gmail.com> Sent Friday, July 5, 2024 1:22 PM To: Diana Aungst Subject: Prospect Solar Project - Amber Davis County Road 4 # USR24-0013 Attachments: 20240705_125302.jpg; 20240705_125256.jpg EXHIBIT 4324111.-660 I Si Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello Diana — I am reaching out in regards to the Prospect Solar Farm project in Keenesburg case #USR24-0013, with my concerns as this project directly impacts my residence at 33518 County Road 4. I have listed a number of items below but wanted to add some personal color as well. In 2017, I was living in Byers following a nasty divorce I sold that property and found my current residence in Keenesburg. It was remote, no neighbors for a half mile, minimal traffic, a barn for my animals and plenty of space for my 3 step children. As a single woman, with no financial support I have worked hard to excel at my career, landed an amazing work from home job, to be able to stay in my home which is my entire livelihood. The portion of this project that will directly impact me, is to the east and southeast impacting 34 of my property line and is owned by Kevin and Lori Helzer. I have been a good neighbor to the Helzer's, honoring the existing crop lease at the original rate that was put in place prior to purchasing this property in 2017 because their irrigation pivot crosses onto the back portion of my property. The loss of that income will have a negative implication to my yearly financials. The overall implications of this project will have an unrecoverable impact on my financial situation as well as my quality of life. I wanted to live out the rest of my life in my home enjoying summers surrounded by wheat, corn and sunflowers, all of which never ran any risk of destroying my future. Please consider the impact this project will have on the people, like me, just trying to live their lives in the peace and quiet that our properties were selected for. Team members Francesco Paolo Cardi, Horus Energy, Erin Bibeau, Logan Simpson & Lane Sharman all visited my home last year to discuss the project with me. Lane made statements about the project building property fencing for me, stated that the reason I and others like me bought my property was for the view to the west of the mountains, not the view to the east, which was dismissive and rude. As you have read and will read what he stated had nothing to do with the decision to purchase my property. I have attached 2 photos; I took this from the deck that is connected to my front/kitchen door. Everything beyond 500ft from my property line will be replaced with Solar panels, I think the new visual impact is hard to understand without seeing what I will lose. 1. Property Value Impacts: a. Visual Effect - The large-scale solar arrays will likely have a significant visual impact on my property, as they will be prominently visible. This can detract from the aesthetic appeal and rural character of the area, negatively affecting my property value. b. Aesthetics - The industrial appearance of the solar farm infrastructure will be disruptive to the natural landscape and visual character of the surrounding area, diminishing the aesthetic appeal. c. Stigma - There is a documented "solar farm stigma" that can further depress nearby property values, regardless of actual impacts. d. **Number of studies, included below that show how this project can potentially impact my home value and make it impossible for me to stay, or leave without taking a substantial hit to my financial wellbeing. 2. Environmental Damage: a. Water Runoff - The large impervious surfaces of the solar panels can increase water runoff and potentially impact local drainage and groundwater recharge. b. Leaching - With an estimated 3.6 million panels, there is a significant risk of leaching of hazardous materials, such as 1 cadmium and lead, into the soil and groundwater over time. c. Hazardous Waste - Solar panels are considered hazardous electronic waste at the end of their lifespan, which poses challenges for disposal and recycling. d. Chemical Spills - There is a risk of chemical spills from maintenance activities or equipment failure, which could contaminate the surrounding environment. e. Toxic Material Release - Over time, the use of cadmium telluride and other toxic materials in the panels can lead to gradual release into the environment. f. Dust - The construction and ongoing operation of the solar farm can generate significant dust, which can negatively impact the surrounding area. 3. Noise and Vibration: a. Construction Noise - The heavy equipment and construction activities will generate substantial noise and vibration, which will disrupt the tranquility of the area. I have requested construction schedules; those requests have gone unanswered. Because of my home office there will be a sound impact to me every day the build is underway. b. Ongoing Noise - The operation of inverters, transformers, and other equipment can produce persistent low-level noise that may be noticeable to nearby residents. c. Crop removal, replaced by solar panels, will climate any reduction in highway noise from highway 79, making it a constant. I really enjoy the time from June until harvest when the sound from the highway is reduced due to the crops. 4. Traffic - The increased truck and worker traffic during construction and ongoing maintenance will likely cause disruptions and safety concerns for the local roads and community. The access road to the west of my property is planned to be a main access point, causing direct impact to the peace and serenity which was a main selling point for me when I purchased this property. 5. Glint and Glare - The reflection of sunlight off the solar panels can create harmful glint and glare effects, which can be a direct disturbance to my home, especially in the evening with the panels will sift to facing the west and point directly at my home. In addition, the potential impact aviation safety impacting my neighbor to the south Todd Denning directly. 6. Heat Effects - The large-scale solar arrays can generate localized heat effects, potentially impacting the microclimate and vegetation in the surrounding area, as well as direct impact on the utility usage at my home to cool in the summer 7. Inadequate Screening - The proposed tree screening and buffering measures are insufficient; the visual and other impacts of the solar farm will be more pronounced for my property. Adding tree saplings that will take years to grow will have zero positive impact, if ever on my property, where the main living space is on the second floor. 8. Electromagnetic Interference - The electrical infrastructure of the solar farm can potentially interfere with radio, television, and other communication signals, disrupting nearby myself & nearby residents. The only internet options at my property are fixed wireless and satellite. Reliable internet is a requirement for my residents for my work. Fixed wireless can be impacted by the reflection of solar to make a change to satellite will have a large increase to my monthly financials. 9. Light Pollution - Nighttime lighting for the solar farm can contribute to light pollution, negatively affecting the rural character and ambiance of the area and directly impact sleep patterns of myself, my neighbors and my animals. 10. Cumulative Impacts - The presence of multiple solar farm projects in close proximity will amplify the collective impacts on the local community, including my property. 11. Conflicts with Future Land Use Plans - The solar farm development may be incompatible with the existing or planned land use for the surrounding area, creating long-term conflicts. 12. Psychological Effects: a. Stress and Anxiety - The presence of the large-scale solar farm and its impacts can cause significant stress and 2 anxiety for myself nearby residents, affecting my quality of life. This project has been in the back of my mind since I heard about it nearly a year ago, it is a constant source of stress and anxiety. b. Change in Quality of Life - The disruption to the rural character and tranquility of the area can result in a diminished quality of life for me my animals and other neighboring residents. 13. Disproportionate Impacts - As an adjacent landowner, we are likely to face a disproportionate share of the cumulative impacts from the solar farm development, with my properties bearing the brunt of the effects. **Here are a few studies that have found potential negative impacts of utility -scale solar farms on nearby real estate values: • University of Texas at Austin Study (2018): This study found that homes located within 1 mile of a solar farm in Texas sold for 4-5% less than comparable homes farther away. • North Carolina State University Study (2020): This study analyzed home sales near 11 utility -scale solar facilities in North Carolina. The researchers found that homes within 0.5 miles of a solar farm sold for 7-8% less than similar homes farther away. • East Carolina University Study (2021): This study examined home sales near 9 utility -scale solar farms in North Carolina and found a 5-7% decrease in home values for properties within 1 mile of a solar facility. • Illinois State University Study (2022): This recent study looked at home sales near 13 solar farms in Illinois and found a 7-9% reduction in home values for properties within 0.5 miles of a solar facility."Solar Farms and Property Values: A Study of the Impact of Solar Farms on Residential Property Values in Nevada" by the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (2013) This study found that solar farms can decrease property values by 5-10% within a 1 -mile radius Thank you for taking the time to read this and for taking my position into account when determining the outcome of this project. The negative implications for the home owners directly connected to this project are not small as the solar companies want everyone to believe. Please help me and my neighbors to maintain our livelihoods and quality of living as proud residents of Weld County. Amber Davis 33518 County Road 4 Keenesburg, CO 80643 720-560-8769 7/5/2024 3 •� 1 •T • /'•O • Io�N y.( F^ tier .?C •'i J�� Lj iv .� � � '.1 :j 1,, ii,!.'R ,• am. • � r. ��v�. ► ..{:-��1�'t �.ki� �S leek;a � "I ?lb Mitntariggi [ _.?��%iy.J b'•�� .t:. .DDD1w �, .� .: ,..7 L.., �.�.. .a'- tii r J c, c.. 7 i 7�iir.� i.sl tr;V7 _ a. L� 7 tW •� 1 ` ~ Ate,' V i♦r. t.J`l.�'�..ui � I 1 aa77 v ,. .,R, ..]n : `{ 'Cc': l c=,i/V 77F1 •1.'I 17 7 traiMig tfl PT: i L_____‘..:„\."7-fitr..', ri.r.;...‘1 it 1, „, : I a r ak. �.� ', �� .s VIM* 1 • s` ,ti. L�ia�15 �j"1p: j;!`agr. w �'{4.2�am til cy , • at ai T�4�r ,�7 ir'[/a • � � l r1wAY2!i E �~ �J1��1`, if i VI •{{7 .R tit+ ,� ;►:�w. :L�i S.?�.�'� �l� �i •- V•'!i .i11' �rirr `117ti i (k .. ,,,. A'; 1. . ; -'• f�. !-.4, t: -.!S:' !'.1` y rai G,.j_y f1[`�i, r 4}i ,"t�LiQ�, f•' ,1� , r'.\1: � �. •. ' .Ll �t '.'9t�!�.......al�tl` l 3i W j. LeYi�. 11. y ,fY-+ , -• �j Ina:. . 1, .iigt 1�'�y��{r��4lSa• x��yW ��`ii%s �j�•li.sar�'P �ry��71 it y.....re�o�ne� <illaelF._f_!R17�`ain i inlay atanfl . t:`I;i " it 4 as, tt p • .cr ' gl,,,b///��d��+ s�iir F�c i ..-R ! '.i �� ia FetAt? ..t*i � �7 ` " •. •�•' _• . 4 JT'�.•T • •',=<< �+ �� ''f :y♦� •� �IJr.X+.Y T��r••.-.�1_ i ++� �f .•Y' '-• 1. -tom `f +.. .'! a-•�v' _ ,�_. �,,r� �+7J:.i♦ta.av' �1•.1 C r�•(ll. -ry - ♦ •M- �•1 1-' :-7j!•711r"•. ern -44r � i' CIS .. rr �♦ �. _N,7'.�•l ..• `•�+►`r •�3.. h -� T*..� • �• if S��lrs lfa.�1 .•��+� `rti._I �f i�4 �•• •• • '_ t j (• f r• `♦1 ..; • •�I�('./�y•fl •r .. . �• PI�.ff� -� Ko44o': a 1 j•• I - t L�.: • k�/•t i=.t• . '�� r l'��'rI - _.! � I� s... .S J � 1• 11 •~� '-^.S• ♦ .•Y^ti .�.iibJ-`_+�'I �f"� #161.1.11; i�.� • '; ..,.;v �_•� l taz A •22': 1. r'Y t7-14. r••�S]t��•1`. ".:.. w�• LI�J • tiA ••��-�„``..j A, �• jr�, �, ." '-• , , 1. .L w�i•tJ717^"-� 1 . ♦~,�-1;te " V Y r . •+ ! • - •, yam.•• t•- ., w •a J��. i ! ' Kt-♦'. l `� 4'.' • t _ •. 'r! .� -J ' y''r ler+�1 • •'t :'_le1 +Yiiir/e..-%.311 � tb ^t s:ilu"2�'I•? r• J. J. .:J• � r'- •;— _ rte- --•; '�. i�•! L - t ri- ST. - ' ,•, . it c],7:wi_ f '•' ��`- IRJp..• �•sy rs{�{7 �•J i�ii� d t♦��•• ". i ••'vs ,.��`•1 !�tI rs i f • '4*(4.. .^ • •,4 ^S�•• �� .;• y Ti7 a �•vai� • •�J ≥'1'ILy� 1 S3a.r��1 • 77 s '�_:. • , . '. * r' yam. R.. t - t p�+ A. t _, j Q my .7 ti ;w.jV(1'{�N.:,i,yrr,,. LM I'-`' J4. . v. y Sii�.-..J lf7 .�- From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Attachments: Francesco Cardi adavisfarms81(ag rmaj .coat Emily Bjtjer; Roger Freeman Response to Community Comments - Neighbour Letter Friday, September 13, 2024 11:42:20 AM Neighbour Letter September 13th 2024 - FinaLf EXHIBIT I Mg/4/-6013 ra CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization. Dear Ms. Davis, I hope you are welt. Please find attached our comments responding to recent neighbour letters. Thanks so much for your cooperation. Kind Regards, Francesco Paolo Cardi Associate Horus Energy Mobile: +1 303 479 4535 francesco.cardiehoruscapital.co.uk https://Jiorusenergy.co.uki Block sender I Report Response To Community Comments On behalf of Horus Energy, we welcome the opportunity to respond to a series of comments that have been recently submitted to the County by neighbours and other local citizens about our proposed Janus and Prospect solar projects. First and foremost, we greatly appreciate your efforts to work with us throughout the course of this project. Horus has received and closely integrated your input, feedback, request for property -specific adaptations, and all the forms of interest and support expressed for this project. Through a variety of steps taken throughout the project planning, development, and permitting stages, we have been gratified to work closely with your incredible community. In that regard, while we recognize that some commenters have recently voiced strong concerns, we do believe the project enjoys significant landowner and local support. This support has been conveyed to the County in 10 letters of support and non -objection. This includes five neighbours adjacent to the projects, as well as the five landowner partners in the project. Horus directly has received many more informal or oral expressions of positive input from a diverse set of interested parties. This foundation of support is built upon a long series of outreach efforts. As many of you know, we begin reaching out to the community in the earliest development stages of the projects - both through individual contacts and a public meeting held on July 05, 2023. As we explained at that meeting, the initial outreach group was identified under basic rules in Weld County for contacting the local immediate neighbours most proximate to the development. This also included several local agencies and community service entities representing everything from fire response to community planning. These initial contacts have formed the basis for a series of continued communications with many of you about individual property issues or considerations. Some have commented that they wish that they have known of the project sooner and could have attended the prior meeting. Please know that while these initial communications focused on those living closest to the development, they were driven solely by practical and regulatory considerations and are part of a continuing, longstanding, and broad community outreach program that has and will be the cornerstone of our approach to this project throughout its course. In this regard, we have welcomed comments from citizens in any location in Weld County. As reflected in this group response, we understand your interest and have carefully considered all comments. We also note that in addition to providing this collective response, we have continued to reach out to individuals and landowners to try to accommodate individual questions or concerns or mitigate particular property circumstances. We have yet to hear back from some individuals - but understand that some folks may want to do so in a collective way. Others may feel like they want to respond more directly and specifically once a collective response is received. The bottom line is that our doors remain wide open to continue any communication - whether collective or otherwise. With these factors in mind, Horus carefully weighed whether a collective response would serve the community best. We believe that this approach is supported by the fact that the concerns expressed convey a very parallel set of questions or concerns. In fact, many of the comments appeared to be jointly generated and contained the same basic wording. We welcome this joint approach, and the efficiencies created thereby, but remain flexible to meet the community needs going forward. While Horus has attempted to frame and highlight key points from our application materials in this response, we did not choose to include voluminous documents and data equally accessible to all on the public websites. It appears that some of you were able to access that information, and we appreciate your taking the time to do so. We are certainly glad to provide additional references to materials on file, specific studies, or other supporting documentation. Please don't hesitate to reach out to us if we can provide or help access these materials or information. Page 1 of 12 Finally, while we believe we have addressed all individual points raised by the community in recent comments, please let us know immediately if we missed any concerns or have additional specific comments or input that you would like for us to address, either through follow-up communications or upcoming public hearings surrounding these projects. General Concern: Property Values We fully understand the utmost importance of property and land rights to all residents of Weld County and the interest of all commenters in this issue. While every property will have different features relevant to this discussion - and some commenters appear to live quite a distance from the solar farms themselves - we feel that the following discussion applies generally to all. That said, since all comments were from property owners outside the project boundaries itself, we concentrate on adjacent property value issues here. In turn, this discussion does not go into detail about the numerous and compelling benefits generated to the community at large through such attributes as economic, tax, renewable energy generation, and supporting project landowner rights to use and obtain value from their land. These are discussed in detail in our application materials and other sources. The potential impact of solar farms on adjacent properties has been considered in other situations in Colorado and across the nation. As a result, much research has been done to assess the impact of solar on land valuations. We recognize that many commenters cited various studies, and we have carefully considered same in formulating this response. As these studies reflect, appraisers generally determine potential negative impact caused by an external source on adjacent or nearby properties utilizing the following factors': • Hazardous material: As discussed further below, a solar farm involves no hazardous materials or waste byproduct as part of its operation • Odor: Solar farms produce no odor. • Noise: As discussed further below, whether discussing passive fixed solar panels, or single -axis trackers, there is no negative impact associated with noise from a solar farm. No sound is emitted from the facility at night. Solar farms are inaudible from the roadways. • Traffic: As discussed further below, there will be a temporary increase in traffic during construction, and we have provided an extensive report in the application materials describing the efforts made to mitigate traffic impacts to the neighbourhood. Once built, the solar farm will have no onsite employees or staff, and the traffic will be far less than many other typical County uses. The site requires only minimal maintenance. • Stigma: There is no stigma associated with solar farms and people generally respond favourably towards such a use. While an individual may express concerns about proximity to a solar farm, there is no specific stigma associated with a solar farm. Stigma generally refers to things such as adult establishments, prisons, rehabilitation facilities, and so forth. Solar panels have no associated stigma and are found everywhere these days, from schools, churches, oil and gas wells to airports and industrial facilities, and increasingly on farms and agricultural sites as well. They are on roofs in many residential communities. Solar panels on a roof are often cited as an enhancement to the property in marketing brochures. • Appearance: This factor is discussed in detail below, but in terms of property value issues, larger solar farrns that use fixed or tracking panels are a passive land use that many feel aligns well with rural residential settings. They are similar in appearance to large greenhouses, which also function as passive solar energy collectors. "Meadow Forge Solar Impact Study", Kirkland Appraisals (2022) Page 2 of 12 With these factors firmly in mind, we have looked closely at the property value issues raised in your comments. The study that we provided, entitled "Property Value Impact Study"2 was published by one of the leading consulting firms, Cohn Reznick, and has been widely cited and utilized in many settings. We do understand your comments that the study was focused on Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan. The Midwest was believed to be a good study area because while it largely incorporated rural settings like this project, housing density is higher, and therefore the impact of solar farms on properties — if any — should be more evident and pronounced. The study shows no measurable impact and consistent difference in property values for properties adjacent to solar farms when compared to similar properties locationally removed from same. Consistently we have found in data from university studies, broker commentary, and other appraisal studies the importance of implementing landscape buffers and proper setbacks to further minimize the prospect of such impacts on property value adjoining the solar farms. The team has kept this in close consideration throughout the development and permitting process, by designing natural screening and respecting setbacks as defined by the Weld County Code. To further explore this and related economic factors, a socioeconomic impact and community benefit report has been commissioned and submitted as part of the permitting process.3 The study shows that the projects will result into an enhancement of the socioeconomic environment within Weld County due to the following factors: job creation, economic output, cost-effective locally generated power, increased income to landowners, and positive local health impacts; while having no measurable impact on the value of adjacent properties. Even if there were impacts to property, solar presents numerous balancing economic benefits that are important to consider. Again, these are detailed in our application materials and not the focus of this response, and we highlight just a few here: (1) Utility scale solar presents an opportunity to reserve land for future agricultural use while continuing to support agricultural interests and landowner rights. (2) This Project would provide an increase in property tax payments to Weld County, Fire District, School District and other community services. (3) Local employment opportunities would increase for local construction and operation companies and workers, and increased use of services (accommodations, restaurants) would occur throughout the construction of the Project without taxing social services such as schools, roads, etc., within the county. (4) The renewable energy and storage attributes of the project are firmly aligned with federal, state, local, utility, and other mandates to develop further renewable energy sources and take advantage of the many economic benefits of these systems. General Concern: Appearance and Visual We recognize that the aesthetics of any neighbouring use is a very personal matter to a property owner, and appreciate your sharing concerns on this topic in your comments. The team has endeavoured to its fullest extent to minimize and mitigate the impacts of this facility in the surrounding area with many of the items addressed here (e.g. screening using living fences, buffers, visual simulations, compatibility). For instance, Janus and Prospect will be built at least 500 feet away from existing homes, complying with Weld County regulations. The facility is designed to be low -profile, with heights ranging from 4 to 10 feet, comparable to the height of a cornfield. We also note that efforts to minimize visual and other impacts will continue throughout the project and will always be open to continuing input from the community. 2 "Property Value Impact Study: Adjacent Property Values Solar Impact Study: A Study of Eight Existing Solar Facilities", CohnReznick (2021) ilttpsdiwWv°v.rri;ictek UI Iergy(e. uuI cts.co.rniGanent/udi i i, t leer /us/enLpdf/Cohj ri-hiuznick°/o20_S larg o2U1a i ruacuo20St.uj'y 7.26.21.pdf 3 Appendix F - Socioeconomic Impact and Community Benefit Report Page 3 of 12 Ultimately, for all the reasons explained here and, in supporting County applications, both Horus and many involved parties and landowners feel that this is an excellent location for this project, and its features support this view. Horus does encourage the development on brown field sites where it makes sense, but there are simply not enough of them next to good transmission systems to meet the growing demand for e nergy in the country. This site was selected based in part on the transmission line and the capacity of the existing 115 and 230 -kV lines and supporting transmission, which has been part of the landscape in the area for many years. Also, there was interest from local landowners with regards to both financial reasons and to preserve their farmland long-term for future uses. The team and its projects have at their core the protection of the natural features that characterize the area, its peace and quietness, the energy and passion of its neighbours that make this area of the State so u nique. We recognize that the project will present some change for many commenters but believe that this change should be viewed in the context of the rapid changes overall in Weld County and beyond. We also believe it is important to compare this use to others that might be proposed over time. For instance, unlike this use, residential developments, in addition to causing disturbance during construction, present a series of ongoing traffic, visual, noise and other impacts. Horus is a property owner as well, and we deeply respect the vested interests, connection, and unique history each of you has to your property. We understand the passion that these issues often invoke. We would just ask that you consider these points as well as you assess your approach to this project. Again, if it would be useful, we welcome the opportunity to continue to address with you individually or collectively this important issue. General Concern: Traffic We understand that you chose to live out of the city to enjoy such features as the quietness, the peacefulness of driving down country roads, the simple cycle of planting, growing, and harvesting of crops, and the openness of the landscape . Many of you expressed concern that the traffic and congestion from this project would fundamentally shift the ability to enjoy this lifestyle. We really believe that this will not be the case - and will continue to do everything we can going forward to address this concern. Again, it is important to bear in mind that unlike so many other uses now crowding parts of Weld County, the increase in traffic will be temporary during the project's construction. Moreover, with our experts - Kimley Horn - who have and are working with Hudson and other cities - we have carefully designed a path that would minimize noise and disturbance and have limited impacts on the transportation patterns or the roads around the project site. The projects wilt utilize the existing roadway system, where appropriate, and contribute to upgrade, build, and maintain the other roads that will be utilized during the construction of the projects. Similar to mineral o il and gas production, Weld County rules ensure that adequate roads must exist or be made available prior to construction of the projects. The projects will submit a Road Use Agreement and Access Road Permit application to the County, ensuring compliance with the County design standards. The projects will u pgrade any damaged and deteriorated roads and help maintain the same if they fall within the construction path. Safety is a very important aspect for Horus and we strive for a responsible and orderly development. This is also thoroughly reflected in Weld County Code provisions aimed at protecting and serving the health, welfare and safety of the citizens of the County. A Traffic Management Plan will be developed that will implement reduced speed limits on local roads and will require signallers to control the traffic in key areas in the vicinity of the projects, aimed at ensuring careful driving from construction workers. The living fence, in addition to providing visual screening, will also provide additional benefits in this respect, contributing towards an improvement in road safety and a reduction of hazardous driving conditions, by reducing snow drift onto roads, which in turn increases visibility, and reduces maintenance, plowing, and salting costs. Page 4 of 12 While there will be some short-term disruptions in term of noise and traffic, the benefits that the project wilt bring will be long-lasting. Some will be apparent in the short term like the increase in revenue from local business and hotels, restaurants, suppliers. The native vegetation that wilt be planted underneath the panels will attract pollinators, a fundamental piece of our ecosystem. The project water tank can be utilized by the Southeast Weld Fire Protection District and its Chief Tom Beach for fire emergencies in the area. Other benefits will be more evident in the long term, like the increase in taxes for Weld County that will help support a wide variety of services upon which all parties rely. General Concern: Dust We appreciate your questions about dust and how this will be mitigated. We have given this topic a lot of thought. We have developed a detailed Dust and Weed Mitigation Plan as part of the protects' land use permit applications, which integrates and adheres to Colorado Department of Health and Environment Land Development Permit requirements establishing acceptable dust levels, which will be monitored closely as the project proceeds.4 We will be adapting this as the project progresses to ensure we are minimizing the temporary construction impact created by dust. Again, we might ask that this concern be put in perspective of all the other permanent potential uses that might be made of these lands - that would not only generate much more immediate dust issues but would increase disturbances of this nature for decades to come and change the fundamental agricultural nature of these lands. General Concern: Noise This in our view is one of the many advantages of solar, above nearly all other uses. During operations there will be no noticeable noise from the solar farm. The only components of the project facilities that will emit low levels of noise will be inverters and BESS equipment. However, these facilities will be located at least a quarter mile from residences and noise levels will be well below levels set by County noise ordinances set forth in Chapter 14 Article IX of the Weld County Code. During the life of the project the site will be controlled remotely, and utility personnel will visit on a quarterly basis to conduct routine inspections and maintenance. The transformer typically has a hum similar to an HVAC that can only be heard in close proximity. Buffers on the property are sufficient to make emitted sounds inaudible from the adjoining properties. Transformers will be located at least a quarter mile from residences and noise levels will be well below levels set by County noise ordinances. During construction there will be some noise due to pile driving and equipment backup beeping such as reverse warning sounds, but please note that this noise will again be temporary in nature and is not anticipated to exceed maximum levels at the property boundary for construction activities outlined in Weld County noise ordinances. All told, the solar farms will be a very quiet neighbour, harvesting solar energy passively throughout the project life. General Concern: Impacts from Project Materials Another benefit of solar, compared to nearly other use that might be made of this land, is the negligible use of materials that are in any way hazardous or harmful. We appreciate the concerns expressed about impacts of materials to be used during the construction phase but are very confident that that any impacts from fertilizer, weed control, or other material usage, will be significantly less than typical residential development and most agricultural uses. These issues are further addressed below in our discussion of environmental matters, but it may help to review the basic constituents found in the components of a solar farm. The panels are bi-facial mono - crystalline that have no known leaching issues. The primary materials of a solar panel which are glass, 4 Dust and Weed Mitigation Ran -Appendix D Page 5 of 12 aluminum, silicone, copper, and trace semiconducting metals are inert and don't constitute hazardous materials or waste. There could be trace amounts of lead from soldering material, which is similar to televisions and cell phones. There is no risk of exposure or leakage and any amount contained in the modules is below the EPA limits. Solar panels are recyclable and contain approximately 75 percent glass, 8 percent aluminium, and 5 percent silicon. Approximately 70 percent of the material is recoverable due to the processing required to separate the panel components. These materials, once recycled, are worth about $6 per panel to the solar farm at today's prices. Solar plants use minimal chemicals. There could be some paint to touch up rusted areas on the mounting structure, potentially some oil in the transformers, and we also intend to utilize limited solutions to control the dust and weeds on the site. Further details on these matters are contained in the various plans cited in this response, but all such materials would be used in accordance with risk assessments and method statements ensuring they are used correctly and with suitable safely procedures in place. Also note there is no cadmium telluride in the panels we have proposed. General Concern: Water There were a few comments directed at water usage issues, and we understand that water is a critical element of concern at all levels of the community. Water usage and quality is a great concern for Weld County and Horus and has been a focus of our application materials throughout. Horus is committed to protecting Weld County's waterways and supply. The properties involved in this project have no vested water rights, and irrigated agriculture is accomplished by leasing water from nearby tenants. The project has secured sufficient water resources to supply what will amount to modest water needs for the Project (0.007 -acre feet per acre per year). As compared to many other uses shown in the Application, solar requires minimal water for project operation. The Project's water use plan is intended to preserve the agricultural land base and allow for a return to full agricultural use once the solar project is decommissioned. For planning purposes, Project water needs can be divided into the following categories: 1. Construction/Dust Control —Some water will be required to implement the Dust Control Plan and related aspects of the construction phrase. The plan is to utilise outside service companies to supply the water for this need as part of their spray mix system so to not require any contribution of local water from the area. There will also be stormwater controls and related mitigation measures during construction to manage existing surface water flow and maintain water quality, as required by governing regulations. Finally, some water may be needed for initial planting and maintenance of plants used for screening, although species are selected for their minimal ongoing watering requirements. 2. Fire Control - While fire is not a typical concern for PV and BESS systems, the Project's water tank may be utilized by the Southeast Weld Fire District and will provide a key resource for protection against fires in the region, especially in times of drought. This tank will need to be filled periodically. 3. Panel Washing and Maintenance -The only ongoing water supply needed for the Project is for washing and maintaining the solar panels and supporting facilities, in part to maximize energy return. The exact cleaning schedule is a function of precipitation, dust, and other particulate settling on the panels. To minimize cleaning, the Project intends to utilize a commercial contractor to treat neighbouring roads with GMCO CS products, a blend of liquid magnesium chloride and a complex sugar. The product is an environmentally friendly solution for gravel road stabilization and dust control. This will reduce water consumption related to cleaning during the operation period (and reduce dust in residential homes as well). Water needs will be more than adequately met by (1) the occasional purchase or trucking in of outside water where needed, particularly at the construction phrase, (2) the establishment of a large water Page 6 of 12 collection tank near the well on the Janus property to store water from the onsite well, and (3) over the longer term, by the existing onsite water well. The onsite welt located is fully in place and secured. Based on initial calculations, the amount of water needed per acre foot of land for the Project is much less than current annual agricultural uses for the Project site. It is also less than the average amount of water per acre of land needed to raise most crops. General Concern: Water Drainage As many of you recognized, one important element of water management is the handling of drainage over the course of the solar project. Horus has commissioned Kimley Horn to prepare a preliminary drainage report which evaluates pre and post development hydrologic characteristics of the project site and addresses the stormwater requirements of Weld County and the state of Colorado. 5 The study found that peak flow rates will actually be reduced from the existing rates, due to the proposed improvements on the project site, complemented with the findings from the Journal of Hydrologic Engineering focused on researching the hydrologic impacts of utility scale solar generation facilities. The study also concluded that drainage patterns offsite will remain the same as historic conditions. In addition, detention ponds have been designed on the project site to retain the required storage volumes. Generally, solar farms have little to no impact on runoff volumes or rates. Rainfall that falls directly on a solar panel runs to the pervious areas around and under the surrounding panels. General Concern: Conflicts with future land use plans We appreciate your questions related to compatibility of the solar farm with overall uses in the area. Compatibility is thoroughly assessed in the Weld County Code in Chapters 21, 22 and 23 as part of the permit application process, and we refer you to the voluminous project materials and attachments submitted by Horus addressingthis subject. For ease of reference, each regulation and associated project compatibility features are outlined below for reference: Ciaapter 21; Areas and Activities of State Interest, Article is Site Selecton and Construction of Major Facilities of a Pub,'c Utility, Div sion 3: Permit Program for Site Selection and Construction of a Major Facility of a Public Utility • Regulation: All reasonable alternatives to the proposed action, including use of existing rights -of - way and joint use of rights -of -way wherever uses are compatible, have been adequately assessed and the proposed action is compatible with and represents the best interests of the people of the County and represents a fair and reasonable utilization of resources in the impact area. • Project Compliance with) egula_t ; All reasonable alternatives within the study area were thoroughly assessed to make the Project fully compatible with and representative of the best interests of the people of Weld County. While a larger land area was initially studied, the Project's final footprint was selected because it offered advantages to the community and overall environment while providing opportunities and circumstances favourable to Solar and BESS facilities, specifically 1) existing transmission infrastructure less than 0.2 miles from the property, 2) augmenting, while sustaining for future landowners, current unsustainable primary land use as indicated by the landowners. This offers benefits to land use for the surrounding area. Utilization of local resources within Weld County will be minimal as the Project will not require services such as water, sewage, or emergency services at a level typical of other land uses in the area. Code Chapter 22: Comprehensive Plan, Article II -- Principles, Goals, and Objectives • Regulation: Transition between land use types and intensities with buffers. Uses that are incompatible with existing uses must be able to mitigate conflicts and support compatible economic development opportunities. • Project Compliance with Regulations: The project complies with or exceeds all County required buffers from roads, residences, Oil and Gas operations, and other special areas. Adjacent uses S Preliminary Drainage Analysis -Appendix J Page 7 of 12 will not be affected, and nearby land can continue to be utilized for agriculture or other compatible u ses. This will support the opportunity for future compatible economic development in the area. Project compatibility is further demonstrated by comparing other land uses in the area. In Weld County the Agricultural zoning district is designed primarily for agricultural uses, but it also accommodates various other special uses, including Oil and Gas Operations, Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), and subdivisions of land for residential development. White these use types are generally accepted in agricultural areas, their impacts to neighbour and e nvironment health are substantial, including for industrial facilities emissions that may result in respiratory issues and water quality contamination. Utility scale solar has fewer direct health impacts as they do not produce air or water pollution and contribute to cleaner energy production, which can have broader public health benefits by reducing reliance on fossil fuels. ChaDter 23; Zoning, Article I — Procedures and Permits, Division 4 — Uses by Special Review • Regulation: Permitted uses will be compatible with the existing surrounding land uses and with the future development of the surrounding area as permitted by the existing zone and with future development. Buffering or screening of the proposed use from adjacent properties requirements. • Project Compliance w.th Regulations: Mitigation of construction impacts and visual impacts have been addressed as described throughout the application. Natural vegetative buffers have been incorporated into the project design on a case -by -case basis to mitigate visual impacts for n eighbours. This includes utilization of multiple layers of vegetation and specific species to ensure each landowner has a screen that works for their specific location and needs. Screening is discussed in more detail below. The proposed use is compatible with existing land uses and future development. The existing site land use is dryland agricultural row crops and rangeland, most similar to tillage/agricultural land classification. While a vital part of the land use base in the area, it does have its impacts. Disturbance to the land from tillage can disrupt the natural soil structure resulting in reduced soil cohesion and structural stability, which may result in increased soil erosion, compaction, and runoff. It also can deplete the soil's organic content, reducing its fertility and affecting its ability to retain moisture and nutrients. The ability to retain moisture in becoming increasingly important in Weld County as water is a precious resource. Disturbed soil is also susceptible to weeds, requiring additional inputs such as herbicides and pesticides, which can further impact soil health and the surrounding environment. Farming this land is becoming increasingly difficult as water becomes scarcer and the soil health declines. This project will allow the landowners to profit from their land without the disturbance that results from tilled agriculture. Temporarily halting ag use of this land for the duration of the project will allow the soil health to improve. Revegetation actions following construction include seeding the land with a county approved seed mix and will promote the growth of native grasses to preserve the quality of the soil and mitigate noxious weeds. By utilizing the county approved native grass seed mix below the panels, the existing tillage/agricultural land areas will be changed to a heavy meadow land classification that reduces peak flow rates and manages stormwater in line with the historic conditions of the site. This will promote water conservation at both the watershed and site levels, with the goal of replicating the native hydrologic characteristics of the sub - watersheds, creating natural ground coverage, and reducing dust. The change in land use from tilled agriculture land to utility scale solar will allow the landowners to increase the health of their land and reduce water use while simultaneously profiting from their land. This is beneficial to adjacent uses as it presents a lesser impact to neighbour and e nvironmental health and is also economically profitable for the County. Upon completion of the solar lease option, the project can be fully decommissioned, and the land returned to agricultural use or open meadow land. Utility scale solar is one of the only land development uses that not only preserves and improves ag land for future use, but is also a low water use, providing conservation benefits as well. Fifty years from now, these developments may be integral to preserving open lands and reducing urban sprawl. Page 8 of 12 General Concern: Screening The screening plan was developed during consultations with adjacent landowners and visual simulations. The goal is to provide screening tailored to your individual property owner requests, and at the same time ensure screening best accounts for water usage needed to sustain the living fence. Screening was developed in consultation with our expert biologist and landscaping team. The size of Rocky Mountain Juniper trees selected (10 -gallon containers for the juniper are about 5' in height and 1.5-2" caliper) was chosen to reduce the risk of mortality from transplant stress. The typical growth rate is one foot a year. A 3 -inch caliper juniper normally utilizes a ball and burlap container system and tends to have higher mortality rates due to the stress/damage to the root ball in transport and planting - which is why the 10 -gallon container tree was recommended. Since Rocky Mountain Juniper is a native species and naturally occurs in that area, we know it can handle the climate and limited water resources, but winter watering should be considered as a precaution (especially if it's a dry winter) to reduce potential for mortality. First season watering was recommended because that should be enough time for root stock to establish at appropriate depths to access ground water. There is a balance between survival and not creating a dependency on watering. Therefore, an adaptive approach would be best where watering is tapered off over 3 years. We have also received questions on how the Skunkbush Sumac will be planted along the Juniper. The two will be planted in a scattered fashion so it looks more natural. We appreciate the recommendation of the American Wild Plum as an alternative to the plants chosen, but American wild plum typically requires more water than the juniper or sumac, so they are not recommended to minimise the use of water, hence why they were not selected in the project design. General Concern: Environment and Wildlife We appreciate your comments on these critical topics, as Horus is committed to promote a responsible development in Weld County, promoting economic development, land stewardship, while at the same time preserving crops and the natural resources and wildlife that make this area so special. To this effect the team has developed several studies which include a Cultural Resource Survey, Wetland and Waterbody Survey, a study on protected species, a Phase 1 Environmental Assessment Report, and Critical Issue Analysis that were completed by archaeological, biological, and ecological experts. The aim and the results of these studies were used to best assess any environmental impact the projects may cause and mitigate the same in the projects design by avoiding waterways, planting native grass mix to enrich the soil and juniper trees lining the fence, and creating a movement corridor along Sand Creek to facilitate big game habitats. The applicant has committed to strict management practices that are detailed in the 1041 /USR application.° This is also embedded within the Weld County Code to ensure that the natural and economic environment and resources of the County are protected and enhanced. With this overarching perspective in mind, the following summarizes and responds to each of the comments received with respect to the environment, wildlife and seeding. Wildlife Corridor We appreciate your comments on the wildlife corridor. Please note that like with so many aspects of this project, we have utilized the expertise of outside local agencies or experts to address this issue. Here, we have designed the corridor in collaboration with experts on wildlife at Colorado Parks and Wildlife ("CPW"). The agency has been consulted since the inception of the projects; they have been involved in the permitting process and provided their referral letters on the projects. To address the loss of open space and the fragmentation of existing and accessible big game habitats caused by the projects, Horus has designed a wildlife corridor of 600ft, wider than the minimum set by CPW (250ft) and followed CPW recommendations for the fencing of the project in order to minimize any potential impact to wildlife. 6 Appendix E - Environmental Protection Measures and Agency Coordination Page 9 of 12 Wildfife_Species As part of the projects siting, development and permitting, please note Horus has completed onsite biological reconnaissance studies with expert biologists which revealed there are no species of concern with federal and state statutory protection likely to occur in the project area, with the exception of burrowing owls. Construction will occur outside of nesting season if this species is identified during the planned pre -construction biological surveys. Horus has also consulted with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ("USFWS") and CPW on the same issue, which have also commented on the projects' application. USFWS has expressed no concern of the project resulting in potential impacts to species listed as proposed, threatened, or endangered. CPW has confirmed the project is sited outside High Priority Habitats ("HPHs"), areas defined as sensitive wildlife habitats. Thank you for making us aware of deer, antelope, foxes, elk, and coyotes in the vicinity, and we will remain mindful throughout the life of the project of the vital need to preserve and enhance every opportunity to support these and all wildlife species. Again, in consulting with the experts on these topics, please note that impacts to these species was not identified as a concern during agency reviews of the project with CPW and USFWS. Seeding We agree with you on the importance of pollinators for crops and the local ecosystem. As highlighted in the project application native plant seeding will be incorporated between and around the solar arrays to beautify and restore the appearance of the Project site, but most importantly to promote the return of native species and pollinators. This plan will also preserve and improve soil conditions. General Concern: Glare A Glare Study was performed by Colliers Engineering & Design on the array areas of the Project. A software called Forge Solar was used that determines the potential for glare given the solar farm specifics and looks at potential effects on the human eye at locations where glare is predicted to occur. The analysis was tailored to review the potential effects of the solar farm on nearby residences and on a privately owned landing strip near the project site. Worst -case scenario parameters were used for a conservative estimate. Findings show that with appropriate system settings, it is unlikely that glare from the proposed solar project will be problematic in any manner for the surrounding area and that the project would comply with the Federal Aviation Administration's 2021 policy regarding glint and glare effects to commercial airports. An in-depth explanation of the above conclusion and the details of the full parameters of this study are found in Appendix P of the Weld County Land Use Applications. General Concern: Heat Effects We understand that considering recent temperature increase trends, it is important to be mindful of whether solar farms might have undesired heat effects. Studies show that while the center of the PV field can reach up to 1.9 Celsius above the ambient temperature. This thermal energy completely dissipates to the environment at distances of approximately 16 to 60 feet. PV solar farms do not induce a day -after -day increase in ambient temperature, and therefore, adverse micro -climate changes from a potential PV plant are not a concern.' Also relevant here is the study entitled Analysis of the Potential for a Heat Island Effect in Large Solar Farms from Columbia University, which presents a comprehensive review of the so-called 'heat island' effect. This study contains field data and simulations showing that the dissipation of thermal energy is enhanced by cooling at night, by existing roads between the fields, and by vegetation buffers. "Analysis of the Potential for a Heat Island Effect in Large Solar Farms", Vasilis Fthenakis (2013) Page 10 of 12 General Concern: Electromagnetic Interference In the ever -evolving landscape of technology, electromagnetic interference (EMI) is an important consideration. We have carefully considered whether EMI will occur as a result of these projects. Utility -scale solar fields are integral to our shift towards renewable energy, consisting of extensive arrays of solar panels designed to capture sunlight and convert it into electricity. The panels themselves are not significant sources of EMI; however, the associated equipment, such as inverters and transformers, can produce electromagnetic fields. Inverters are crucial components in solar fields. They convert the direct current (DC) generated by solar panels into alternating current (AC) used by the electrical grid. Inverters and transformers typically operate at power frequencies, around 50-60 Hz, and can produce EMI that might affect nearby electronic devices. Although the frequencies are much tower than those from cell phones, these devices must be carefully designed and shielded to prevent interference. Proper inverter enclosure grounding, filtering, and circuit layout has been incorporated into this project to further reduce EM radiation. Inverters are distributed throughout the project footprint and are located at least a quarter mile from residences, further reducing impacts. For a comparison, cell phones operate using radiofrequency (RF) signals, typically in the GHz range - 900 MHz, 1.8 GHz, and 2.4 GHz - essential for communication. This RF radiation, while essential for connectivity, has sparked ongoing health discussions which may have led to the concern by residents about potential EMI from the proposed solar projects. However, when comparingthe health impacts of cell phones and solar field inverters, the differences are notable. The primary concern with cell phones is the higher frequency RF radiation emitted, which can lead to potential health risks if exposure is prolonged. Regulatory standards are in place to mitigate these risks, but ongoing research continues to evaluate the long-term effects of RF exposure on health. The EMI from inverters in solar fields operates at lower frequencies and is generally considered to pose less of a direct health risk compared to RF radiation. However, inverters must be designed to minimize EMI and prevent interference with nearby electronic equipment. The health risks from this type of EMI are typically regarded as minimal, though they still warrant careful management. Proper design and regulatory adherence are essential to mitigate any potential interference. The Janus and Prospect Solar projects will adhere to the strict regulations regarding EMI found in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 47, Part 15 to ensure that the health and safety of Weld County residents is protected. General Concern: Light Pollution Compared to urban areas, industrial facilities, or outdoor recreational lighting, solar farms have a much lower impact in terms of tight pollution. The solar panels themselves do not emit light. Lighting at the projects will be limited to the substation and operations and maintenance building. These lights will be downward facing and will be activated by motion sensor. Lights on the substation are the responsibility of the substation operator and can be remotely turned on/off. On the other hand, urban areas and industrial activities often involve extensive, high -intensity lighting that can contribute to significant light pollution, General Concern: Cumulative Impacts With regards to the concern raised by a few commenters that the two projects may have greater impacts being adjacent, please note the team has addressed this concern by preparing the reports and submitting the applications to the County together. The projects will therefore be assessed as a whole rather than independently as the permitting proceeds, and cumulative impacts will be considered. Page 11 of 12 Conclusion The project team would like to thank local residents for taking time to reach out and submit your concerns. We encourage your continued review, input and perspectives. Please contact us by email at roger,freeman@horuscapital.co.uk, francesco.cardi@horuscapital.co.u' , and ehitler@logansimpson.com to discuss the project and any follow up or additional questions you may have. We took forward to working with you as we move through the planning and regulatory processes for the project. Thanks so much for your cooperation. Sincerely, Horus Team Page 12 of 12 From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Attachments: Francesco Card( IbirkmeyerCahjlrflatironsicom Roger Freeman; airily Bit er Response to Community Comments - Neighbour Letter Friday, September 13, 2024 11:50:39 AM Neig tour Letter September 13th 2024 - Fina .pdf EXHIBIT tk23t/rbd(3 �3 CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization. Block sender I Report Dear Ms. Birkmeyer, Please find attached our comments responding to recent neighbour letters. Thanks so much for your cooperation. Kind Regards, Francesco Paolo Cardi Associate Horns Energy Mobile: +1 303 479 4535 francesco.cardi@horuscapital.co.uk https://horuseneray.co.uki Response To Community Comments On behalf of Horus Energy, we welcome the opportunity to respond to a series of comments that have been recently submitted to the County by neighbours and other local citizens about our proposed Janus and Prospect solar projects. First and foremost, we greatly appreciate your efforts to work with us throughout the course of this project. Horus has received and closely integrated your input, feedback, request for property -specific adaptations, and all the forms of interest and support expressed for this project. Through a variety of steps taken throughout the project planning, development, and permitting stages, we have been gratified to work closely with your incredible community. In that regard, while we recognize that some commenters have recently voiced strong concerns, we do believe the project enjoys significant landowner and local support. This support has been conveyed to the County in 10 letters of support and non -objection. This includes five neighbours adjacent to the projects, as well as the five landowner partners in the project. Horus directly has received many more informal or oral expressions of positive input from a diverse set of interested parties. This foundation of support is built upon a long series of outreach efforts. As many of you know, we begin reaching out to the community in the earliest development stages of the projects - both through individual contacts and a public meeting held on July 05, 2023. As we explained at that meeting, the initial outreach group was identified under basic rules in Weld County for contacting the local immediate neighbours most proximate to the development. This also included several local agencies and community service entities representing everything from fire response to community planning. These initial contacts have formed the basis for a series of continued communications with many of you about individual property issues or considerations. Some have commented that they wish that they have known of the project sooner and could have attended the prior meeting. Please know that while these initial communications focused on those living closest to the development, they were driven solely by practical and regulatory considerations and are part of a continuing, longstanding, and broad community outreach program that has and will be the cornerstone of our approach to this project throughout its course. In this regard, we have welcomed comments from citizens in any location in Weld County. As reflected in this group response, we understand your interest and have carefully considered all comments. We also note that in addition to providing this collective response, we have continued to reach out to individuals and landowners to try to accommodate individual questions or concerns or mitigate particular property circumstances. We have yet to hear back from some individuals - but understand that some folks may want to do so in a collective way. Others may feel like they want to respond more directly and specifically once a collective response is received. The bottom line is that our doors remain wide open to continue any communication - whether collective or otherwise. With these factors in mind, Horus carefully weighed whether a collective response would serve the community best. We believe that this approach is supported by the fact that the concerns expressed convey a very parallel set of questions or concerns. In fact, many of the comments appeared to be jointly generated and contained the same basic wording. We welcome this joint approach, and the efficiencies created thereby, but remain flexible to meet the community needs going forward. While Horus has attempted to frame and highlight key points from our application materials in this response, we did not choose to include voluminous documents and data equally accessible to all on the public websites. It appears that some of you were able to access that information, and we appreciate your taking the time to do so. We are certainly glad to provide additional references to materials on file, specific studies, or other supporting documentation. Please don't hesitate to reach out to us if we can provide or help access these materials or information. Page 1 of 12 Finally, while we believe we have addressed all individual points raised by the community in recent comments, please let us know immediately if we missed any concerns or have additional specific comments or input that you would like for us to address, either through follow-up communications or upcoming public hearings surrounding these projects. General Concern: Property Values We fully understand the utmost importance of property and land rights to all residents of Weld County and the interest of all commenters in this issue. While every property will have different features relevant to this discussion - and some commenters appear to live quite a distance from the solar farms themselves - we feel that the following discussion applies generally to all. That said, since all comments were from property owners outside the project boundaries itself, we concentrate on adjacent property value issues here. In turn, this discussion does not go into detail about the numerous and compelling benefits generated to the community at large through such attributes as economic, tax, renewable energy generation, and supporting project landowner rights to use and obtain value from their land. These are discussed in detail in our application materials and other sources. The potential impact of solar farms on adjacent properties has been considered in other situations in Colorado and across the nation. As a result, much research has been done to assess the impact of solar on land valuations. We recognize that many commenters cited various studies, and we have carefully considered same in formulating this response. As these studies reflect, appraisers generally determine potential negative impact caused by an external source on adjacent or nearby properties utilizing the following factors': • Hazardous material: As discussed further below, a solar farm involves no hazardous materials or waste byproduct as part of its operation • Odor: Solar farms produce no odor. • Noise: As discussed further below, whether discussing passive fixed solar panels, or single -axis trackers, there is no negative impact associated with noise from a solar farm. No sound is emitted from the facility at night. Solar farms are inaudible from the roadways. • Traffic: As discussed further below, there will be a temporary increase in traffic during construction, and we have provided an extensive report in the application materials describing the efforts made to mitigate traffic impacts to the neighbourhood. Once built, the solar farm will have no onsite employees or staff, and the traffic will be far less than many other typical County uses. The site requires only minimal maintenance. • Stigma: There is no stigma associated with solar farms and people generally respond favourably towards such a use. While an individual may express concerns about proximity to a solar farm, there is no specific stigma associated with a solar farm. Stigma generally refers to things such as adult establishments, prisons, rehabilitation facilities, and so forth. Solar panels have no associated stigma and are found everywhere these days, from schools, churches, oil and gas wells to airports and industrial facilities, and increasingly on farms and agricultural sites as well. They are on roofs in many residential communities. Solar panels on a roof are often cited as an enhancement to the property in marketing brochures. • Appearance: This factor is discussed in detail below, but in terms of property value issues, larger solar farms that use fixed or tracking panels are a passive land use that many feel aligns well with rural residential settings. They are similar in appearance to large greenhouses, which also function as passive solar energy collectors. ' "Meadow Forge Solar Impact Study", Kirkland Appraisals (2022) Page 2 of 12 With these factors firmly in mind, we have looked closely at the property value issues raised in your comments. The study that we provided, entitled "Property Value Impact Study"2 was published by one of the leading consulting firms, Cohn Reznick, and has been widely cited and utilized in many settings. We do understand your comments that the study was focused on Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan. The Midwest was believed to be a good study area because while it largely incorporated rural settings like this project, housing density is higher, and therefore the impact of solar farms on properties — if any — should be more evident and pronounced. The study shows no measurable impact and consistent difference in property values for properties adjacent to solar farms when compared to similar properties locationally removed from same. Consistently we have found in data from university studies, broker commentary, and other appraisal studies the importance of implementing landscape buffers and proper setbacks to further minimize the prospect of such impacts on property value adjoining the solar farms. The team has kept this in close consideration throughout the development and permitting process, by designing natural screening and respecting setbacks as defined by the Weld County Code. To further explore this and related economic factors, a socioeconomic impact and community benefit report has been commissioned and submitted as part of the permitting process.3 The study shows that the projects will result into an enhancement of the socioeconomic environment within Weld County due to the following factors: job creation, economic output, cost-effective locally generated power, increased income to landowners, and positive local health impacts; while having no measurable impact on the value of adjacent properties. Even if there were impacts to property, solar presents numerous balancing economic benefits that are important to consider. Again, these are detailed in our application materials and not the focus of this response, and we highlight just a few here: (1) Utility scale solar presents an opportunity to reserve land for future agricultural use while continuing to support agricultural interests and landowner rights. (2) This Project would provide an increase in property tax payments to Weld County, Fire District, School District and other community services. (3) Local employment opportunities would increase for local construction and operation companies and workers, and increased use of services (accommodations, restaurants) would occur throughout the construction of the Project without taxing social services such as schools, roads, etc., within the county. (4) The renewable energy and storage attributes of the project are firmly aligned with federal, state, local, utility, and other mandates to develop further renewable energy sources and take advantage of the many economic benefits of these systems. General Concern: Appearance and Visual We recognize that the aesthetics of any neighbouring use is a very personal matter to a property owner, and appreciate your sharing concerns on this topic in your comments. The team has endeavoured to its fullest extent to minimize and mitigate the impacts of this facility in the surrounding area with many of the items addressed here (e.g. screening using living fences, buffers, visual simulations, compatibility). For instance, Janus and Prospect will be built at least 500 feet away from existing homes, complying with Weld County regulations. The facility is designed to be low -profile, with heights ranging from 4 to 10 feet, comparable to the height of a cornfield. We also note that efforts to minimize visual and other impacts will continue throughout the project and will always be open to continuing input from the community. 2 "Property Value Impact Study: Adjacent Property Values Solar Impact Study: A Study of Eight Existing Solar Facilities", CohnReznick (2021) https://www.nexteraenergyresnurce ,comlcontenuldam/neerfus/en/pd#/CohnReznick%20Soiar%20Impact%20Study 7.26.21.pdf 3 Appendix F - Socioeconomic Impact and Community Benefit Report Page 3 of 12 Ultimately, for all the reasons explained here and, in supporting County applications, both Horus and many involved parties and landowners feel that this is an excellent location for this project, and its features support this view. Horus does encourage the development on brown field sites where it makes sense, but there are simply not enough of them next to good transmission systems to meet the growing demand for e nergy in the country. This site was selected based in part on the transmission tine and the capacity of the existing 115 and 230 -kV lines and supporting transmission, which has been part of the landscape in the area for many years. Also, there was interest from local landowners with regards to both financial reasons and to preserve their farmland long-term for future uses. The team and its projects have at their core the protection of the natural features that characterize the area, its peace and quietness, the energy and passion of its neighbours that make this area of the State so u nique. We recognize that the project will present some change for many commenters but believe that this change should be viewed in the context of the rapid changes overall in Weld County and beyond. We also believe it is important to compare this use to others that might be proposed over time. For instance, unlike this use, residential developments, in addition to causing disturbance during construction, present a series of ongoing traffic, visual, noise and other impacts. Horus is a property owner as well, and we deeply respect the vested interests, connection, and unique history each of you has to your property. We understand the passion that these issues often invoke. We would just ask that you consider these points as well as you assess your approach to this project. Again, if it would be useful, we welcome the opportunity to continue to address with you individually or collectively this important issue. General Concern: Traffic We understand that you chose to live out of the city to enjoy such features as the quietness, the peacefulness of driving down country roads, the simple cycle of planting, growing, and harvesting of crops, and the openness of the landscape . Many of you expressed concern that the traffic and congestion from this project would fundamentally shift the ability to enjoy this lifestyle. We really believe that this will not be the case - and will continue to do everything we can going forward to address this concern. Again, it is important to bear in mind that unlike so many other uses now crowding parts of Weld County, the increase in traffic will be temporary during the project's construction. Moreover, with our experts — Kimley Horn — who have and are working with Hudson and other cities — we have carefully designed a path that would minimize noise and disturbance and have limited impacts on the transportation patterns or the roads around the project site. The projects will utilize the existing roadway system, where appropriate, and contribute to upgrade, build, and maintain the other roads that will be utilized during the construction of the projects. Similar to mineral oil and gas production, Weld County rules ensure that adequate roads must exist or be made available prior to construction of the projects. The projects will submit a Road Use Agreement and Access Road Permit application to the County, ensuring compliance with the County design standards. The projects will u pgrade any damaged and deteriorated roads and help maintain the same if they fall within the construction path. Safety is a very important aspect for Horus and we strive for a responsible and orderly development. This is also thoroughly reflected in Weld County Code provisions aimed at protecting and serving the health, welfare and safety of the citizens of the County. A Traffic Management Plan will be developed that will implement reduced speed limits on local roads and will require signallers to control the traffic in key areas in the vicinity of the projects, aimed at ensuring careful driving from construction workers. The living fence, in addition to providing visual screening, will also provide additional benefits in this respect, contributing towards an improvement in road safety and a reduction of hazardous driving conditions, by reducing snow drift onto roads, which in turn increases visibility, and reduces maintenance, plowing, and salting costs. Page 4 of 12 While there will be some short-term disruptions in term of noise and traffic, the benefits that the project will bring will be long-lasting. Some wilt be apparent in the short term like the increase in revenue from local business and hotels, restaurants, suppliers. The native vegetation that will be planted underneath the panels will attract pollinators, a fundamental piece of our ecosystem. The project water tank can be utilized by the Southeast Weld Fire Protection District and its Chief Tom Beach for fire emergencies in the area. Other benefits will be more evident in the long term, like the increase in taxes for Weld County that will help support a wide variety of services upon which all parties rely. General Concern: Dust We appreciate your questions about dust and how this will be mitigated. We have given this topic a lot of thought. We have developed a detailed Dust and Weed Mitigation Plan as part of the projects' land use permit applications, which integrates and adheres to Colorado Department of Health and Environment Land Development Permit requirements establishing acceptable dust levels, which will be monitored closely as the project proceeds. We will be adapting this as the project progresses to ensure we are minimizing the temporary construction impact created by dust. Again, we might ask that this concern be put in perspective of all the other permanent potential uses that might be made of these lands - that would not only generate much more immediate dust issues but would increase disturbances of this nature for decades to come and change the fundamental agricultural nature of these lands. General Concern: Noise This in our view is one of the many advantages of solar, above nearly all other uses. During operations there will be no noticeable noise from the solar farm. The only components of the project facilities that will emit low levels of noise will be inverters and BESS equipment. However, these facilities will be located at least a quarter mile from residences and noise levels will be well below levels set by County noise ordinances set forth in Chapter 14 Article IX of the Weld County Code. During the life of the project the site will be controlled remotely, and utility personnel will visit on a quarterly basis to conduct routine inspections and maintenance. The transformer typically has a hum similar to an HVAC that can only be heard in close proximity. Buffers on the property are sufficient to make emitted sounds inaudible from the adjoining properties. Transformers will be located at least a quarter mile from residences and noise levels will be well below levels set by County noise ordinances. During construction there will be some noise due to pile driving and equipment backup beeping such as reverse warning sounds, but please note that this noise will again be temporary in nature and is not anticipated to exceed maximum levels at the property boundary for construction activities outlined in Weld County noise ordinances. All told, the solar farms wilt be a very quiet neighbour, harvesting solar energy passively throughout the project life. General Concern: Impacts from Project Materials Another benefit of solar, compared to nearly other use that might be made of this land, is the negligible use of materials that are in any way hazardous or harmful. We appreciate the concerns expressed about impacts of materials to be used during the construction phase but are very confident that that any impacts from fertilizer, weed control, or other material usage, will be significantly less than typical residential development and most agricultural uses. These issues are further addressed below in our discussion of environmental matters, but it may help to review the basic constituents found in the components of a solar farm. The panels are bi-facial mono - crystalline that have no known leaching issues. The primary materials of a solar panel which are glass, 4 Dust and Weed Mitigation Plan -Appendix D Page 5 of 12 aluminum, silicone, copper, and trace semiconducting metals are inert and don't constitute hazardous materials or waste. There could be trace amounts of lead from soldering material, which is similar to televisions and cell phones. There is no risk of exposure or Leakage and any amount contained in the modules is below the EPA limits. Solar panels are recyclable and contain approximately 75 percent glass, 8 percent aluminium, and 5 percent silicon. Approximately 70 percent of the material is recoverable due to the processing required to separate the panel components. These materials, once recycled, are worth about $6 per panel to the solar farm at today's prices. Solar plants use minimal chemicals. There could be some paint to touch up rusted areas on the mounting structure, potentially some oil in the transformers, and we also intend to utilize Limited solutions to control the dust and weeds on the site. Further details on these matters are contained in the various plans cited in this response, but all such materials would be used in accordance with risk assessments and method statements ensuring they are used correctly and with suitable safely procedures in place. Also note there is no cadmium telluride in the panels we have proposed. General Concern: Water There were a few comments directed at water usage issues, and we understand that water is a critical element of concern at all levels of the community. Water usage and quality is a great concern for Weld County and Horus and has been a focus of our application materials throughout. Horus is committed to protecting Weld County's waterways and supply. The properties involved in this project have no vested water rights, and irrigated agriculture is accomplished by leasing water from nearby tenants. The project has secured sufficient water resources to supply what will amount to modest water needs for the Project (0.007 -acre feet per acre per year). As compared to many other uses shown in the Application, solar requires minimal water for project operation. The Project's water use plan is intended to preserve the agricultural land base and allow for a return to full agricultural use once the solar project is decommissioned. For planning purposes, Project water needs can be divided into the following categories: 1. Construction/Dust Control —Some water will be required to implement the Dust Control Plan and related aspects of the construction phrase. The plan is to utilise outside service companies to supply the water for this need as part of their spray mix system so to not require any contribution of local water from the area. There will also be stormwater controls and related mitigation measures during construction to manage existing surface water flow and maintain water quality, as required by governing regulations. Finally, some water may be needed for initial planting and maintenance of plants used for screening, although species are selected for their minimal ongoing watering requirements. 2. Fire Control - While fire is not a typical concern for PV and BESS systems, the Project's water tank may be utilized by the Southeast Weld Fire District and will provide a key resource for protection against fires in the region, especially in times of drought. This tank will need to be filled periodically. 3. Panel Washing and Maintenance - The only ongoing water supply needed for the Project is for washing and maintaining the solar panels and supporting facilities, in part to maximize energy return. The exact cleaning schedule is a function of precipitation, dust, and other particulate settling on the panels. To minimize cleaning, the Project intends to utilize a commercial contractor to treat neighbouring roads with GMCO CS products, a blend of liquid magnesium chloride and a complex sugar. The product is an environmentally friendly solution for gravel road stabilization and dust control. This will reduce water consumption related to cleaning during the operation period (and reduce dust in residential homes as well). Water needs will be more than adequately met by (1) the occasional purchase or trucking in of outside water where needed, particularly at the construction phrase, (2) the establishment of a large water Page 6 of 12 collection tank near the well on the Janus property to store water from the onsite well. and (3) over the longer term, by the existing onsite water well. The onsite well located is fully in place and secured. Based on initial calculations, the amount of water needed par acre foot of land for the Project is much Less than current annual agricultural uses for the Project site. It is also lase than the average amount of water per acre of land needed to raise most crops. General Concern: Water Drainage As many of you recognized, one important element of water management is the handling of drainage over the course of the soLar project. Horus has commissioned Kimley Horn to prepare a preliminary drainage report which evaluates pre and post development hydrologic characteristics of the project site and addresses the storrnwater requirements of Weld County end the state of Colorado. 6 The study found that peak flow rates will actually be reduced from the existing rates, due to the proposed improvements on the project site, complemented with the findings from the Journal of Hydrologic Engineering focused on researching the hydrologic impacts of utility scale solar generation facilities. The study also concluded that drainage patterns offsite will remain the same as historic conditions. In addition, detention ponds have been designed on the project site to retain the required storage volumes. Generally, solar farms have little to no impact on runoff volumes or rates. Rainfall that falls directly on a solar panel runs to the pervious areas around end under the surrounding panels. General Concern: Cant bats with future land use plans We appreciate your questions related to compatibility of the solar farm with overall uses in the area. Compatibility is thoroughly assessed in the Weld County Code in Chapters 21, 22 and 23 as part of the permit application process, and we refer you to the voluminous project materials and attachments submitted by Horns addressing this subject. For ease of reference, each regulation and associated project compatibility features are outlined below for reference: Its intaint, Article ilk Site Selection and Construction oa r iliti ea of a Put is Utill �i�ri®ion : Permit pr m for Lie L - on anc Construct on of a Major Facility pt a Public Utility Regulation: All reasonable alternatives to the proposed action, including use of existing rlghtseofm way and joint use of rights -of -way wherever uses are compatible, have been adequately assessed and the proposed action is compatible with and represents the best interests of the people of the County and represents a fair and reasonable utilization of resources in the impact area. • Project Compliance with R latinns: All reasonable alternatives within the study area were thoroughly assessed to make the Project fully compatible with and representative of the best interests of the people of Weld County. While a larger land area was initially studied, the Projectra final footprint was selected because it offered advantages to the community and overall environment while providing opportunities and circumstances favourable to Solar and BESS facilities. specifically 1) existing transmission infrastructure less than 0.2 miles from the property. 2) augmenting, while sustalningfor future landowners, current unsustainable primary Land use as indicated by the landowners. This offers benefits to land use for the surrounding area. Utilization of local resources within Weld County will be minimal as the Project will not require services such as water, sewage, or emergency services at a level typical of other land uses in the area. CottChe f ' + t pre$cns • Repletion: T ansltl'on between land use types and intensities #h buffers. Uses that are incompatible with existing uses must be able to mitigate conflicts and support compatible economic development opportunities. • Project Compliance w th Reau _tip The project complies with or exceeds all County required buffers from roads, residences. Oil and Gas operations, and other special areas. Adjacent uses ' Preliminary Maine Antes v Appendix 1 Page 7 of 12 will not be affected, and nearby land can continue to be utilized for agriculture or other compatible u ses. This will support the opportunity for future compatible economic development in the area. Project compatibility is further demonstrated by comparing other land uses in the area. In Weld County the Agricultural zoning district is designed primarily for agricultural uses, but it also accommodates various other special uses, including Oil and Gas Operations, Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), and subdivisions of land for residential development. While these use types are generally accepted in agricultural areas, their impacts to neighbour and e nvironment health are substantial, including for industrial facilities emissions that may result in respiratory issues and water quality contamination. Utility scale solar has fewer direct health impacts as they do not produce air or water pollution and contribute to cleaner energy production, which can have broader public health benefits by reducing reliance on fossil fuels. Chapter 23; Zoning, Artele — Procedures and Permits, D.vis-on 4 Uses by Spec at Review • Regulation: Permitted uses will be compatible with the existing surrounding land uses and with the future development of the surrounding area as permitted by the existing zone and with future development. Buffering or screening of the proposed use from adjacent properties requirements. • Project Compliance with Regulations: Mitigation of construction impacts and visual impacts have been addressed as described throughout the application. Natural vegetative buffers have been incorporated into the project design on a case -by -case basis to mitigate visual impacts for n eighbours. This includes utilization of multiple layers of vegetation and specific species to ensure each landowner has a screen that works for their specific location and needs. Screening is discussed in more detail below. The proposed use is compatible with existing [and uses and future development. The existing site land use is dryland agricultural row crops and rangeland, most similar to tillage/agricultural land classification. While a vital part of the land use base in the area, it does have its impacts. Disturbance to the land from tillage can disrupt the natural soil structure resulting in reduced soil cohesion and structural stability, which may result in increased soil erosion, compaction, and runoff. It also can deplete the soil's organic content, reducing its fertility and affecting its ability to retain moisture and nutrients. The ability to retain moisture in becoming increasingly important in Weld County as water is a precious resource. Disturbed soil is also susceptible to weeds, requiring additional inputs such as herbicides and pesticides, which can further impact soil health and the surrounding environment. Farming this land is becoming increasingly difficult as water becomes scarcer and the soil health declines. This project will allow the landowners to profit from their land without the disturbance that results from tilled agriculture. Temporarily halting ag use of this land for the duration of the project will allow the soil health to improve. Revegetation actions following construction include seeding the land with a county approved seed mix and will promote the growth of native grasses to preserve the quality of the soil and mitigate noxious weeds. By utilizing the county approved native grass seed mix below the panels, the existing tillage/agricultural land areas will be changed to a heavy meadow land classification that reduces peak flow rates and manages stormwater in line with the historic conditions of the site. This will promote water conservation at both the watershed and site levels, with the goal of replicating the native hydrologic characteristics of the sub - watersheds, creating natural ground coverage, and reducing dust. The change in land use from tilled agriculture land to utility scale solar will allow the landowners to increase the health of their land and reduce water use while simultaneously profiting from their land. This is beneficial to adjacent uses as it presents a lesser impact to neighbour and environmental health and is also economically profitable for the County. Upon completion of the solar lease option, the project can be fully decommissioned, and the land returned to agricultural use or open meadow land. Utility scale solar is one of the only land development uses that not only preserves and improves ag land for future use, but is also a low water use, providing conservation benefits as well. Fifty years from now, these developments may be integral to preserving open lands and reducing urban sprawl. Page 8 of 12 General Concern: Screening The screening plan was developed during consultations with adjacent landowners and visual simulations. The goal is to provide screening tailored to your individual property owner requests, and at the same time ensure screening best accounts for water usage needed to sustain the living fence. Screening was developed in consultation with our expert biologist and landscaping team. The size of Rocky Mountain Juniper trees selected (10 -gallon containers for the juniper are about 5' in height and 1.5-2" caliper) was chosen to reduce the risk of mortality from transplant stress. The typical growth rate is one foot a year. A 3 -inch caliper juniper normally utilizes a bait and burlap container system and tends to have higher mortality rates due to the stress/damage to the root ball in transport and planting - which is why the 10 -gallon container tree was recommended. Since Rocky Mountain Juniper is a native species and naturally occurs in that area, we know it can handle the climate and limited water resources, but winter watering should be considered as a precaution (especially if it's a dry winter) to reduce potential for mortality. First season watering was recommended because that should be enough time for root stock to establish at appropriate depths to access ground water. There is a balance between survival and not creating a dependency on watering. Therefore, an adaptive approach would be best where watering is tapered off over 3 years. We have also received questions on how the Skunkbush Sumac will be planted along the Juniper. The two will be planted in a scattered fashion so it looks more natural. We appreciate the recommendation of the American Wild Plum as an alternative to the plants chosen, but American wild plum typically requires more water than the juniper or sumac, so they are not recommended to minimise the use of water, hence why they were not selected in the project design. General Concern: Environment and Wildlife We appreciate your comments on these critical topics, as Horus is committed to promote a responsible development in Weld County, promoting economic development, land stewardship, while at the same time preserving crops and the natural resources and wildlife that make this area so special. To this effect the team has developed several studies which include a Cultural Resource Survey, Wetland and Waterbody Survey, a study on protected species, a Phase 1 Environmental Assessment Report, and Critical Issue Analysis that were completed by archaeological, biological, and ecological experts. The aim and the results of these studies were used to best assess any environmental impact the projects may cause and mitigate the same in the projects design by avoiding waterways, planting native grass mix to enrich the soil and juniper trees lining the fence, and creating a movement corridor along Sand Creek to facilitate big game habitats. The applicant has committed to strict management practices that are detailed in the 1041 /USR applications Ti Geis is also embedded within the Weld County Code to ensure that the natural and economic environment and resources of the County are protected and enhanced. With this overarching perspective in mind, the following summarizes and responds to each of the comments received with respect to the environment, wildlife and seeding. Wildlife Corridor We appreciate your comments on the wildlife corridor. Please note that like with so many aspects of this project, we have utilized the expertise of outside local agencies or experts to address this issue. Here, we have designed the corridor in collaboration with experts on wildlife at Colorado Parks and Wildlife ("CPW"). The agency has been consulted since the inception of the projects; they have been involved in the permitting process and provided their referral letters on the projects. To address the loss of open space and the fragmentation of existing and accessible big game habitats caused by the projects, Horus has designed a wildlife corridor of 600ft, wider than the minimum set by CPW (250ft) and followed CPW recommendations for the fencing of the project in order to minimize any potential impact to wildlife. 6 Appendix E - Environmental Protection Measures and Agency Coordination Page 9 of 12 W Idlife Species As part of the projects siting, development and permitting, please note Horus has completed onsite biological reconnaissance studies with expert biologists which revealed there are no species of concern with federal and state statutory protection likely to occur in the project area, with the exception of burrowing owls. Construction will occur outside of nesting season if this species is identified during the planned pre -construction biological surveys. Horus has also consulted with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ("USFWS") and CPW on the same issue, which have also commented on the projects' application. USFWS has expressed no concern of the project resulting in potential impacts to species listed as proposed, threatened, or endangered. CPW has confirmed the project is sited outside High Priority Habitats ("HPHs"), areas defined as sensitive wildlife habitats. Thank you for making us aware of deer, antelope, foxes, elk, and coyotes in the vicinity, and we will remain mindful throughout the life of the project of the vital need to preserve and enhance every opportunity to support these and all wildlife species. Again, in consulting with the experts on these topics, please note that impacts to these species was not identified as a concern during agency reviews of the project with CPW and USFWS. Seeding We agree with you on the importance of pollinators for crops and the local ecosystem. As highlighted in the project application native plant seeding will be incorporated between and around the solar arrays to beautify and restore the appearance of the Project site, but most importantly to promote the return of native species and pollinators. This plan will also preserve and improve soil conditions. General Concern: Glare A Glare Study was performed by Colliers Engineering & Design on the array areas of the Project. A software called Forge Solar was used that determines the potential for glare given the solar farm specifics and looks at potential effects on the human eye at locations where glare is predicted to occur. The analysis was tailored to review the potential effects of the solar farm on nearby residences and on a privately owned landing strip near the project site. Worst -case scenario parameters were used for a conservative estimate. Findings show that with appropriate system settings, it is unlikely that glare from the proposed solar project will be problematic in any manner for the surrounding area and that the project would comply with the Federal Aviation Administration's 2021 policy regarding glint and glare effects to commercial airports. An in-depth explanation of the above conclusion and the details of the full parameters of this study are found in Appendix P of the Weld County Land Use Applications. General Concern: Heat Effects We understand that considering recent temperature increase trends, it is important to be mindful of whether solar farms might have undesired heat effects. Studies show that while the center of the PV field can reach up to 1.9 Celsius above the ambient temperature. This thermal energy completely dissipates to the environment at distances of approximately 16 to 60 feet. PV solar farms do not induce a day -after -day increase in ambient temperature, and therefore, adverse micro -climate changes from a potential PV plant are not a concern.' Also relevant here is the study entitled Analysis of the Potential for a Heat Island Effect in Large Solar Farms from Columbia University, which presents a comprehensive review of the so-called 'heat island' effect. This study contains field data and simulations showing that the dissipation of thermal energy is enhanced by cooling at night, by existing roads between the fields, and by vegetation buffers. "Analysis of the Potential for a Heat Island Effect in Large Solar Farms", Vasilis Fthenakis (2013) Page 10 of 12 General Concern: Electromagnetic Interference In the ever -evolving landscape of technology, electromagnetic interference (EMI) is an important consideration. We have carefully considered whether EMI will occur as a result of these projects. Utility -scale solar fields are integral to our shift towards renewable energy, consisting of extensive arrays of solar panels designed to capture sunlight and convert it into electricity. The panels themselves are not significant sources of EMI; however, the associated equipment, such as inverters and transformers, can produce electromagnetic fields. Inverters are crucial components in solar fields. They convert the direct current (DC) generated by solar panels into alternating current (AC) used by the electrical grid. Inverters and transformers typically operate at power frequencies, around 50-60 Hz, and can produce EMI that might affect nearby electronic devices. Although the frequencies are much lower than those from cell phones, these devices must be carefully designed and shielded to prevent interference. Proper inverter enclosure grounding, filtering, and circuit layout has been incorporated into this project to further reduce EM radiation. Inverters are distributed throughout the project footprint and are located at least a quarter mile from residences, further reducing impacts. For a comparison, cell phones operate using radiofrequency (RF) signals, typically in the GHz range - 900 MHz, 1.8 GHz, and 2.4 GHz - essential for communication. This RF radiation, while essential for connectivity, has sparked ongoing health discussions which may have led to the concern by residents about potential EMI from the proposed solar projects. However, when comparing the health impacts of cell phones and solar field inverters, the differences are notable. The primary concern with cell phones is the higher frequency RF radiation emitted, which can lead to potential health risks if exposure is prolonged. Regulatory standards are in place to mitigate these risks, but ongoing research continues to evaluate the long-term effects of RF exposure on health. The EMI from inverters in solar fields operates at lower frequencies and is generally considered to pose less of a direct health risk compared to RF radiation. However, inverters must be designed to minimize EMI and prevent interference with nearby electronic equipment. The health risks from this type of EMI are typically regarded as minimal, though they still warrant careful management. Proper design and regulatory adherence are essential to mitigate any potential interference. The Janus and Prospect Solar projects will adhere to the strict regulations regarding EMI found in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 47, Part 15 to ensure that the health and safety of Weld County residents is protected. General Concern: Light Pollution Compared to urban areas, industrial facilities, or outdoor recreational lighting, solar farms have a much lower impact in terms of light pollution. The solar panels themselves do not emit light. Lighting at the projects will be limited to the substation and operations and maintenance building. These lights will be downward facing and will be activated by motion sensor. Lights on the substation are the responsibility of the substation operator and can be remotely turned on/off. On the other hand, urban areas and industrial activities often involve extensive, high -intensity lighting that can contribute to significant light pollution, General Concern: Cumulative Impacts With regards to the concern raised by a few commenters that the two projects may have greater impacts being adjacent, please note the team has addressed this concern by preparing the reports and submitting the applications to the County together. The projects will therefore be assessed as a whole rather than independently as the permitting proceeds, and cumulative impacts will be considered. Page 11 of 12 Conclusion The project team would like to thank local residents for taking time to reach out and submit your concerns. We encourage your continued review, input and perspectives. Please contact us by email at rovr.free_mai1@horuscap.ital.co.cLk, f cesco.cardi@horuscapitaLco uk, and ebitler@logansimpson.con-. to discuss the project and anyfollow up or additional questions you may have. We look forward to working with you as we move through the planning and regulatory processes for the project. Thanks so much for your cooperation. Sincerely, Horus Team Page 12 of 12 From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Attachments: Francesco Card] bnrod in@gmail.com Emi y Bitter; Roger Freeman Response to Community Comments - Neighbour Letter Friday, September 13, 2024 12:00:07 PM Neighbour Letter September 13th 2024 - Final.pdf EXHIBIT uW-ao0 14 CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization. Dear Ms. Nolan, Please find attached our comments responding to recent neighbour Letters. Thanks so much for your cooperation. Kind Regards, Francesco Paolo Card! Associate Horus Energy Mobile: +1 303 479 4535 francesco.cardi@horuscapital,co.uk https://horusenergy.co.uki 13)oGk enter I Report Response To Community Comments On behalf of Horus Energy, we welcome the opportunity to respond to a series of comments that have been recently submitted to the County by neighbours and other local citizens about our proposed Janus and Prospect solar projects. First and foremost, we greatly appreciate your efforts to work with us throughout the course of this project. Horus has received and closely integrated your input, feedback, request for property -specific adaptations, and all the forms of interest and support expressed for this project. Through a variety of steps taken throughout the project planning, development, and permitting stages, we have been gratified to work closely with your incredible community. In that regard, while we recognize that some commenters have recently voiced strong concerns, we do believe the project enjoys significant landowner and local support. This support has been conveyed to the County in 10 letters of support and non -objection. This includes five neighbours adjacent to the projects, as well as the five landowner partners in the project. Horus directly has received many more informal or oral expressions of positive input from a diverse set of interested parties. This foundation of support is built upon a long series of outreach efforts. As many of you know, we begin reaching out to the community in the earliest development stages of the projects - both through individual contacts and a public meeting held on July 05, 2023. As we explained at that meeting, the initial outreach group was identified under basic rules in Weld County for contacting the local immediate neighbours most proximate to the development. This also included several local agencies and community service entities representing everything from fire response to community planning. These initial contacts have formed the basis for a series of continued communications with many of you about individual property issues or considerations. Some have commented that they wish that they have known of the project sooner and could have attended the prior meeting. Please know that while these initial communications focused on those living closest to the development, they were driven solely by practical and regulatory considerations and are part of a continuing, longstanding, and broad community outreach program that has and will be the cornerstone of our approach to this project throughout its course. In this regard, we have welcomed comments from citizens in any location in Weld County. As reflected in this group response, we understand your interest and have carefully considered all comments. We also note that in addition to providing this collective response, we have continued to reach out to individuals and landowners to try to accommodate individual questions or concerns or mitigate particular property circumstances. We have yet to hear back from some individuals - but understand that some folks may want to do so in a collective way. Others may feel like they want to respond more directly and specifically once a collective response is received. The bottom line is that our doors remain wide open to continue any communication - whether collective or otherwise. With these factors in mind, Horus carefully weighed whether a collective response would serve the community best. We believe that this approach is supported by the fact that the concerns expressed convey a very parallel set of questions or concerns. In fact, many of the comments appeared to be jointly generated and contained the same basic wording. We welcome this joint approach, and the efficiencies created thereby, but remain flexible to meet the community needs going forward. While Horus has attempted to frame and highlight key points from our application materials in this response, we did not choose to include voluminous documents and data equally accessible to all on the public websites. It appears that some of you were able to access that information, and we appreciate your taking the time to do so. We are certainly glad to provide additional references to materials on file, specific studies, or other supporting documentation. Please don't hesitate to reach out to us if we can provide or help access these materials or information. Page 1 of 12 Finally, while we believe we have addressed all individual points raised by the community in recent comments, please let us know immediately if we missed any concerns or have additional specific comments or input that you would like for us to address, either through follow-up communications or upcoming public hearings surrounding these projects. General Concern: Property Values We fully understand the utmost importance of property and land rights to all residents of Weld County and the interest of all commenters in this issue. While every property will have different features relevant to this discussion - and some commenters appear to live quite a distance from the solar farms themselves - we feel that the following discussion applies generally to all. That said, since all comments were from property owners outside the project boundaries itself, we concentrate on adjacent property value issues here. In turn, this discussion does not go into detail about the numerous and compelling benefits generated to the community at large through such attributes as economic, tax, renewable energy generation, and supporting project landowner rights to use and obtain value from their land. These are discussed in detail in our application materials and other sources. The potential impact of solar farms on adjacent properties has been considered in other situations in Colorado and across the nation. As a result, much research has been done to assess the impact of solar on land valuations. We recognize that many commenters cited various studies, and we have carefully considered same in formulating this response. As these studies reflect, appraisers generally determine potential negative impact caused by an external source on adjacent or nearby properties utilizing the following factors: • Hazardous material: As discussed further below, a solar farm involves no hazardous materials or waste byproduct as part of its operation • Odor: Solar farms produce no odor. • Noise: As discussed further below, whether discussing passive fixed solar panels, or single -axis trackers, there is no negative impact associated with noise from a solar farm. No sound is emitted from the facility at night. Solar farms are inaudible from the roadways. • Traffic: As discussed further below, there will be a temporary increase in traffic during construction, and we have provided an extensive report in the application materials describing the efforts made to mitigate traffic impacts to the neighbourhood. Once built, the solar farm will have no onsite employees or staff, and the traffic will be far less than many other typical County uses. The site requires only minimal maintenance. • Stigma: There is no stigma associated with solar farms and people generally respond favourably towards such a use. While an individual may express concerns about proximity to a solar farm, there is no specific stigma associated with a solar farm. Stigma generally refers to things such as adult establishments, prisons, rehabilitation facilities, and so forth. Solar panels have no associated stigma and are found everywhere these days, from schools, churches, oil and gas wells to airports and industrial facilities, and increasingly on farms and agricultural sites as well. They are on roofs in many residential communities. Solar panels on a roof are often cited as an enhancement to the property in marketing brochures. • Appearance: This factor is discussed in detail below, but in terms of property value issues, larger solar farms that use fixed or tracking panels are a passive land use that many feel aligns well with rural residential settings. They are similar in appearance to large greenhouses, which also function as passive solar energy collectors. 1 "Meadow Forge Solar Impact Study", Kirkland Appraisals (2022) Page 2 of 12 With these factors firmly in mind, we have looked closely at the property value issues raised in your comments. The study that we provided, entitled "Property Value Impact Study"2 was published by one of the leading consulting firms, Cohn Reznick, and has been widely cited and utilized in many settings. We do understand your comments that the study was focused on Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan. The Midwest was believed to be a good study area because while it largely incorporated rural settings like this project, housing density is higher, and therefore the impact of solar farms on properties - if any - should be more evident and pronounced. The study shows no measurable impact and consistent difference in property values for properties adjacent to solar farms when compared to similar properties locationally removed from same. Consistently we have found in data from university studies, broker commentary, and other appraisal studies the importance of implementing landscape buffers and proper setbacks to further minimize the prospect of such impacts on property value adjoining the solar farms. The team has kept this in close consideration throughout the development and permitting process, by designing natural screening and respecting setbacks as defined by the Weld County Code. To further explore this and related economic factors, a socioeconomic impact and community benefit report has been commissioned and submitted as part of the permitting process.' The study shows that the projects will result into an enhancement of the socioeconomic environment within Weld County due to the following factors: job creation, economic output, cost-effective locally generated power, increased income to landowners, and positive local health impacts; while having no measurable impact on the value of adjacent properties. Even if there were impacts to property, solar presents numerous balancing economic benefits that are important to consider. Again, these are detailed in our application materials and not the focus of this response, and we highlight just a few here: (1) Utility scale solar presents an opportunity to reserve land for future agricultural use while continuing to support agricultural interests and landowner rights. (2) This Project would provide an increase in property tax payments to Weld County, Fire District, School District and other community services. (3) Local employment opportunities would increase for local construction and operation companies and workers, and increased use of services (accommodations, restaurants) would occur throughout the construction of the Project without taxing social services such as schools, roads, etc., within the county. (4) The renewable energy and storage attributes of the project are firmly aligned with federal, state, local, utility, and other mandates to develop further renewable energy sources and take advantage of the many economic benefits of these systems. General Concern: Appearance and Visual We recognize that the aesthetics of any neighbouring use is a very personal matter to a property owner, and appreciate your sharing concerns on this topic in your comments. The team has endeavoured to its fullest extent to minimize and mitigate the impacts of this facility in the surrounding area with many of the items addressed here (e.g. screening using living fences, buffers, visual simulations, compatibility). For instance, Janus and Prospect will be built at least 500 feet away from existing homes, complying with Weld County regulations. The facility is designed to be low -profile, with heights ranging from 4 to 10 feet, comparable to the height of a cornfield. We also note that efforts to minimize visual and other impacts will continue throughout the project and will always be open to continuing input from the community. 2 "Property Value Impact Study: Adjacent Property Values Solar Impact Study: A Study of Eight Existing Solar Facilities", CohnReznick (2021) https://www.nexteraenergyresources.com/content/dam/neer/us/en/pdf/CohnReznick%20Solar%20lmpact%20Study 7.26.21.pdf 3 Appendix F -Socioeconomic Impact and Community Benefit Report Page 3 of 12 Ultimately, for all the reasons explained here and, in supporting County applications, both Horus and many involved parties and landowners feel that this is an excellent location for this project, and its features support this view. Horus does encourage the development on brown field sites where it makes sense, but there are simply not enough of them next to good transmission systems to meet the growing demand for energy in the country. This site was selected based in part on the transmission line and the capacity of the existing 115 and 230 -kV lines and supporting transmission, which has been part of the landscape in the area for many years. Also, there was interest from local landowners with regards to both financial reasons and to preserve their farmland long-term for future uses. The team and its projects have at their core the protection of the natural features that characterize the area, its peace and quietness, the energy and passion of its neighbours that make this area of the State so unique. We recognize that the project will present some change for many commenters but believe that this change should be viewed in the context of the rapid changes overall in Weld County and beyond. We also believe it is important to compare this use to others that might be proposed over time. For instance, unlike this use, residential developments, in addition to causing disturbance during construction, present a series of ongoing traffic, visual, noise and other impacts. Horus is a property owner as well, and we deeply respect the vested interests, connection, and unique history each of you has to your property. We understand the passion that these issues often invoke. We would just ask that you consider these points as well as you assess your approach to this project. Again, if it would be useful, we welcome the opportunity to continue to address with you individually or collectively this important issue. General Concern: Traffic We understand that you chose to live out of the city to enjoy such features as the quietness, the peacefulness of driving down country roads, the simple cycle of planting, growing, and harvesting of crops, and the openness of the landscape . Many of you expressed concern that the traffic and congestion from this project would fundamentally shift the ability to enjoy this lifestyle. We really believe that this will not be the case - and will continue to do everything we can going forward to address this concern. Again, it is important to bear in mind that unlike so many other uses now crowding parts of Weld County, the increase in traffic will be temporary during the project's construction. Moreover, with our experts - Kimley Horn - who have and are working with Hudson and other cities - we have carefully designed a path that would minimize noise and disturbance and have limited impacts on the transportation patterns or the roads around the project site. The projects will utilize the existing roadway system, where appropriate, and contribute to upgrade, build, and maintain the other roads that will be utilized during the construction of the projects. Similar to mineral oil and gas production, Weld County rules ensure that adequate roads must exist or be made available prior to construction of the projects. The projects will submit a Road Use Agreement and Access Road Permit application to the County, ensuring compliance with the County design standards. The projects will upgrade any damaged and deteriorated roads and help maintain the same if they fall within the construction path. Safety is a very important aspect for Horus and we strive for a responsible and orderly development. This is also thoroughly reflected in Weld County Code provisions aimed at protecting and serving the health, welfare and safety of the citizens of the County. A Traffic Management Plan will be developed that will implement reduced speed limits on local roads and will require signallers to control the traffic in key areas in the vicinity of the projects, aimed at ensuring careful driving from construction workers. The living fence, in addition to providing visual screening, will also provide additional benefits in this respect, contributing towards an improvement in road safety and a reduction of hazardous driving conditions, by reducing snow drift onto roads, which in turn increases visibility, and reduces maintenance, plowing, and salting costs. Page 4 of 12 While there will be some short-term disruptions in term of noise and traffic, the benefits that the project will bring will be long-lasting. Some will be apparent in the short term like the increase in revenue from local business and hotels, restaurants, suppliers. The native vegetation that will be planted underneath the panels will attract pollinators, a fundamental piece of our ecosystem. The project water tank can be utilized by the Southeast Weld Fire Protection District and its Chief Tom Beach for fire emergencies in the area. Other benefits will be more evident in the long term, like the increase in taxes for Weld County that will help support a wide variety of services upon which all parties rely. General Concern: Dust We appreciate your questions about dust and how this will be mitigated. We have given this topic a lot of thought. We have developed a detailed Dust and Weed Mitigation Plan as part of the projects' land use permit applications, which integrates and adheres to Colorado Department of Health and Environment Land Development Permit requirements establishing acceptable dust levels, which will be monitored closely as the project proceeds.' We will be adapting this as the project progresses to ensure we are minimizing the temporary construction impact created by dust. Again, we might ask that this concern be put in perspective of all the other permanent potential uses that might be made of these lands - that would not only generate much more immediate dust issues but would increase disturbances of this nature for decades to come and change the fundamental agricultural nature of these lands. General Concern: Noise This in our view is one of the many advantages of solar, above nearly all other uses. During operations there will be no noticeable noise from the solar farm. The only components of the project facilities that will emit low levels of noise will be inverters and BESS equipment. However, these facilities will be located at least a quarter mile from residences and noise levels will be well below levels set by County noise ordinances set forth in Chapter 14 Article IX of the Weld County Code. During the life of the project the site will be controlled remotely, and utility personnel will visit on a quarterly basis to conduct routine inspections and maintenance. The transformer typically has a hum similar to an HVAC that can only be heard in close proximity. Buffers on the property are sufficient to make emitted sounds inaudible from the adjoining properties. Transformers will be located at least a quarter mile from residences and noise levels will be well below levels set by County noise ordinances. During construction there will be some noise due to pile driving and equipment backup beeping such as reverse warning sounds, but please note that this noise will again be temporary in nature and is not anticipated to exceed maximum levels at the property boundary for construction activities outlined in Weld County noise ordinances. All told, the solar farms will be a very quiet neighbour, harvesting solar energy passively throughout the project life. General Concern: Impacts from Project Materials Another benefit of solar, compared to nearly other use that might be made of this land, is the negligible use of materials that are in any way hazardous or harmful. We appreciate the concerns expressed about impacts of materials to be used during the construction phase but are very confident that that any impacts from fertilizer, weed control, or other material usage, will be significantly less than typical residential development and most agricultural uses. These issues are further addressed below in our discussion of environmental matters, but it may help to review the basic constituents found in the components of a solar farm. The panels are bi-facial mono - crystalline that have no known leaching issues. The primary materials of a solar panel which are glass, 4 Dust and Weed Mitigation Nan - Appendix D Page 5 of 12 aluminum, silicone, copper, and trace semiconducting metals are inert and don't constitute hazardous materials or waste. There could be trace amounts of lead from soldering material, which is similar to televisions and cell phones. There is no risk of exposure or leakage and any amount contained in the modules is below the EPA limits. Solar panels are recyclable and contain approximately 75 percent glass, 8 percent aluminium, and 5 percent silicon. Approximately 70 percent of the material is recoverable due to the processing required to separate the panel components. These materials, once recycled, are worth about $6 per panel to the solar farm at today's prices. Solar plants use minimal chemicals. There could be some paint to touch up rusted areas on the mounting structure, potentially some oil in the transformers, and we also intend to utilize limited solutions to control the dust and weeds on the site. Further details on these matters are contained in the various plans cited in this response, but all such materials would be used in accordance with risk assessments and method statements ensuring they are used correctly and with suitable safely procedures in place. Also note there is no cadmium telluride in the panels we have proposed. General Concern: Water There were a few comments directed at water usage issues, and we understand that water is a critical element of concern at all levels of the community. Water usage and quality is a great concern for Weld County and Horus and has been a focus of our application materials throughout. Horus is committed to protecting Weld County's waterways and supply. The properties involved in this project have no vested water rights, and irrigated agriculture is accomplished by leasing water from nearby tenants. The project has secured sufficient water resources to supply what will amount to modest water needs for the Project (0.007 -acre feet per acre per year). As compared to many other uses shown in the Application, solar requires minimal water for project operation. The Project's water use plan is intended to preserve the agricultural land base and allow for a return to full agricultural use once the solar project is decommissioned. For planning purposes, Project water needs can be divided into the following categories: 1. Construction/Dust Control Some water will be required to implement the Dust Control Plan and related aspects of the construction phrase. The plan is to utilise outside service companies to supply the water for this need as part of their spray mix system so to not require any contribution of local water from the area. There will also be stormwater controls and related mitigation measures during construction to manage existing surface water flow and maintain water quality, as required by governing regulations. Finally, some water may be needed for initial planting and maintenance of plants used for screening, although species are selected for their minimal ongoing watering requirements. 2. Fire Control - While fire is not a typical concern for PV and BESS systems, the Project's water tank may be utilized by the Southeast Weld Fire District and will provide a key resource for protection against fires in the region, especially in times of drought. This tank will need to be filled periodically. 3. Panel Washing and Maintenance - The only ongoing water supply needed for the Project is for washing and maintaining the solar panels and supporting facilities, in part to maximize energy return. The exact cleaning schedule is a function of precipitation, dust, and other particulate settling on the panels. To minimize cleaning, the Project intends to utilize a commercial contractor to treat neighbouring roads with GMCO CS products, a blend of liquid magnesium chloride and a complex sugar. The product is an environmentally friendly solution for gravel road stabilization and dust control. This will reduce water consumption related to cleaning during the operation period (and reduce dust in residential homes as well). Water needs will be more than adequately met by (1) the occasional purchase or trucking in of outside water where needed, particularly at the construction phrase, (2) the establishment of a large water Page 6 of 12 collection tank near the well on the Janus property to store water from the onsite well, and (3) over the longer term, by the existing onsite water well. The onsite well located is fully in place and secured. Based on initial calculations, the amount of water needed per acre foot of land for the Project is much less than current annual agricultural uses for the Project site. It is also less than the average amount of water per acre of land needed to raise most crops. General Concern: Water Drainage As many of you recognized, one important element of water management is the handling of drainage over the course of the solar project. Horus has commissioned Kim ley Horn to prepare a preliminary drainage report which evaluates pre and post development hydrologic characteristics of the project site and addresses the stormwater requirements of Weld County and the state of Colorado. 5 The study found that peak flow rates will actually be reduced from the existing rates, due to the proposed improvements on the project site, complemented with the findings from the Journal of Hydrologic Engineering focused on researching the hydrologic impacts of utility scale solar generation facilities. The study also concluded that drainage patterns offsite will remain the same as historic conditions. In addition, detention ponds have been designed on the project site to retain the required storage volumes. Generally, solar farms have little to no impact on runoff volumes or rates. Rainfall that falls directly on a solar panel runs to the pervious areas around and under the surrounding panels. General Concern: Conflicts with future land use plans We appreciate your questions related to compatibility of the solar farm with overall uses in the area. Compatibility is thoroughly assessed in the Weld County Code in Chapters 21, 22 and 23 as part of the permit application process, and we refer you to the voluminous project materials and attachments submitted by Horus addressing this subject. For ease of reference, each regulation and associated project compatibility features are outlined below for reference: Chapter 21: Areas and Activities of State Interest, Article III: Site Selection and Construction of Major Facilities of a Public Utility, Division 3: Permit Program for Site Selection and Construction of a Major Facility of a Public Utility • Regulation: All reasonable alternatives to the proposed action, including use of existing rights -of - way and joint use of rights -of -way wherever uses are compatible, have been adequately assessed and the proposed action is compatible with and represents the best interests of the people of the County and represents a fair and reasonable utilization of resources in the impact area. • Project Compliance with Regulations: All reasonable alternatives within the study area were thoroughly assessed to make the Project fully compatible with and representative of the best interests of the people of Weld County. While a larger land area was initially studied, the Project's final footprint was selected because it offered advantages to the community and overall environment while providing opportunities and circumstances favourable to Solar and BESS facilities, specifically 1) existing transmission infrastructure less than 0.2 miles from the property, 2) augmenting, while sustaining for future landowners, current unsustainable primary land use as indicated by the landowners. This offers benefits to land use for the surrounding area. Utilization of local resources within Weld County will be minimal as the Project will not require services such as water, sewage, or emergency services at a level typical of other land uses in the area. Code Chapter 22: Comprehensive Plan, Article II - Principles, Goals, and Objectives • Regulation: Transition between land use types and intensities with buffers. Uses that are incompatible with existing uses must be able to mitigate conflicts and support compatible economic development opportunities. • Project Compliance with Regulations: The project complies with or exceeds all County required buffers from roads, residences, Oil and Gas operations, and other special areas. Adjacent uses 5 Preliminary Drainage Analysis — Appendix J Page 7 of 12 will not be affected, and nearby land can continue to be utilized for agriculture or other compatible u ses. This will support the opportunity for future compatible economic development in the area. Project compatibility is further demonstrated by comparing other land uses in the area. In Weld County the Agricultural zoning district is designed primarily for agricultural uses, but it also accommodates various other special uses, including Oil and Gas Operations, Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), and subdivisions of land for residential development. While these use types are generally accepted in agricultural areas, their impacts to neighbour and e nvironment health are substantial, including for industrial facilities emissions that may result in respiratory issues and water quality contamination. Utility scale solar has fewer direct health impacts as they do not produce air or water pollution and contribute to cleaner energy production, which can have broader public health benefits by reducing reliance on fossil fuels. Chapter 23: Zoning, Article II - Procedures and Permits, Division 4 - Uses by Special Review • Regulation: Permitted uses will be compatible with the existing surrounding land uses and with the future development of the surrounding area as permitted by the existing zone and with future development. Buffering or screening of the proposed use from adjacent properties requirements. • Project Compliance with Regulations: Mitigation of construction impacts and visual impacts have been addressed as described throughout the application. Natural vegetative buffers have been incorporated into the project design on a case -by -case basis to mitigate visual impacts for n eighbours. This includes utilization of multiple layers of vegetation and specific species to ensure each landowner has a screen that works for their specific location and needs. Screening is discussed in more detail below. The proposed use is compatible with existing land uses and future development. The existing site land use is dryland agricultural row crops and rangeland, most similar to tillage/agricultural land classification. While a vital part of the land use base in the area, it does have its impacts. Disturbance to the land from tillage can disrupt the natural soil structure resulting in reduced soil cohesion and structural stability, which may result in increased soil erosion, compaction, and runoff. It also can deplete the soil's organic content, reducing its fertility and affecting its ability to retain moisture and nutrients. The ability to retain moisture in becoming increasingly important in Weld County as water is a precious resource. Disturbed soil is also susceptible to weeds, requiring additional inputs such as herbicides and pesticides, which can further impact soil health and the surrounding environment. Farming this land is becoming increasingly difficult as water becomes scarcer and the soil health declines. This project will allow the landowners to profit from their land without the disturbance that results from tilled agriculture. Temporarily halting ag use of this land for the duration of the project will allow the soil health to improve. Revegetation actions following construction include seeding the land with a county approved seed mix and will promote the growth of native grasses to preserve the quality of the soil and mitigate noxious weeds. By utilizing the county approved native grass seed mix below the panels, the existing tillage/agricultural land areas will be changed to a heavy meadow land classification that reduces peak flow rates and manages stormwater in line with the historic conditions of the site. This will promote water conservation at both the watershed and site levels, with the goal of replicating the native hydrologic characteristics of the sub - watersheds, creating natural ground coverage, and reducing dust. The change in land use from tilled agriculture land to utility scale solar will allow the landowners to increase the health of their land and reduce water use while simultaneously profiting from their land. This is beneficial to adjacent uses as it presents a lesser impact to neighbour and e nvironmental health and is also economically profitable for the County. Upon completion of the solar lease option, the project can be fully decommissioned, and the land returned to agricultural use or open meadow land. Utility scale solar is one of the only land development uses that not only preserves and improves ag land for future use, but is also a low water use, providing conservation benefits as well. Fifty years from now, these developments may be integral to preserving open lands and reducing urban sprawl. Page 8 of 12 General Concern: Screening The screening plan was developed during consultations with adjacent landowners and visual simulations. The goal is to provide screening tailored to your individual property owner requests, and at the same time ensure screening best accounts for water usage needed to sustain the living fence. Screening was developed in consultation with our expert biologist and landscaping team. The size of Rocky Mountain Juniper trees selected (10 -gallon containers for the juniper are about 5' in height and 1.5-2" caliper) was chosen to reduce the risk of mortality from transplant stress. The typical growth rate is one foot a year. A 3 -inch caliper juniper normally utilizes a ball and burlap container system and tends to have higher mortality rates due to the stress/damage to the root ball in transport and planting - which is why the 10 -gallon container tree was recommended. Since Rocky Mountain Juniper is a native species and naturally occurs in that area, we know it can handle the climate and limited water resources, but winter watering should be considered as a precaution (especially if it's a dry winter) to reduce potential for mortality. First season watering was recommended because that should be enough time for root stock to establish at appropriate depths to access ground water. There is a balance between survival and not creating a dependency on watering. Therefore, an adaptive approach would be best where watering is tapered off over 3 years. We have also received questions on how the Skunkbush Sumac will be planted along the Juniper. The two will be planted in a scattered fashion so it looks more natural. We appreciate the recommendation of the American Wild Plum as an alternative to the plants chosen, but American wild plum typically requires more water than the juniper or sumac, so they are not recommended to minimise the use of water, hence why they were not selected in the project design. General Concern: Environment and Wildlife We appreciate your comments on these critical topics, as Horus is committed to promote a responsible development in Weld County, promoting economic development, land stewardship, while at the same time preserving crops and the natural resources and wildlife that make this area so special. To this effect the team has developed several studies which include a Cultural Resource Survey, Wetland and Waterbody Survey, a study on protected species, a Phase 1 Environmental Assessment Report, and Critical Issue Analysis that were completed by archaeological, biological, and ecological experts. The aim and the results of these studies were used to best assess any environmental impact the projects may cause and mitigate the same in the projects design by avoiding waterways, planting native grass mix to enrich the soil and juniper trees lining the fence, and creating a movement corridor along Sand Creek to facilitate big game habitats. The applicant has committed to strict management practices that are detailed in the 1041 /USR application.' This is also embedded within the Weld County Code to ensure that the natural and economic environment and resources of the County are protected and enhanced. With this overarching perspective in mind, the following summarizes and responds to each of the comments received with respect to the environment, wildlife and seeding. Wildlife Corridor We appreciate your comments on the wildlife corridor. Please note that like with so many aspects of this project, we have utilized the expertise of outside local agencies or experts to address this issue. Here, we have designed the corridor in collaboration with experts on wildlife at Colorado Parks and Wildlife ("CPW"). The agency has been consulted since the inception of the projects; they have been involved in the permitting process and provided their referral letters on the projects. To address the loss of open space and the fragmentation of existing and accessible big game habitats caused by the projects, Horus has designed a wildlife corridor of 600ft, wider than the minimum set by CPW (250ft) and followed CPW recommendations for the fencing of the project in order to minimize any potential impact to wildlife. 6 Appendix E - Environmental Protection Measures and Agency Coordination Page 9 of 12 Wildlife Species As part of the projects siting, development and permitting, please note Horus has completed onsite biological reconnaissance studies with expert biologists which revealed there are no species of concern with federal and state statutory protection likely to occur in the project area, with the exception of burrowing owls. Construction will occur outside of nesting season if this species is identified during the planned pre -construction biological surveys. Horus has also consulted with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ("USFWS") and CPW on the same issue, which have also commented on the projects' application. USFWS has expressed no concern of the project resulting in potential impacts to species listed as proposed, threatened, or endangered. CPW has confirmed the project is sited outside High Priority Habitats ("HPHs"), areas defined as sensitive wildlife habitats. Thank you for making us aware of deer, antelope, foxes, elk, and coyotes in the vicinity, and we will remain mindful throughout the life of the project of the vital need to preserve and enhance every opportunity to support these and all wildlife species. Again, in consulting with the experts on these topics, please note that impacts to these species was not identified as a concern during agency reviews of the project with CPW and USFWS. Seeding We agree with you on the importance of pollinators for crops and the local ecosystem. As highlighted in the project application native plant seeding will be incorporated between and around the solar arrays to beautify and restore the appearance of the Project site, but most importantly to promote the return of native species and pollinators. This plan will also preserve and improve soil conditions. General Concern: Glare A Glare Study was performed by Colliers Engineering & Design on the array areas of the Project. A software called Forge Solar was used that determines the potential for glare given the solar farm specifics and looks at potential effects on the human eye at locations where glare is predicted to occur. The analysis was tailored to review the potential effects of the solar farm on nearby residences and on a privately owned landing strip near the project site. Worst -case scenario parameters were used for a conservative estimate. Findings show that with appropriate system settings, it is unlikely that glare from the proposed solar project will be problematic in any manner for the surrounding area and that the project would comply with the Federal Aviation Administration's 2021 policy regarding glint and glare effects to commercial airports. An in-depth explanation of the above conclusion and the details of the full parameters of this study are found in Appendix P of the Weld County Land Use Applications. General Concern: Heat Effects We understand that considering recent temperature increase trends, it is important to be mindful of whether solar farms might have undesired heat effects. Studies show that while the center of the PV field can reach up to 1.9 Celsius above the ambient temperature. This thermal energy completely dissipates to the environment at distances of approximately 16 to 60 feet. PV solar farms do not induce a day -after -day increase in ambient temperature, and therefore, adverse micro -climate changes from a potential PV plant are not a concern.' Also relevant here is the study entitled Analysis of the Potential for a Heat Island Effect in Large Solar Farms from Columbia University, which presents a comprehensive review of the so-called 'heat island' effect. This study contains field data and simulations showing that the dissipation of thermal energy is enhanced by cooling at night, by existing roads between the fields, and by vegetation buffers. 7 "Analysis of the Potential for a Heat Island Effect in Large Solar Farms", Vasilis Fthenakis (2013) Page 10 of 12 General Concern: Electromagnetic Interference In the ever -evolving landscape of technology, electromagnetic interference (EMI) is an important consideration. We have carefully considered whether EMI will occur as a result of these projects. Utility -scale solar fields are integral to our shift towards renewable energy, consisting of extensive arrays of solar panels designed to capture sunlight and convert it into electricity. The panels themselves are not significant sources of EMI; however, the associated equipment, such as inverters and transformers, can produce electromagnetic fields. Inverters are crucial components in solar fields. They convert the direct current (DC) generated by solar panels into alternating current (AC) used by the electrical grid. Inverters and transformers typically operate at power frequencies, around 50-60 Hz, and can produce EMI that might affect nearby electronic devices. Although the frequencies are much lower than those from cell phones, these devices must be carefully designed and shielded to prevent interference. Proper inverter enclosure grounding, filtering, and circuit layout has been incorporated into this project to further reduce EM radiation. Inverters are distributed throughout the project footprint and are located at least a quarter mile from residences, further reducing impacts. For a comparison, cell phones operate using radiofrequency (RF) signals, typically in the GHz range - 900 MHz, 1.8 GHz, and 2.4 GHz - essential for communication. This RF radiation, while essential for connectivity, has sparked ongoing health discussions which may have led to the concern by residents about potential EMI from the proposed solar projects. However, when comparing the health impacts of cell phones and solar field inverters, the differences are notable. The primary concern with cell phones is the higher frequency RF radiation emitted, which can lead to potential health risks if exposure is prolonged. Regulatory standards are in place to mitigate these risks, but ongoing research continues to evaluate the long-term effects of RF exposure on health. The EMI from inverters in solar fields operates at lower frequencies and is generally considered to pose less of a direct health risk compared to RF radiation. However, inverters must be designed to minimize EMI and prevent interference with nearby electronic equipment. The health risks from this type of EMI are typically regarded as minimal, though they still warrant careful management. Proper design and regulatory adherence are essential to mitigate any potential interference. The Janus and Prospect Solar projects will adhere to the strict regulations regarding EMI found in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 47, Part 15 to ensure that the health and safety of Weld County residents is protected. General Concern: Light Pollution Compared to urban areas, industrial facilities, or outdoor recreational lighting, solar farms have a much lower impact in terms of light pollution. The solar panels themselves do not emit light. Lighting at the projects will be limited to the substation and operations and maintenance building. These lights will be downward facing and will be activated by motion sensor. Lights on the substation are the responsibility of the substation operator and can be remotely turned on/off. On the other hand, urban areas and industrial activities often involve extensive, high -intensity lighting that can contribute to significant light pollution, General Concern: Cumulative Impacts With regards to the concern raised by a few commenters that the two projects may have greater impacts being adjacent, please note the team has addressed this concern by preparing the reports and submitting the applications to the County together. The projects will therefore be assessed as a whole rather than independently as the permitting proceeds, and cumulative impacts will be considered. Page 11 of 12 Conclusion The project team would like to thank local residents for taking time to reach out and submit your concerns. We encourage your continued review, input and perspectives. Please contact us by email at ro er.freeman@horuscapital.co.uk, Francesco.cardi@horuscapital.co.uk, and ebitler@logansimpson.com to discuss the project and any follow up or additional questions you may have. We look forward to working with you as we move through the planning and regulatory processes for the project. Thanks so much for your cooperation. Sincerely, Horus Team Page 12 of 12 From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Attachments: Francesco Card! pol Q3Q5Cahg,paij.com Emily Bitter; Roger Freeniaji Response to Community Comments - Neighbour Letter Friday, September 13, 2024 11:53:59 AM Neighbour Letter September 13th 2024 - Final.pdf EXHIBIT LA&22'FOO� 16 CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization. Dear Mr. Nolan, Please find attached our comments responding to recent neighbour letters. Thanks so much for your cooperation. Kind Regards, Francesco Paolo Cardi Associate Horus Energy Mobile: +1 303 479 4535 francesco.cardi@horuscapital.co.vk https://horusenergy.ca. ukl Qlock gender I Report Response To Community Comments On behalf of Horus Energy, we welcome the opportunity to respond to a series of comments that have been recently submitted to the County by neighbours and other local citizens about our proposed Janus and Prospect solar projects. First and foremost, we greatly appreciate your efforts to work with us throughout the course of this project. Horus has received and closely integrated your input, feedback, request for property -specific adaptations, and all the forms of interest and support expressed for this project. Through a variety of steps taken throughout the project planning, development, and permitting stages, we have been gratified to work closely with your incredible community. In that regard, while we recognize that some commenters have recently voiced strong concerns, we do believe the project enjoys significant landowner and local support. This support has been conveyed to the County in 10 letters of support and non -objection. This includes five neighbours adjacent to the projects, as well as the five landowner partners in the project. Horus directly has received many more informal or oral expressions of positive input from a diverse set of interested parties. This foundation of support is built upon a long series of outreach efforts. As many of you know, we begin reaching out to the community in the earliest development stages of the projects - both through individual contacts and a public meeting held on July 05, 2023. As we explained at that meeting, the initial outreach group was identified under basic rules in Weld County for contacting the local immediate neighbours most proximate to the development. This also included several local agencies and community service entities representing everything from fire response to community planning. These initial contacts have formed the basis for a series of continued communications with many of you about individual property issues or considerations. Some have commented that they wish that they have known of the project sooner and could have attended the prior meeting. Please know that while these initial communications focused on those living closest to the development, they were driven solely by practical and regulatory considerations and are part of a continuing, longstanding, and broad community outreach program that has and will be the cornerstone of our approach to this project throughout its course. In this regard, we have welcomed comments from citizens in any location in Weld County. As reflected in this group response, we understand your interest and have carefully considered all comments. We also note that in addition to providing this collective response, we have continued to reach out to individuals and landowners to try to accommodate individual questions or concerns or mitigate particular property circumstances. We have yet to hear back from some individuals - but understand that some folks may want to do so in a collective way. Others may feel like they want to respond more directly and specifically once a collective response is received. The bottom line is that our doors remain wide open to continue any communication - whether collective or otherwise. With these factors in mind, Horus carefully weighed whether a collective response would serve the community best. We believe that this approach is supported by the fact that the concerns expressed convey a very parallel set of questions or concerns. In fact, many of the comments appeared to be jointly generated and contained the same basic wording. We welcome this joint approach, and the efficiencies created thereby, but remain flexible to meet the community needs going forward. While Horus has attempted to frame and highlight key points from our application materials in this response, we did not choose to include voluminous documents and data equally accessible to all on the public websites. It appears that some of you were able to access that information, and we appreciate your taking the time to do so. We are certainly glad to provide additional references to materials on file, specific studies, or other supporting documentation. Please don't hesitate to reach out to us if we can provide or help access these materials or information. Page 1 of 12 Finally, while we believe we have addressed all individual points raised by the community in recent comments, please let us know immediately if we missed any concerns or have additional specific comments or input that you would like for us to address, either through follow-up communications or upcoming public hearings surrounding these projects. General Concern: Property Values We fully understand the utmost importance of property and land rights to all residents of Weld County and the interest of all commenters in this issue. While every property will have different features relevant to this discussion - and some commenters appear to live quite a distance from the solar farms themselves - we feel that the following discussion applies generally to all. That said, since all comments were from property owners outside the project boundaries itself, we concentrate on adjacent property value issues here. In turn, this discussion does not go into detail about the numerous and compelling benefits generated to the community at large through such attributes as economic, tax, renewable energy generation, and supporting project landowner rights to use and obtain value from their land. These are discussed in detail in our application materials and other sources. The potential impact of solar farms on adjacent properties has been considered in other situations in Colorado and across the nation. As a result, much research has been done to assess the impact of solar on land valuations. We recognize that many commenters cited various studies, and we have carefully considered same in formulating this response. As these studies reflect, appraisers generally determine potential negative impact caused by an external source on adjacent or nearby properties utilizing the following factors: • Hazardous material: As discussed further below, a solar farm involves no hazardous materials or waste byproduct as part of its operation • Odor: Solar farms produce no odor. • Noise: As discussed further below, whether discussing passive fixed solar panels, or single -axis trackers, there is no negative impact associated with noise from a solar farm. No sound is emitted from the facility at night. Solar farms are inaudible from the roadways. • Traffic: As discussed further below, there will be a temporary increase in traffic during construction, and we have provided an extensive report in the application materials describing the efforts made to mitigate traffic impacts to the neighbourhood. Once built, the solar farm will have no onsite employees or staff, and the traffic will be far less than many other typical County uses. The site requires only minimal maintenance. • Stigma: There is no stigma associated with solar farms and people generally respond favourably towards such a use. While an individual may express concerns about proximity to a solar farm, there is no specific stigma associated with a solar farm. Stigma generally refers to things such as adult establishments, prisons, rehabilitation facilities, and so forth. Solar panels have no associated stigma and are found everywhere these days, from schools, churches, oil and gas wells to airports and industrial facilities, and increasingly on farms and agricultural sites as well. They are on roofs in many residential communities. Solar panels on a roof are often cited as an enhancement to the property in marketing brochures. • Appearance: This factor is discussed in detail below, but in terms of property value issues, larger solar farms that use fixed or tracking panels are a passive land use that many feel aligns well with rural residential settings. They are similar in appearance to large greenhouses, which also function as passive solar energy collectors. 1 "Meadow Forge Solar Impact Study", Kirkland Appraisals (2022) Page 2 of 12 With these factors firmly in mind, we have looked closely at the property value issues raised in your comments. The study that we provided, entitled "Property Value Impact Study"2 was published by one of the leading consulting firms, Cohn Reznick, and has been widely cited and utilized in many settings. We do understand your comments that the study was focused on Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan. The Midwest was believed to be a good study area because while it largely incorporated rural settings like this project, housing density is higher, and therefore the impact of solar farms on properties - if any - should be more evident and pronounced. The study shows no measurable impact and consistent difference in property values for properties adjacent to solar farms when compared to similar properties locationally removed from same. Consistently we have found in data from university studies, broker commentary, and other appraisal studies the importance of implementing landscape buffers and proper setbacks to further minimize the prospect of such impacts on property value adjoining the solar farms. The team has kept this in close consideration throughout the development and permitting process, by designing natural screening and respecting setbacks as defined by the Weld County Code. To further explore this and related economic factors, a socioeconomic impact and community benefit report has been commissioned and submitted as part of the permitting process.' The study shows that the projects will result into an enhancement of the socioeconomic environment within Weld County due to the following factors: job creation, economic output, cost-effective locally generated power, increased income to landowners, and positive local health impacts; while having no measurable impact on the value of adjacent properties. Even if there were impacts to property, solar presents numerous balancing economic benefits that are important to consider. Again, these are detailed in our application materials and not the focus of this response, and we highlight just a few here: (1) Utility scale solar presents an opportunity to reserve land for future agricultural use while continuing to support agricultural interests and landowner rights. (2) This Project would provide an increase in property tax payments to Weld County, Fire District, School District and other community services. (3) Local employment opportunities would increase for local construction and operation companies and workers, and increased use of services (accommodations, restaurants) would occur throughout the construction of the Project without taxing social services such as schools, roads, etc., within the county. (4) The renewable energy and storage attributes of the project are firmly aligned with federal, state, local, utility, and other mandates to develop further renewable energy sources and take advantage of the many economic benefits of these systems. General Concern: Appearance and Visual We recognize that the aesthetics of any neighbouring use is a very personal matter to a property owner, and appreciate your sharing concerns on this topic in your comments. The team has endeavoured to its fullest extent to minimize and mitigate the impacts of this facility in the surrounding area with many of the items addressed here (e.g. screening using living fences, buffers, visual simulations, compatibility). For instance, Janus and Prospect will be built at least 500 feet away from existing homes, complying with Weld County regulations. The facility is designed to be low -profile, with heights ranging from 4 to 10 feet, comparable to the height of a cornfield. We also note that efforts to minimize visual and other impacts will continue throughout the project and will always be open to continuing input from the community. 2 "Property Value Impact Study: Adjacent Property Values Solar Impact Study: A Study of Eight Existing Solar Facilities", CohnReznick (2021) https://www.nexteraenergyresources.com/content/dam/neer/us/en/pdf/CohnReznick%20Solar%20lmpact%20Study 7.26.21.pdf 3 Appendix F -Socioeconomic Impact and Community Benefit Report Page 3 of 12 Ultimately, for all the reasons explained here and, in supporting County applications, both Horus and many involved parties and landowners feel that this is an excellent location for this project, and its features support this view. Horus does encourage the development on brown field sites where it makes sense, but there are simply not enough of them next to good transmission systems to meet the growing demand for energy in the country. This site was selected based in part on the transmission line and the capacity of the existing 115 and 230 -kV lines and supporting transmission, which has been part of the landscape in the area for many years. Also, there was interest from local landowners with regards to both financial reasons and to preserve their farmland long-term for future uses. The team and its projects have at their core the protection of the natural features that characterize the area, its peace and quietness, the energy and passion of its neighbours that make this area of the State so unique. We recognize that the project will present some change for many commenters but believe that this change should be viewed in the context of the rapid changes overall in Weld County and beyond. We also believe it is important to compare this use to others that might be proposed over time. For instance, unlike this use, residential developments, in addition to causing disturbance during construction, present a series of ongoing traffic, visual, noise and other impacts. Horus is a property owner as well, and we deeply respect the vested interests, connection, and unique history each of you has to your property. We understand the passion that these issues often invoke. We would just ask that you consider these points as well as you assess your approach to this project. Again, if it would be useful, we welcome the opportunity to continue to address with you individually or collectively this important issue. General Concern: Traffic We understand that you chose to live out of the city to enjoy such features as the quietness, the peacefulness of driving down country roads, the simple cycle of planting, growing, and harvesting of crops, and the openness of the landscape . Many of you expressed concern that the traffic and congestion from this project would fundamentally shift the ability to enjoy this lifestyle. We really believe that this will not be the case - and will continue to do everything we can going forward to address this concern. Again, it is important to bear in mind that unlike so many other uses now crowding parts of Weld County, the increase in traffic will be temporary during the project's construction. Moreover, with our experts - Kimley Horn - who have and are working with Hudson and other cities - we have carefully designed a path that would minimize noise and disturbance and have limited impacts on the transportation patterns or the roads around the project site. The projects will utilize the existing roadway system, where appropriate, and contribute to upgrade, build, and maintain the other roads that will be utilized during the construction of the projects. Similar to mineral oil and gas production, Weld County rules ensure that adequate roads must exist or be made available prior to construction of the projects. The projects will submit a Road Use Agreement and Access Road Permit application to the County, ensuring compliance with the County design standards. The projects will upgrade any damaged and deteriorated roads and help maintain the same if they fall within the construction path. Safety is a very important aspect for Horus and we strive for a responsible and orderly development. This is also thoroughly reflected in Weld County Code provisions aimed at protecting and serving the health, welfare and safety of the citizens of the County. A Traffic Management Plan will be developed that will implement reduced speed limits on local roads and will require signallers to control the traffic in key areas in the vicinity of the projects, aimed at ensuring careful driving from construction workers. The living fence, in addition to providing visual screening, will also provide additional benefits in this respect, contributing towards an improvement in road safety and a reduction of hazardous driving conditions, by reducing snow drift onto roads, which in turn increases visibility, and reduces maintenance, plowing, and salting costs. Page 4 of 12 While there will be some short-term disruptions in term of noise and traffic, the benefits that the project will bring will be long-lasting. Some will be apparent in the short term like the increase in revenue from local business and hotels, restaurants, suppliers. The native vegetation that will be planted underneath the panels will attract pollinators, a fundamental piece of our ecosystem. The project water tank can be utilized by the Southeast Weld Fire Protection District and its Chief Tom Beach for fire emergencies in the area. Other benefits will be more evident in the long term, like the increase in taxes for Weld County that will help support a wide variety of services upon which all parties rely. General Concern: Dust We appreciate your questions about dust and how this will be mitigated. We have given this topic a lot of thought. We have developed a detailed Dust and Weed Mitigation Plan as part of the projects' land use permit applications, which integrates and adheres to Colorado Department of Health and Environment Land Development Permit requirements establishing acceptable dust levels, which will be monitored closely as the project proceeds.' We will be adapting this as the project progresses to ensure we are minimizing the temporary construction impact created by dust. Again, we might ask that this concern be put in perspective of all the other permanent potential uses that might be made of these lands - that would not only generate much more immediate dust issues but would increase disturbances of this nature for decades to come and change the fundamental agricultural nature of these lands. General Concern: Noise This in our view is one of the many advantages of solar, above nearly all other uses. During operations there will be no noticeable noise from the solar farm. The only components of the project facilities that will emit low levels of noise will be inverters and BESS equipment. However, these facilities will be located at least a quarter mile from residences and noise levels will be well below levels set by County noise ordinances set forth in Chapter 14 Article IX of the Weld County Code. During the life of the project the site will be controlled remotely, and utility personnel will visit on a quarterly basis to conduct routine inspections and maintenance. The transformer typically has a hum similar to an HVAC that can only be heard in close proximity. Buffers on the property are sufficient to make emitted sounds inaudible from the adjoining properties. Transformers will be located at least a quarter mile from residences and noise levels will be well below levels set by County noise ordinances. During construction there will be some noise due to pile driving and equipment backup beeping such as reverse warning sounds, but please note that this noise will again be temporary in nature and is not anticipated to exceed maximum levels at the property boundary for construction activities outlined in Weld County noise ordinances. All told, the solar farms will be a very quiet neighbour, harvesting solar energy passively throughout the project life. General Concern: Impacts from Project Materials Another benefit of solar, compared to nearly other use that might be made of this land, is the negligible use of materials that are in any way hazardous or harmful. We appreciate the concerns expressed about impacts of materials to be used during the construction phase but are very confident that that any impacts from fertilizer, weed control, or other material usage, will be significantly less than typical residential development and most agricultural uses. These issues are further addressed below in our discussion of environmental matters, but it may help to review the basic constituents found in the components of a solar farm. The panels are bi-facial mono - crystalline that have no known leaching issues. The primary materials of a solar panel which are glass, 4 Dust and Weed Mitigation Nan - Appendix D Page 5 of 12 aluminum, silicone, copper, and trace semiconducting metals are inert and don't constitute hazardous materials or waste. There could be trace amounts of lead from soldering material, which is similar to televisions and cell phones. There is no risk of exposure or leakage and any amount contained in the modules is below the EPA limits. Solar panels are recyclable and contain approximately 75 percent glass, 8 percent aluminium, and 5 percent silicon. Approximately 70 percent of the material is recoverable due to the processing required to separate the panel components. These materials, once recycled, are worth about $6 per panel to the solar farm at today's prices. Solar plants use minimal chemicals. There could be some paint to touch up rusted areas on the mounting structure, potentially some oil in the transformers, and we also intend to utilize limited solutions to control the dust and weeds on the site. Further details on these matters are contained in the various plans cited in this response, but all such materials would be used in accordance with risk assessments and method statements ensuring they are used correctly and with suitable safely procedures in place. Also note there is no cadmium telluride in the panels we have proposed. General Concern: Water There were a few comments directed at water usage issues, and we understand that water is a critical element of concern at all levels of the community. Water usage and quality is a great concern for Weld County and Horus and has been a focus of our application materials throughout. Horus is committed to protecting Weld County's waterways and supply. The properties involved in this project have no vested water rights, and irrigated agriculture is accomplished by leasing water from nearby tenants. The project has secured sufficient water resources to supply what will amount to modest water needs for the Project (0.007 -acre feet per acre per year). As compared to many other uses shown in the Application, solar requires minimal water for project operation. The Project's water use plan is intended to preserve the agricultural land base and allow for a return to full agricultural use once the solar project is decommissioned. For planning purposes, Project water needs can be divided into the following categories: 1. Construction/Dust Control Some water will be required to implement the Dust Control Plan and related aspects of the construction phrase. The plan is to utilise outside service companies to supply the water for this need as part of their spray mix system so to not require any contribution of local water from the area. There will also be stormwater controls and related mitigation measures during construction to manage existing surface water flow and maintain water quality, as required by governing regulations. Finally, some water may be needed for initial planting and maintenance of plants used for screening, although species are selected for their minimal ongoing watering requirements. 2. Fire Control - While fire is not a typical concern for PV and BESS systems, the Project's water tank may be utilized by the Southeast Weld Fire District and will provide a key resource for protection against fires in the region, especially in times of drought. This tank will need to be filled periodically. 3. Panel Washing and Maintenance - The only ongoing water supply needed for the Project is for washing and maintaining the solar panels and supporting facilities, in part to maximize energy return. The exact cleaning schedule is a function of precipitation, dust, and other particulate settling on the panels. To minimize cleaning, the Project intends to utilize a commercial contractor to treat neighbouring roads with GMCO CS products, a blend of liquid magnesium chloride and a complex sugar. The product is an environmentally friendly solution for gravel road stabilization and dust control. This will reduce water consumption related to cleaning during the operation period (and reduce dust in residential homes as well). Water needs will be more than adequately met by (1) the occasional purchase or trucking in of outside water where needed, particularly at the construction phrase, (2) the establishment of a large water Page 6 of 12 collection tank near the well on the Janus property to store water from the onsite well, and (3) over the longer term, by the existing onsite water well. The onsite well located is fully in place and secured. Based on initial calculations, the amount of water needed per acre foot of land for the Project is much less than current annual agricultural uses for the Project site. It is also less than the average amount of water per acre of land needed to raise most crops. General Concern: Water Drainage As many of you recognized, one important element of water management is the handling of drainage over the course of the solar project. Horus has commissioned Kim ley Horn to prepare a preliminary drainage report which evaluates pre and post development hydrologic characteristics of the project site and addresses the stormwater requirements of Weld County and the state of Colorado. 5 The study found that peak flow rates will actually be reduced from the existing rates, due to the proposed improvements on the project site, complemented with the findings from the Journal of Hydrologic Engineering focused on researching the hydrologic impacts of utility scale solar generation facilities. The study also concluded that drainage patterns offsite will remain the same as historic conditions. In addition, detention ponds have been designed on the project site to retain the required storage volumes. Generally, solar farms have little to no impact on runoff volumes or rates. Rainfall that falls directly on a solar panel runs to the pervious areas around and under the surrounding panels. General Concern: Conflicts with future land use plans We appreciate your questions related to compatibility of the solar farm with overall uses in the area. Compatibility is thoroughly assessed in the Weld County Code in Chapters 21, 22 and 23 as part of the permit application process, and we refer you to the voluminous project materials and attachments submitted by Horus addressing this subject. For ease of reference, each regulation and associated project compatibility features are outlined below for reference: Chapter 21: Areas and Activities of State Interest, Article III: Site Selection and Construction of Major Facilities of a Public Utility, Division 3: Permit Program for Site Selection and Construction of a Major Facility of a Public Utility • Regulation: All reasonable alternatives to the proposed action, including use of existing rights -of - way and joint use of rights -of -way wherever uses are compatible, have been adequately assessed and the proposed action is compatible with and represents the best interests of the people of the County and represents a fair and reasonable utilization of resources in the impact area. • Project Compliance with Regulations: All reasonable alternatives within the study area were thoroughly assessed to make the Project fully compatible with and representative of the best interests of the people of Weld County. While a larger land area was initially studied, the Project's final footprint was selected because it offered advantages to the community and overall environment while providing opportunities and circumstances favourable to Solar and BESS facilities, specifically 1) existing transmission infrastructure less than 0.2 miles from the property, 2) augmenting, while sustaining for future landowners, current unsustainable primary land use as indicated by the landowners. This offers benefits to land use for the surrounding area. Utilization of local resources within Weld County will be minimal as the Project will not require services such as water, sewage, or emergency services at a level typical of other land uses in the area. Code Chapter 22: Comprehensive Plan, Article II - Principles, Goals, and Objectives • Regulation: Transition between land use types and intensities with buffers. Uses that are incompatible with existing uses must be able to mitigate conflicts and support compatible economic development opportunities. • Project Compliance with Regulations: The project complies with or exceeds all County required buffers from roads, residences, Oil and Gas operations, and other special areas. Adjacent uses 5 Preliminary Drainage Analysis — Appendix J Page 7 of 12 will not be affected, and nearby land can continue to be utilized for agriculture or other compatible u ses. This will support the opportunity for future compatible economic development in the area. Project compatibility is further demonstrated by comparing other land uses in the area. In Weld County the Agricultural zoning district is designed primarily for agricultural uses, but it also accommodates various other special uses, including Oil and Gas Operations, Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), and subdivisions of land for residential development. While these use types are generally accepted in agricultural areas, their impacts to neighbour and e nvironment health are substantial, including for industrial facilities emissions that may result in respiratory issues and water quality contamination. Utility scale solar has fewer direct health impacts as they do not produce air or water pollution and contribute to cleaner energy production, which can have broader public health benefits by reducing reliance on fossil fuels. Chapter 23: Zoning, Article II - Procedures and Permits, Division 4 - Uses by Special Review • Regulation: Permitted uses will be compatible with the existing surrounding land uses and with the future development of the surrounding area as permitted by the existing zone and with future development. Buffering or screening of the proposed use from adjacent properties requirements. • Project Compliance with Regulations: Mitigation of construction impacts and visual impacts have been addressed as described throughout the application. Natural vegetative buffers have been incorporated into the project design on a case -by -case basis to mitigate visual impacts for n eighbours. This includes utilization of multiple layers of vegetation and specific species to ensure each landowner has a screen that works for their specific location and needs. Screening is discussed in more detail below. The proposed use is compatible with existing land uses and future development. The existing site land use is dryland agricultural row crops and rangeland, most similar to tillage/agricultural land classification. While a vital part of the land use base in the area, it does have its impacts. Disturbance to the land from tillage can disrupt the natural soil structure resulting in reduced soil cohesion and structural stability, which may result in increased soil erosion, compaction, and runoff. It also can deplete the soil's organic content, reducing its fertility and affecting its ability to retain moisture and nutrients. The ability to retain moisture in becoming increasingly important in Weld County as water is a precious resource. Disturbed soil is also susceptible to weeds, requiring additional inputs such as herbicides and pesticides, which can further impact soil health and the surrounding environment. Farming this land is becoming increasingly difficult as water becomes scarcer and the soil health declines. This project will allow the landowners to profit from their land without the disturbance that results from tilled agriculture. Temporarily halting ag use of this land for the duration of the project will allow the soil health to improve. Revegetation actions following construction include seeding the land with a county approved seed mix and will promote the growth of native grasses to preserve the quality of the soil and mitigate noxious weeds. By utilizing the county approved native grass seed mix below the panels, the existing tillage/agricultural land areas will be changed to a heavy meadow land classification that reduces peak flow rates and manages stormwater in line with the historic conditions of the site. This will promote water conservation at both the watershed and site levels, with the goal of replicating the native hydrologic characteristics of the sub - watersheds, creating natural ground coverage, and reducing dust. The change in land use from tilled agriculture land to utility scale solar will allow the landowners to increase the health of their land and reduce water use while simultaneously profiting from their land. This is beneficial to adjacent uses as it presents a lesser impact to neighbour and e nvironmental health and is also economically profitable for the County. Upon completion of the solar lease option, the project can be fully decommissioned, and the land returned to agricultural use or open meadow land. Utility scale solar is one of the only land development uses that not only preserves and improves ag land for future use, but is also a low water use, providing conservation benefits as well. Fifty years from now, these developments may be integral to preserving open lands and reducing urban sprawl. Page 8 of 12 General Concern: Screening The screening plan was developed during consultations with adjacent landowners and visual simulations. The goal is to provide screening tailored to your individual property owner requests, and at the same time ensure screening best accounts for water usage needed to sustain the living fence. Screening was developed in consultation with our expert biologist and landscaping team. The size of Rocky Mountain Juniper trees selected (10 -gallon containers for the juniper are about 5' in height and 1.5-2" caliper) was chosen to reduce the risk of mortality from transplant stress. The typical growth rate is one foot a year. A 3 -inch caliper juniper normally utilizes a ball and burlap container system and tends to have higher mortality rates due to the stress/damage to the root ball in transport and planting - which is why the 10 -gallon container tree was recommended. Since Rocky Mountain Juniper is a native species and naturally occurs in that area, we know it can handle the climate and limited water resources, but winter watering should be considered as a precaution (especially if it's a dry winter) to reduce potential for mortality. First season watering was recommended because that should be enough time for root stock to establish at appropriate depths to access ground water. There is a balance between survival and not creating a dependency on watering. Therefore, an adaptive approach would be best where watering is tapered off over 3 years. We have also received questions on how the Skunkbush Sumac will be planted along the Juniper. The two will be planted in a scattered fashion so it looks more natural. We appreciate the recommendation of the American Wild Plum as an alternative to the plants chosen, but American wild plum typically requires more water than the juniper or sumac, so they are not recommended to minimise the use of water, hence why they were not selected in the project design. General Concern: Environment and Wildlife We appreciate your comments on these critical topics, as Horus is committed to promote a responsible development in Weld County, promoting economic development, land stewardship, while at the same time preserving crops and the natural resources and wildlife that make this area so special. To this effect the team has developed several studies which include a Cultural Resource Survey, Wetland and Waterbody Survey, a study on protected species, a Phase 1 Environmental Assessment Report, and Critical Issue Analysis that were completed by archaeological, biological, and ecological experts. The aim and the results of these studies were used to best assess any environmental impact the projects may cause and mitigate the same in the projects design by avoiding waterways, planting native grass mix to enrich the soil and juniper trees lining the fence, and creating a movement corridor along Sand Creek to facilitate big game habitats. The applicant has committed to strict management practices that are detailed in the 1041 /USR application.' This is also embedded within the Weld County Code to ensure that the natural and economic environment and resources of the County are protected and enhanced. With this overarching perspective in mind, the following summarizes and responds to each of the comments received with respect to the environment, wildlife and seeding. Wildlife Corridor We appreciate your comments on the wildlife corridor. Please note that like with so many aspects of this project, we have utilized the expertise of outside local agencies or experts to address this issue. Here, we have designed the corridor in collaboration with experts on wildlife at Colorado Parks and Wildlife ("CPW"). The agency has been consulted since the inception of the projects; they have been involved in the permitting process and provided their referral letters on the projects. To address the loss of open space and the fragmentation of existing and accessible big game habitats caused by the projects, Horus has designed a wildlife corridor of 600ft, wider than the minimum set by CPW (250ft) and followed CPW recommendations for the fencing of the project in order to minimize any potential impact to wildlife. 6 Appendix E - Environmental Protection Measures and Agency Coordination Page 9 of 12 Wildlife Species As part of the projects siting, development and permitting, please note Horus has completed onsite biological reconnaissance studies with expert biologists which revealed there are no species of concern with federal and state statutory protection likely to occur in the project area, with the exception of burrowing owls. Construction will occur outside of nesting season if this species is identified during the planned pre -construction biological surveys. Horus has also consulted with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ("USFWS") and CPW on the same issue, which have also commented on the projects' application. USFWS has expressed no concern of the project resulting in potential impacts to species listed as proposed, threatened, or endangered. CPW has confirmed the project is sited outside High Priority Habitats ("HPHs"), areas defined as sensitive wildlife habitats. Thank you for making us aware of deer, antelope, foxes, elk, and coyotes in the vicinity, and we will remain mindful throughout the life of the project of the vital need to preserve and enhance every opportunity to support these and all wildlife species. Again, in consulting with the experts on these topics, please note that impacts to these species was not identified as a concern during agency reviews of the project with CPW and USFWS. Seeding We agree with you on the importance of pollinators for crops and the local ecosystem. As highlighted in the project application native plant seeding will be incorporated between and around the solar arrays to beautify and restore the appearance of the Project site, but most importantly to promote the return of native species and pollinators. This plan will also preserve and improve soil conditions. General Concern: Glare A Glare Study was performed by Colliers Engineering & Design on the array areas of the Project. A software called Forge Solar was used that determines the potential for glare given the solar farm specifics and looks at potential effects on the human eye at locations where glare is predicted to occur. The analysis was tailored to review the potential effects of the solar farm on nearby residences and on a privately owned landing strip near the project site. Worst -case scenario parameters were used for a conservative estimate. Findings show that with appropriate system settings, it is unlikely that glare from the proposed solar project will be problematic in any manner for the surrounding area and that the project would comply with the Federal Aviation Administration's 2021 policy regarding glint and glare effects to commercial airports. An in-depth explanation of the above conclusion and the details of the full parameters of this study are found in Appendix P of the Weld County Land Use Applications. General Concern: Heat Effects We understand that considering recent temperature increase trends, it is important to be mindful of whether solar farms might have undesired heat effects. Studies show that while the center of the PV field can reach up to 1.9 Celsius above the ambient temperature. This thermal energy completely dissipates to the environment at distances of approximately 16 to 60 feet. PV solar farms do not induce a day -after -day increase in ambient temperature, and therefore, adverse micro -climate changes from a potential PV plant are not a concern.' Also relevant here is the study entitled Analysis of the Potential for a Heat Island Effect in Large Solar Farms from Columbia University, which presents a comprehensive review of the so-called 'heat island' effect. This study contains field data and simulations showing that the dissipation of thermal energy is enhanced by cooling at night, by existing roads between the fields, and by vegetation buffers. 7 "Analysis of the Potential for a Heat Island Effect in Large Solar Farms", Vasilis Fthenakis (2013) Page 10 of 12 General Concern: Electromagnetic Interference In the ever -evolving landscape of technology, electromagnetic interference (EMI) is an important consideration. We have carefully considered whether EMI will occur as a result of these projects. Utility -scale solar fields are integral to our shift towards renewable energy, consisting of extensive arrays of solar panels designed to capture sunlight and convert it into electricity. The panels themselves are not significant sources of EMI; however, the associated equipment, such as inverters and transformers, can produce electromagnetic fields. Inverters are crucial components in solar fields. They convert the direct current (DC) generated by solar panels into alternating current (AC) used by the electrical grid. Inverters and transformers typically operate at power frequencies, around 50-60 Hz, and can produce EMI that might affect nearby electronic devices. Although the frequencies are much lower than those from cell phones, these devices must be carefully designed and shielded to prevent interference. Proper inverter enclosure grounding, filtering, and circuit layout has been incorporated into this project to further reduce EM radiation. Inverters are distributed throughout the project footprint and are located at least a quarter mile from residences, further reducing impacts. For a comparison, cell phones operate using radiofrequency (RF) signals, typically in the GHz range - 900 MHz, 1.8 GHz, and 2.4 GHz - essential for communication. This RF radiation, while essential for connectivity, has sparked ongoing health discussions which may have led to the concern by residents about potential EMI from the proposed solar projects. However, when comparing the health impacts of cell phones and solar field inverters, the differences are notable. The primary concern with cell phones is the higher frequency RF radiation emitted, which can lead to potential health risks if exposure is prolonged. Regulatory standards are in place to mitigate these risks, but ongoing research continues to evaluate the long-term effects of RF exposure on health. The EMI from inverters in solar fields operates at lower frequencies and is generally considered to pose less of a direct health risk compared to RF radiation. However, inverters must be designed to minimize EMI and prevent interference with nearby electronic equipment. The health risks from this type of EMI are typically regarded as minimal, though they still warrant careful management. Proper design and regulatory adherence are essential to mitigate any potential interference. The Janus and Prospect Solar projects will adhere to the strict regulations regarding EMI found in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 47, Part 15 to ensure that the health and safety of Weld County residents is protected. General Concern: Light Pollution Compared to urban areas, industrial facilities, or outdoor recreational lighting, solar farms have a much lower impact in terms of light pollution. The solar panels themselves do not emit light. Lighting at the projects will be limited to the substation and operations and maintenance building. These lights will be downward facing and will be activated by motion sensor. Lights on the substation are the responsibility of the substation operator and can be remotely turned on/off. On the other hand, urban areas and industrial activities often involve extensive, high -intensity lighting that can contribute to significant light pollution, General Concern: Cumulative Impacts With regards to the concern raised by a few commenters that the two projects may have greater impacts being adjacent, please note the team has addressed this concern by preparing the reports and submitting the applications to the County together. The projects will therefore be assessed as a whole rather than independently as the permitting proceeds, and cumulative impacts will be considered. Page 11 of 12 Conclusion The project team would like to thank local residents for taking time to reach out and submit your concerns. We encourage your continued review, input and perspectives. Please contact us by email at ro er.freeman@horuscapital.co.uk, Francesco.cardi@horuscapital.co.uk, and ebitler@logansimpson.com to discuss the project and any follow up or additional questions you may have. We look forward to working with you as we move through the planning and regulatory processes for the project. Thanks so much for your cooperation. Sincerely, Horus Team Page 12 of 12 From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Attachments: Francegcp Cardi linnea, riebschiagergomcst.pet R er Freeman; Emily Bitter Response to Community Comments - Neighbour Letter Friday, September 13, 2024 12:06:13 PM Neighbour Letter September Lath 2024 - Fina .p4f EXHIBIT I 1A9a2L1•-eilb lb CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization. Dear Ms. Riebschlager, Please find attached our comments responding to recent neighbour letters. Thanks so much for your cooperation. Kind Regards, Francesco Paolo Cardi Associate Horus Energy Mobile: +1 303 479 4535 francesco.cardi©horuscapital.co.uk https://horuseneray.co.uki B ock sender 1 Report Response To Community Comments On behalf of Horus Energy, we welcome the opportunity to respond to a series of comments that have been recently submitted to the County by neighbours and other local citizens about our proposed Janus and Prospect solar projects. First and foremost, we greatly appreciate your efforts to work with us throughout the course of this project. Horus has received and closely integrated your input, feedback, request for property -specific adaptations, and all the forms of interest and support expressed for this project. Through a variety of steps taken throughout the project planning, development, and permitting stages, we have been gratified to work closely with your incredible community. In that regard, while we recognize that some commenters have recently voiced strong concerns, we do believe the project enjoys significant landowner and local support. This support has been conveyed to the County in 10 letters of support and non -objection. This includes five neighbours adjacent to the projects, as well as the five landowner partners in the project. Horus directly has received many more informal or oral expressions of positive input from a diverse set of interested parties. This foundation of support is built upon a long series of outreach efforts. As many of you know, we begin reaching out to the community in the earliest development stages of the projects - both through individual contacts and a public meeting held on July 05, 2023. As we explained at that meeting, the initial outreach group was identified under basic rules in Weld County for contacting the local immediate neighbours most proximate to the development. This also included several local agencies and community service entities representing everything from fire response to community planning. These initial contacts have formed the basis for a series of continued communications with many of you about individual property issues or considerations. Some have commented that they wish that they have known of the project sooner and could have attended the prior meeting. Please know that while these initial communications focused on those living closest to the development, they were driven solely by practical and regulatory considerations and are part of a continuing, longstanding, and broad community outreach program that has and will be the cornerstone of our approach to this project throughout its course. In this regard, we have welcomed comments from citizens in any location in Weld County. As reflected in this group response, we understand your interest and have carefully considered all comments. We also note that in addition to providing this collective response, we have continued to reach out to individuals and landowners to try to accommodate individual questions or concerns or mitigate particular property circumstances. We have yet to hear back from some individuals - but understand that some folks may want to do so in a collective way. Others may feel like they want to respond more directly and specifically once a collective response is received. The bottom line is that our doors remain wide open to continue any communication - whether collective or otherwise. With these factors in mind, Horus carefully weighed whether a collective response would serve the community best. We believe that this approach is supported by the fact that the concerns expressed convey a very parallel set of questions or concerns. In fact, many of the comments appeared to be jointly generated and contained the same basic wording. We welcome this joint approach, and the efficiencies created thereby, but remain flexible to meet the community needs going forward. While Horus has attempted to frame and highlight key points from our application materials in this response, we did not choose to include voluminous documents and data equally accessible to all on the public websites. It appears that some of you were able to access that information, and we appreciate your taking the time to do so. We are certainly glad to provide additional references to materials on file, specific studies, or other supporting documentation. Please don't hesitate to reach out to us if we can provide or help access these materials or information. Page 1 of 12 Finally, while we believe we have addressed all individual points raised by the community in recent comments, please let us know immediately if we missed any concerns or have additional specific comments or input that you would like for us to address, either through follow-up communications or upcoming public hearings surrounding these projects. General Concern: Property Values We fully understand the utmost importance of property and land rights to all residents of Weld County and the interest of all commenters in this issue. While every property will have different features relevant to this discussion - and some commenters appear to live quite a distance from the solar farms themselves - we feel that the following discussion applies generally to all. That said, since all comments were from property owners outside the project boundaries itself, we concentrate on adjacent property value issues here. In turn, this discussion does not go into detail about the numerous and compelling benefits generated to the community at large through such attributes as economic, tax, renewable energy generation, and supporting project landowner rights to use and obtain value from their land. These are discussed in detail in our application materials and other sources. The potential impact of solar farms on adjacent properties has been considered in other situations in Colorado and across the nation. As a result, much research has been done to assess the impact of solar on land valuations. We recognize that many commenters cited various studies, and we have carefully considered same in formulating this response. As these studies reflect, appraisers generally determine potential negative impact caused by an external source on adjacent or nearby properties utilizing the following factors: • Hazardous material: As discussed further below, a solar farm involves no hazardous materials or waste byproduct as part of its operation • Odor: Solar farms produce no odor. • Noise: As discussed further below, whether discussing passive fixed solar panels, or single -axis trackers, there is no negative impact associated with noise from a solar farm. No sound is emitted from the facility at night. Solar farms are inaudible from the roadways. • Traffic: As discussed further below, there will be a temporary increase in traffic during construction, and we have provided an extensive report in the application materials describing the efforts made to mitigate traffic impacts to the neighbourhood. Once built, the solar farm will have no onsite employees or staff, and the traffic will be far less than many other typical County uses. The site requires only minimal maintenance. • Stigma: There is no stigma associated with solar farms and people generally respond favourably towards such a use. While an individual may express concerns about proximity to a solar farm, there is no specific stigma associated with a solar farm. Stigma generally refers to things such as adult establishments, prisons, rehabilitation facilities, and so forth. Solar panels have no associated stigma and are found everywhere these days, from schools, churches, oil and gas wells to airports and industrial facilities, and increasingly on farms and agricultural sites as well. They are on roofs in many residential communities. Solar panels on a roof are often cited as an enhancement to the property in marketing brochures. • Appearance: This factor is discussed in detail below, but in terms of property value issues, larger solar farms that use fixed or tracking panels are a passive land use that many feel aligns well with rural residential settings. They are similar in appearance to large greenhouses, which also function as passive solar energy collectors. 1 "Meadow Forge Solar Impact Study", Kirkland Appraisals (2022) Page 2 of 12 With these factors firmly in mind, we have looked closely at the property value issues raised in your comments. The study that we provided, entitled "Property Value Impact Study"2 was published by one of the leading consulting firms, Cohn Reznick, and has been widely cited and utilized in many settings. We do understand your comments that the study was focused on Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan. The Midwest was believed to be a good study area because while it largely incorporated rural settings like this project, housing density is higher, and therefore the impact of solar farms on properties - if any - should be more evident and pronounced. The study shows no measurable impact and consistent difference in property values for properties adjacent to solar farms when compared to similar properties locationally removed from same. Consistently we have found in data from university studies, broker commentary, and other appraisal studies the importance of implementing landscape buffers and proper setbacks to further minimize the prospect of such impacts on property value adjoining the solar farms. The team has kept this in close consideration throughout the development and permitting process, by designing natural screening and respecting setbacks as defined by the Weld County Code. To further explore this and related economic factors, a socioeconomic impact and community benefit report has been commissioned and submitted as part of the permitting process.' The study shows that the projects will result into an enhancement of the socioeconomic environment within Weld County due to the following factors: job creation, economic output, cost-effective locally generated power, increased income to landowners, and positive local health impacts; while having no measurable impact on the value of adjacent properties. Even if there were impacts to property, solar presents numerous balancing economic benefits that are important to consider. Again, these are detailed in our application materials and not the focus of this response, and we highlight just a few here: (1) Utility scale solar presents an opportunity to reserve land for future agricultural use while continuing to support agricultural interests and landowner rights. (2) This Project would provide an increase in property tax payments to Weld County, Fire District, School District and other community services. (3) Local employment opportunities would increase for local construction and operation companies and workers, and increased use of services (accommodations, restaurants) would occur throughout the construction of the Project without taxing social services such as schools, roads, etc., within the county. (4) The renewable energy and storage attributes of the project are firmly aligned with federal, state, local, utility, and other mandates to develop further renewable energy sources and take advantage of the many economic benefits of these systems. General Concern: Appearance and Visual We recognize that the aesthetics of any neighbouring use is a very personal matter to a property owner, and appreciate your sharing concerns on this topic in your comments. The team has endeavoured to its fullest extent to minimize and mitigate the impacts of this facility in the surrounding area with many of the items addressed here (e.g. screening using living fences, buffers, visual simulations, compatibility). For instance, Janus and Prospect will be built at least 500 feet away from existing homes, complying with Weld County regulations. The facility is designed to be low -profile, with heights ranging from 4 to 10 feet, comparable to the height of a cornfield. We also note that efforts to minimize visual and other impacts will continue throughout the project and will always be open to continuing input from the community. 2 "Property Value Impact Study: Adjacent Property Values Solar Impact Study: A Study of Eight Existing Solar Facilities", CohnReznick (2021) https://www.nexteraenergyresources.com/content/dam/neer/us/en/pdf/CohnReznick%20Solar%20lmpact%20Study 7.26.21.pdf 3 Appendix F -Socioeconomic Impact and Community Benefit Report Page 3 of 12 Ultimately, for all the reasons explained here and, in supporting County applications, both Horus and many involved parties and landowners feel that this is an excellent location for this project, and its features support this view. Horus does encourage the development on brown field sites where it makes sense, but there are simply not enough of them next to good transmission systems to meet the growing demand for energy in the country. This site was selected based in part on the transmission line and the capacity of the existing 115 and 230 -kV lines and supporting transmission, which has been part of the landscape in the area for many years. Also, there was interest from local landowners with regards to both financial reasons and to preserve their farmland long-term for future uses. The team and its projects have at their core the protection of the natural features that characterize the area, its peace and quietness, the energy and passion of its neighbours that make this area of the State so unique. We recognize that the project will present some change for many commenters but believe that this change should be viewed in the context of the rapid changes overall in Weld County and beyond. We also believe it is important to compare this use to others that might be proposed over time. For instance, unlike this use, residential developments, in addition to causing disturbance during construction, present a series of ongoing traffic, visual, noise and other impacts. Horus is a property owner as well, and we deeply respect the vested interests, connection, and unique history each of you has to your property. We understand the passion that these issues often invoke. We would just ask that you consider these points as well as you assess your approach to this project. Again, if it would be useful, we welcome the opportunity to continue to address with you individually or collectively this important issue. General Concern: Traffic We understand that you chose to live out of the city to enjoy such features as the quietness, the peacefulness of driving down country roads, the simple cycle of planting, growing, and harvesting of crops, and the openness of the landscape . Many of you expressed concern that the traffic and congestion from this project would fundamentally shift the ability to enjoy this lifestyle. We really believe that this will not be the case - and will continue to do everything we can going forward to address this concern. Again, it is important to bear in mind that unlike so many other uses now crowding parts of Weld County, the increase in traffic will be temporary during the project's construction. Moreover, with our experts - Kimley Horn - who have and are working with Hudson and other cities - we have carefully designed a path that would minimize noise and disturbance and have limited impacts on the transportation patterns or the roads around the project site. The projects will utilize the existing roadway system, where appropriate, and contribute to upgrade, build, and maintain the other roads that will be utilized during the construction of the projects. Similar to mineral oil and gas production, Weld County rules ensure that adequate roads must exist or be made available prior to construction of the projects. The projects will submit a Road Use Agreement and Access Road Permit application to the County, ensuring compliance with the County design standards. The projects will upgrade any damaged and deteriorated roads and help maintain the same if they fall within the construction path. Safety is a very important aspect for Horus and we strive for a responsible and orderly development. This is also thoroughly reflected in Weld County Code provisions aimed at protecting and serving the health, welfare and safety of the citizens of the County. A Traffic Management Plan will be developed that will implement reduced speed limits on local roads and will require signallers to control the traffic in key areas in the vicinity of the projects, aimed at ensuring careful driving from construction workers. The living fence, in addition to providing visual screening, will also provide additional benefits in this respect, contributing towards an improvement in road safety and a reduction of hazardous driving conditions, by reducing snow drift onto roads, which in turn increases visibility, and reduces maintenance, plowing, and salting costs. Page 4 of 12 While there will be some short-term disruptions in term of noise and traffic, the benefits that the project will bring will be long-lasting. Some will be apparent in the short term like the increase in revenue from local business and hotels, restaurants, suppliers. The native vegetation that will be planted underneath the panels will attract pollinators, a fundamental piece of our ecosystem. The project water tank can be utilized by the Southeast Weld Fire Protection District and its Chief Tom Beach for fire emergencies in the area. Other benefits will be more evident in the long term, like the increase in taxes for Weld County that will help support a wide variety of services upon which all parties rely. General Concern: Dust We appreciate your questions about dust and how this will be mitigated. We have given this topic a lot of thought. We have developed a detailed Dust and Weed Mitigation Plan as part of the projects' land use permit applications, which integrates and adheres to Colorado Department of Health and Environment Land Development Permit requirements establishing acceptable dust levels, which will be monitored closely as the project proceeds.' We will be adapting this as the project progresses to ensure we are minimizing the temporary construction impact created by dust. Again, we might ask that this concern be put in perspective of all the other permanent potential uses that might be made of these lands - that would not only generate much more immediate dust issues but would increase disturbances of this nature for decades to come and change the fundamental agricultural nature of these lands. General Concern: Noise This in our view is one of the many advantages of solar, above nearly all other uses. During operations there will be no noticeable noise from the solar farm. The only components of the project facilities that will emit low levels of noise will be inverters and BESS equipment. However, these facilities will be located at least a quarter mile from residences and noise levels will be well below levels set by County noise ordinances set forth in Chapter 14 Article IX of the Weld County Code. During the life of the project the site will be controlled remotely, and utility personnel will visit on a quarterly basis to conduct routine inspections and maintenance. The transformer typically has a hum similar to an HVAC that can only be heard in close proximity. Buffers on the property are sufficient to make emitted sounds inaudible from the adjoining properties. Transformers will be located at least a quarter mile from residences and noise levels will be well below levels set by County noise ordinances. During construction there will be some noise due to pile driving and equipment backup beeping such as reverse warning sounds, but please note that this noise will again be temporary in nature and is not anticipated to exceed maximum levels at the property boundary for construction activities outlined in Weld County noise ordinances. All told, the solar farms will be a very quiet neighbour, harvesting solar energy passively throughout the project life. General Concern: Impacts from Project Materials Another benefit of solar, compared to nearly other use that might be made of this land, is the negligible use of materials that are in any way hazardous or harmful. We appreciate the concerns expressed about impacts of materials to be used during the construction phase but are very confident that that any impacts from fertilizer, weed control, or other material usage, will be significantly less than typical residential development and most agricultural uses. These issues are further addressed below in our discussion of environmental matters, but it may help to review the basic constituents found in the components of a solar farm. The panels are bi-facial mono - crystalline that have no known leaching issues. The primary materials of a solar panel which are glass, 4 Dust and Weed Mitigation Nan - Appendix D Page 5 of 12 aluminum, silicone, copper, and trace semiconducting metals are inert and don't constitute hazardous materials or waste. There could be trace amounts of lead from soldering material, which is similar to televisions and cell phones. There is no risk of exposure or leakage and any amount contained in the modules is below the EPA limits. Solar panels are recyclable and contain approximately 75 percent glass, 8 percent aluminium, and 5 percent silicon. Approximately 70 percent of the material is recoverable due to the processing required to separate the panel components. These materials, once recycled, are worth about $6 per panel to the solar farm at today's prices. Solar plants use minimal chemicals. There could be some paint to touch up rusted areas on the mounting structure, potentially some oil in the transformers, and we also intend to utilize limited solutions to control the dust and weeds on the site. Further details on these matters are contained in the various plans cited in this response, but all such materials would be used in accordance with risk assessments and method statements ensuring they are used correctly and with suitable safely procedures in place. Also note there is no cadmium telluride in the panels we have proposed. General Concern: Water There were a few comments directed at water usage issues, and we understand that water is a critical element of concern at all levels of the community. Water usage and quality is a great concern for Weld County and Horus and has been a focus of our application materials throughout. Horus is committed to protecting Weld County's waterways and supply. The properties involved in this project have no vested water rights, and irrigated agriculture is accomplished by leasing water from nearby tenants. The project has secured sufficient water resources to supply what will amount to modest water needs for the Project (0.007 -acre feet per acre per year). As compared to many other uses shown in the Application, solar requires minimal water for project operation. The Project's water use plan is intended to preserve the agricultural land base and allow for a return to full agricultural use once the solar project is decommissioned. For planning purposes, Project water needs can be divided into the following categories: 1. Construction/Dust Control Some water will be required to implement the Dust Control Plan and related aspects of the construction phrase. The plan is to utilise outside service companies to supply the water for this need as part of their spray mix system so to not require any contribution of local water from the area. There will also be stormwater controls and related mitigation measures during construction to manage existing surface water flow and maintain water quality, as required by governing regulations. Finally, some water may be needed for initial planting and maintenance of plants used for screening, although species are selected for their minimal ongoing watering requirements. 2. Fire Control - While fire is not a typical concern for PV and BESS systems, the Project's water tank may be utilized by the Southeast Weld Fire District and will provide a key resource for protection against fires in the region, especially in times of drought. This tank will need to be filled periodically. 3. Panel Washing and Maintenance - The only ongoing water supply needed for the Project is for washing and maintaining the solar panels and supporting facilities, in part to maximize energy return. The exact cleaning schedule is a function of precipitation, dust, and other particulate settling on the panels. To minimize cleaning, the Project intends to utilize a commercial contractor to treat neighbouring roads with GMCO CS products, a blend of liquid magnesium chloride and a complex sugar. The product is an environmentally friendly solution for gravel road stabilization and dust control. This will reduce water consumption related to cleaning during the operation period (and reduce dust in residential homes as well). Water needs will be more than adequately met by (1) the occasional purchase or trucking in of outside water where needed, particularly at the construction phrase, (2) the establishment of a large water Page 6 of 12 collection tank near the well on the Janus property to store water from the onsite well, and (3) over the longer term, by the existing onsite water well. The onsite well located is fully in place and secured. Based on initial calculations, the amount of water needed per acre foot of land for the Project is much less than current annual agricultural uses for the Project site. It is also less than the average amount of water per acre of land needed to raise most crops. General Concern: Water Drainage As many of you recognized, one important element of water management is the handling of drainage over the course of the solar project. Horus has commissioned Kim ley Horn to prepare a preliminary drainage report which evaluates pre and post development hydrologic characteristics of the project site and addresses the stormwater requirements of Weld County and the state of Colorado. 5 The study found that peak flow rates will actually be reduced from the existing rates, due to the proposed improvements on the project site, complemented with the findings from the Journal of Hydrologic Engineering focused on researching the hydrologic impacts of utility scale solar generation facilities. The study also concluded that drainage patterns offsite will remain the same as historic conditions. In addition, detention ponds have been designed on the project site to retain the required storage volumes. Generally, solar farms have little to no impact on runoff volumes or rates. Rainfall that falls directly on a solar panel runs to the pervious areas around and under the surrounding panels. General Concern: Conflicts with future land use plans We appreciate your questions related to compatibility of the solar farm with overall uses in the area. Compatibility is thoroughly assessed in the Weld County Code in Chapters 21, 22 and 23 as part of the permit application process, and we refer you to the voluminous project materials and attachments submitted by Horus addressing this subject. For ease of reference, each regulation and associated project compatibility features are outlined below for reference: Chapter 21: Areas and Activities of State Interest, Article III: Site Selection and Construction of Major Facilities of a Public Utility, Division 3: Permit Program for Site Selection and Construction of a Major Facility of a Public Utility • Regulation: All reasonable alternatives to the proposed action, including use of existing rights -of - way and joint use of rights -of -way wherever uses are compatible, have been adequately assessed and the proposed action is compatible with and represents the best interests of the people of the County and represents a fair and reasonable utilization of resources in the impact area. • Project Compliance with Regulations: All reasonable alternatives within the study area were thoroughly assessed to make the Project fully compatible with and representative of the best interests of the people of Weld County. While a larger land area was initially studied, the Project's final footprint was selected because it offered advantages to the community and overall environment while providing opportunities and circumstances favourable to Solar and BESS facilities, specifically 1) existing transmission infrastructure less than 0.2 miles from the property, 2) augmenting, while sustaining for future landowners, current unsustainable primary land use as indicated by the landowners. This offers benefits to land use for the surrounding area. Utilization of local resources within Weld County will be minimal as the Project will not require services such as water, sewage, or emergency services at a level typical of other land uses in the area. Code Chapter 22: Comprehensive Plan, Article II - Principles, Goals, and Objectives • Regulation: Transition between land use types and intensities with buffers. Uses that are incompatible with existing uses must be able to mitigate conflicts and support compatible economic development opportunities. • Project Compliance with Regulations: The project complies with or exceeds all County required buffers from roads, residences, Oil and Gas operations, and other special areas. Adjacent uses 5 Preliminary Drainage Analysis — Appendix J Page 7 of 12 will not be affected, and nearby land can continue to be utilized for agriculture or other compatible u ses. This will support the opportunity for future compatible economic development in the area. Project compatibility is further demonstrated by comparing other land uses in the area. In Weld County the Agricultural zoning district is designed primarily for agricultural uses, but it also accommodates various other special uses, including Oil and Gas Operations, Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), and subdivisions of land for residential development. While these use types are generally accepted in agricultural areas, their impacts to neighbour and e nvironment health are substantial, including for industrial facilities emissions that may result in respiratory issues and water quality contamination. Utility scale solar has fewer direct health impacts as they do not produce air or water pollution and contribute to cleaner energy production, which can have broader public health benefits by reducing reliance on fossil fuels. Chapter 23: Zoning, Article II - Procedures and Permits, Division 4 - Uses by Special Review • Regulation: Permitted uses will be compatible with the existing surrounding land uses and with the future development of the surrounding area as permitted by the existing zone and with future development. Buffering or screening of the proposed use from adjacent properties requirements. • Project Compliance with Regulations: Mitigation of construction impacts and visual impacts have been addressed as described throughout the application. Natural vegetative buffers have been incorporated into the project design on a case -by -case basis to mitigate visual impacts for n eighbours. This includes utilization of multiple layers of vegetation and specific species to ensure each landowner has a screen that works for their specific location and needs. Screening is discussed in more detail below. The proposed use is compatible with existing land uses and future development. The existing site land use is dryland agricultural row crops and rangeland, most similar to tillage/agricultural land classification. While a vital part of the land use base in the area, it does have its impacts. Disturbance to the land from tillage can disrupt the natural soil structure resulting in reduced soil cohesion and structural stability, which may result in increased soil erosion, compaction, and runoff. It also can deplete the soil's organic content, reducing its fertility and affecting its ability to retain moisture and nutrients. The ability to retain moisture in becoming increasingly important in Weld County as water is a precious resource. Disturbed soil is also susceptible to weeds, requiring additional inputs such as herbicides and pesticides, which can further impact soil health and the surrounding environment. Farming this land is becoming increasingly difficult as water becomes scarcer and the soil health declines. This project will allow the landowners to profit from their land without the disturbance that results from tilled agriculture. Temporarily halting ag use of this land for the duration of the project will allow the soil health to improve. Revegetation actions following construction include seeding the land with a county approved seed mix and will promote the growth of native grasses to preserve the quality of the soil and mitigate noxious weeds. By utilizing the county approved native grass seed mix below the panels, the existing tillage/agricultural land areas will be changed to a heavy meadow land classification that reduces peak flow rates and manages stormwater in line with the historic conditions of the site. This will promote water conservation at both the watershed and site levels, with the goal of replicating the native hydrologic characteristics of the sub - watersheds, creating natural ground coverage, and reducing dust. The change in land use from tilled agriculture land to utility scale solar will allow the landowners to increase the health of their land and reduce water use while simultaneously profiting from their land. This is beneficial to adjacent uses as it presents a lesser impact to neighbour and e nvironmental health and is also economically profitable for the County. Upon completion of the solar lease option, the project can be fully decommissioned, and the land returned to agricultural use or open meadow land. Utility scale solar is one of the only land development uses that not only preserves and improves ag land for future use, but is also a low water use, providing conservation benefits as well. Fifty years from now, these developments may be integral to preserving open lands and reducing urban sprawl. Page 8 of 12 General Concern: Screening The screening plan was developed during consultations with adjacent landowners and visual simulations. The goal is to provide screening tailored to your individual property owner requests, and at the same time ensure screening best accounts for water usage needed to sustain the living fence. Screening was developed in consultation with our expert biologist and landscaping team. The size of Rocky Mountain Juniper trees selected (10 -gallon containers for the juniper are about 5' in height and 1.5-2" caliper) was chosen to reduce the risk of mortality from transplant stress. The typical growth rate is one foot a year. A 3 -inch caliper juniper normally utilizes a ball and burlap container system and tends to have higher mortality rates due to the stress/damage to the root ball in transport and planting - which is why the 10 -gallon container tree was recommended. Since Rocky Mountain Juniper is a native species and naturally occurs in that area, we know it can handle the climate and limited water resources, but winter watering should be considered as a precaution (especially if it's a dry winter) to reduce potential for mortality. First season watering was recommended because that should be enough time for root stock to establish at appropriate depths to access ground water. There is a balance between survival and not creating a dependency on watering. Therefore, an adaptive approach would be best where watering is tapered off over 3 years. We have also received questions on how the Skunkbush Sumac will be planted along the Juniper. The two will be planted in a scattered fashion so it looks more natural. We appreciate the recommendation of the American Wild Plum as an alternative to the plants chosen, but American wild plum typically requires more water than the juniper or sumac, so they are not recommended to minimise the use of water, hence why they were not selected in the project design. General Concern: Environment and Wildlife We appreciate your comments on these critical topics, as Horus is committed to promote a responsible development in Weld County, promoting economic development, land stewardship, while at the same time preserving crops and the natural resources and wildlife that make this area so special. To this effect the team has developed several studies which include a Cultural Resource Survey, Wetland and Waterbody Survey, a study on protected species, a Phase 1 Environmental Assessment Report, and Critical Issue Analysis that were completed by archaeological, biological, and ecological experts. The aim and the results of these studies were used to best assess any environmental impact the projects may cause and mitigate the same in the projects design by avoiding waterways, planting native grass mix to enrich the soil and juniper trees lining the fence, and creating a movement corridor along Sand Creek to facilitate big game habitats. The applicant has committed to strict management practices that are detailed in the 1041 /USR application.' This is also embedded within the Weld County Code to ensure that the natural and economic environment and resources of the County are protected and enhanced. With this overarching perspective in mind, the following summarizes and responds to each of the comments received with respect to the environment, wildlife and seeding. Wildlife Corridor We appreciate your comments on the wildlife corridor. Please note that like with so many aspects of this project, we have utilized the expertise of outside local agencies or experts to address this issue. Here, we have designed the corridor in collaboration with experts on wildlife at Colorado Parks and Wildlife ("CPW"). The agency has been consulted since the inception of the projects; they have been involved in the permitting process and provided their referral letters on the projects. To address the loss of open space and the fragmentation of existing and accessible big game habitats caused by the projects, Horus has designed a wildlife corridor of 600ft, wider than the minimum set by CPW (250ft) and followed CPW recommendations for the fencing of the project in order to minimize any potential impact to wildlife. 6 Appendix E - Environmental Protection Measures and Agency Coordination Page 9 of 12 Wildlife Species As part of the projects siting, development and permitting, please note Horus has completed onsite biological reconnaissance studies with expert biologists which revealed there are no species of concern with federal and state statutory protection likely to occur in the project area, with the exception of burrowing owls. Construction will occur outside of nesting season if this species is identified during the planned pre -construction biological surveys. Horus has also consulted with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ("USFWS") and CPW on the same issue, which have also commented on the projects' application. USFWS has expressed no concern of the project resulting in potential impacts to species listed as proposed, threatened, or endangered. CPW has confirmed the project is sited outside High Priority Habitats ("HPHs"), areas defined as sensitive wildlife habitats. Thank you for making us aware of deer, antelope, foxes, elk, and coyotes in the vicinity, and we will remain mindful throughout the life of the project of the vital need to preserve and enhance every opportunity to support these and all wildlife species. Again, in consulting with the experts on these topics, please note that impacts to these species was not identified as a concern during agency reviews of the project with CPW and USFWS. Seeding We agree with you on the importance of pollinators for crops and the local ecosystem. As highlighted in the project application native plant seeding will be incorporated between and around the solar arrays to beautify and restore the appearance of the Project site, but most importantly to promote the return of native species and pollinators. This plan will also preserve and improve soil conditions. General Concern: Glare A Glare Study was performed by Colliers Engineering & Design on the array areas of the Project. A software called Forge Solar was used that determines the potential for glare given the solar farm specifics and looks at potential effects on the human eye at locations where glare is predicted to occur. The analysis was tailored to review the potential effects of the solar farm on nearby residences and on a privately owned landing strip near the project site. Worst -case scenario parameters were used for a conservative estimate. Findings show that with appropriate system settings, it is unlikely that glare from the proposed solar project will be problematic in any manner for the surrounding area and that the project would comply with the Federal Aviation Administration's 2021 policy regarding glint and glare effects to commercial airports. An in-depth explanation of the above conclusion and the details of the full parameters of this study are found in Appendix P of the Weld County Land Use Applications. General Concern: Heat Effects We understand that considering recent temperature increase trends, it is important to be mindful of whether solar farms might have undesired heat effects. Studies show that while the center of the PV field can reach up to 1.9 Celsius above the ambient temperature. This thermal energy completely dissipates to the environment at distances of approximately 16 to 60 feet. PV solar farms do not induce a day -after -day increase in ambient temperature, and therefore, adverse micro -climate changes from a potential PV plant are not a concern.' Also relevant here is the study entitled Analysis of the Potential for a Heat Island Effect in Large Solar Farms from Columbia University, which presents a comprehensive review of the so-called 'heat island' effect. This study contains field data and simulations showing that the dissipation of thermal energy is enhanced by cooling at night, by existing roads between the fields, and by vegetation buffers. 7 "Analysis of the Potential for a Heat Island Effect in Large Solar Farms", Vasilis Fthenakis (2013) Page 10 of 12 General Concern: Electromagnetic Interference In the ever -evolving landscape of technology, electromagnetic interference (EMI) is an important consideration. We have carefully considered whether EMI will occur as a result of these projects. Utility -scale solar fields are integral to our shift towards renewable energy, consisting of extensive arrays of solar panels designed to capture sunlight and convert it into electricity. The panels themselves are not significant sources of EMI; however, the associated equipment, such as inverters and transformers, can produce electromagnetic fields. Inverters are crucial components in solar fields. They convert the direct current (DC) generated by solar panels into alternating current (AC) used by the electrical grid. Inverters and transformers typically operate at power frequencies, around 50-60 Hz, and can produce EMI that might affect nearby electronic devices. Although the frequencies are much lower than those from cell phones, these devices must be carefully designed and shielded to prevent interference. Proper inverter enclosure grounding, filtering, and circuit layout has been incorporated into this project to further reduce EM radiation. Inverters are distributed throughout the project footprint and are located at least a quarter mile from residences, further reducing impacts. For a comparison, cell phones operate using radiofrequency (RF) signals, typically in the GHz range - 900 MHz, 1.8 GHz, and 2.4 GHz - essential for communication. This RF radiation, while essential for connectivity, has sparked ongoing health discussions which may have led to the concern by residents about potential EMI from the proposed solar projects. However, when comparing the health impacts of cell phones and solar field inverters, the differences are notable. The primary concern with cell phones is the higher frequency RF radiation emitted, which can lead to potential health risks if exposure is prolonged. Regulatory standards are in place to mitigate these risks, but ongoing research continues to evaluate the long-term effects of RF exposure on health. The EMI from inverters in solar fields operates at lower frequencies and is generally considered to pose less of a direct health risk compared to RF radiation. However, inverters must be designed to minimize EMI and prevent interference with nearby electronic equipment. The health risks from this type of EMI are typically regarded as minimal, though they still warrant careful management. Proper design and regulatory adherence are essential to mitigate any potential interference. The Janus and Prospect Solar projects will adhere to the strict regulations regarding EMI found in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 47, Part 15 to ensure that the health and safety of Weld County residents is protected. General Concern: Light Pollution Compared to urban areas, industrial facilities, or outdoor recreational lighting, solar farms have a much lower impact in terms of light pollution. The solar panels themselves do not emit light. Lighting at the projects will be limited to the substation and operations and maintenance building. These lights will be downward facing and will be activated by motion sensor. Lights on the substation are the responsibility of the substation operator and can be remotely turned on/off. On the other hand, urban areas and industrial activities often involve extensive, high -intensity lighting that can contribute to significant light pollution, General Concern: Cumulative Impacts With regards to the concern raised by a few commenters that the two projects may have greater impacts being adjacent, please note the team has addressed this concern by preparing the reports and submitting the applications to the County together. The projects will therefore be assessed as a whole rather than independently as the permitting proceeds, and cumulative impacts will be considered. Page 11 of 12 Conclusion The project team would like to thank local residents for taking time to reach out and submit your concerns. We encourage your continued review, input and perspectives. Please contact us by email at ro er.freeman@horuscapital.co.uk, Francesco.cardi@horuscapital.co.uk, and ebitler@logansimpson.com to discuss the project and any follow up or additional questions you may have. We look forward to working with you as we move through the planning and regulatory processes for the project. Thanks so much for your cooperation. Sincerely, Horus Team Page 12 of 12 From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Attachments: Francesco Cardi 9x97bo yahoo•com Emily Bitter; Roger Freeman Response to Community Comments - Neighbour Letter Friday, September 13, 2024 11:49: 13 AM Neighbour Letter September 13th 2024 - Final.pdf EXHIBIT 04/224--06 /7 CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization. Block sender Remit Dear Mr. Thompson, Please find attached our comments responding to recent neighbour letters. Thanks so much for your cooperation. Kind Regards, Francesco Paolo Cardi Associate Horus Energy Mobile: +1 303 479 4535 francesco. Qardikhoruscapita l.QQ. uk https://horusenergy.co.uk/ Response To Community Comments On behalf of Horus Energy, we welcome the opportunity to respond to a series of comments that have been recently submitted to the County by neighbours and other local citizens about our proposed Janus and Prospect solar projects. First and foremost, we greatly appreciate your efforts to work with us throughout the course of this project. Horus has received and closely integrated your input, feedback, request for property -specific adaptations, and all the forms of interest and support expressed for this project. Through a variety of steps taken throughout the project planning, development, and permitting stages, we have been gratified to work closely with your incredible community. In that regard, while we recognize that some commenters have recently voiced strong concerns, we do believe the project enjoys significant landowner and local support. This support has been conveyed to the County in 10 letters of support and non -objection. This includes five neighbours adjacent to the projects, as well as the five landowner partners in the project. Horus directly has received many more informal or oral expressions of positive input from a diverse set of interested parties. This foundation of support is built upon a long series of outreach efforts. As many of you know, we begin reaching out to the community in the earliest development stages of the projects - both through individual contacts and a public meeting held on July 05, 2023. As we explained at that meeting, the initial outreach group was identified under basic rules in Weld County for contacting the local immediate neighbours most proximate to the development. This also included several local agencies and community service entities representing everything from fire response to community planning. These initial contacts have formed the basis for a series of continued communications with many of you about individual property issues or considerations. Some have commented that they wish that they have known of the project sooner and could have attended the prior meeting. Please know that while these initial communications focused on those living closest to the development, they were driven solely by practical and regulatory considerations and are part of a continuing, longstanding, and broad community outreach program that has and will be the cornerstone of our approach to this project throughout its course. In this regard, we have welcomed comments from citizens in any location in Weld County. As reflected in this group response, we understand your interest and have carefully considered all comments. We also note that in addition to providing this collective response, we have continued to reach out to individuals and landowners to try to accommodate individual questions or concerns or mitigate particular property circumstances. We have yet to hear back from some individuals - but understand that some folks may want to do so in a collective way. Others may feel like they want to respond more directly and specifically once a collective response is received. The bottom line is that our doors remain wide open to continue any communication - whether collective or otherwise. With these factors in mind, Horus carefully weighed whether a collective response would serve the community best. We believe that this approach is supported by the fact that the concerns expressed convey a very parallel set of questions or concerns. In fact, many of the comments appeared to be jointly generated and contained the same basic wording. We welcome this joint approach, and the efficiencies created thereby, but remain flexible to meet the community needs going forward. While Horus has attempted to frame and highlight key points from our application materials in this response, we did not choose to include voluminous documents and data equally accessible to all on the public websites. It appears that some of you were able to access that information, and we appreciate your taking the time to do so. We are certainly glad to provide additional references to materials on file, specific studies, or other supporting documentation. Please don't hesitate to reach out to us if we can provide or help access these materials or information. Page 1 of 12 Finally, while we believe we have addressed all individual points raised by the community in recent comments, please let us know immediately if we missed any concerns or have additional specific comments or input that you would like for us to address, either through follow-up communications or upcoming public hearings surrounding these projects. General Concern: Property Values We fully understand the utmost importance of property and land rights to all residents of Weld County and the interest of all commenters in this issue. While every property will have different features relevant to this discussion - and some commenters appear to live quite a distance from the solar farms themselves - we feel that the following discussion applies generally to all. That said, since all comments were from property owners outside the project boundaries itself, we concentrate on adjacent property value issues here. In turn, this discussion does not go into detail about the numerous and compelling benefits generated to the community at large through such attributes as economic, tax, renewable energy generation, and supporting project landowner rights to use and obtain value from their land. These are discussed in detail in our application materials and other sources. The potential impact of solar farms on adjacent properties has been considered in other situations in Colorado and across the nation. As a result, much research has been done to assess the impact of solar on land valuations. We recognize that many commenters cited various studies, and we have carefully considered same in formulating this response. As these studies reflect, appraisers generally determine potential negative impact caused by an external source on adjacent or nearby properties utilizing the following factors: • Hazardous material: As discussed further below, a solar farm involves no hazardous materials or waste byproduct as part of its operation • Odor: Solar farms produce no odor. • Noise: As discussed further below, whether discussing passive fixed solar panels, or single -axis trackers, there is no negative impact associated with noise from a solar farm. No sound is emitted from the facility at night. Solar farms are inaudible from the roadways. • Traffic: As discussed further below, there will be a temporary increase in traffic during construction, and we have provided an extensive report in the application materials describing the efforts made to mitigate traffic impacts to the neighbourhood. Once built, the solar farm will have no onsite employees or staff, and the traffic will be far less than many other typical County uses. The site requires only minimal maintenance. • Stigma: There is no stigma associated with solar farms and people generally respond favourably towards such a use. While an individual may express concerns about proximity to a solar farm, there is no specific stigma associated with a solar farm. Stigma generally refers to things such as adult establishments, prisons, rehabilitation facilities, and so forth. Solar panels have no associated stigma and are found everywhere these days, from schools, churches, oil and gas wells to airports and industrial facilities, and increasingly on farms and agricultural sites as well. They are on roofs in many residential communities. Solar panels on a roof are often cited as an enhancement to the property in marketing brochures. • Appearance: This factor is discussed in detail below, but in terms of property value issues, larger solar farms that use fixed or tracking panels are a passive land use that many feel aligns well with rural residential settings. They are similar in appearance to large greenhouses, which also function as passive solar energy collectors. 1 "Meadow Forge Solar Impact Study", Kirkland Appraisals (2022) Page 2 of 12 With these factors firmly in mind, we have looked closely at the property value issues raised in your comments. The study that we provided, entitled "Property Value Impact Study"2 was published by one of the leading consulting firms, Cohn Reznick, and has been widely cited and utilized in many settings. We do understand your comments that the study was focused on Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan. The Midwest was believed to be a good study area because while it largely incorporated rural settings like this project, housing density is higher, and therefore the impact of solar farms on properties - if any - should be more evident and pronounced. The study shows no measurable impact and consistent difference in property values for properties adjacent to solar farms when compared to similar properties locationally removed from same. Consistently we have found in data from university studies, broker commentary, and other appraisal studies the importance of implementing landscape buffers and proper setbacks to further minimize the prospect of such impacts on property value adjoining the solar farms. The team has kept this in close consideration throughout the development and permitting process, by designing natural screening and respecting setbacks as defined by the Weld County Code. To further explore this and related economic factors, a socioeconomic impact and community benefit report has been commissioned and submitted as part of the permitting process.' The study shows that the projects will result into an enhancement of the socioeconomic environment within Weld County due to the following factors: job creation, economic output, cost-effective locally generated power, increased income to landowners, and positive local health impacts; while having no measurable impact on the value of adjacent properties. Even if there were impacts to property, solar presents numerous balancing economic benefits that are important to consider. Again, these are detailed in our application materials and not the focus of this response, and we highlight just a few here: (1) Utility scale solar presents an opportunity to reserve land for future agricultural use while continuing to support agricultural interests and landowner rights. (2) This Project would provide an increase in property tax payments to Weld County, Fire District, School District and other community services. (3) Local employment opportunities would increase for local construction and operation companies and workers, and increased use of services (accommodations, restaurants) would occur throughout the construction of the Project without taxing social services such as schools, roads, etc., within the county. (4) The renewable energy and storage attributes of the project are firmly aligned with federal, state, local, utility, and other mandates to develop further renewable energy sources and take advantage of the many economic benefits of these systems. General Concern: Appearance and Visual We recognize that the aesthetics of any neighbouring use is a very personal matter to a property owner, and appreciate your sharing concerns on this topic in your comments. The team has endeavoured to its fullest extent to minimize and mitigate the impacts of this facility in the surrounding area with many of the items addressed here (e.g. screening using living fences, buffers, visual simulations, compatibility). For instance, Janus and Prospect will be built at least 500 feet away from existing homes, complying with Weld County regulations. The facility is designed to be low -profile, with heights ranging from 4 to 10 feet, comparable to the height of a cornfield. We also note that efforts to minimize visual and other impacts will continue throughout the project and will always be open to continuing input from the community. 2 "Property Value Impact Study: Adjacent Property Values Solar Impact Study: A Study of Eight Existing Solar Facilities", CohnReznick (2021) https://www.nexteraenergyresources.com/content/dam/neer/us/en/pdf/CohnReznick%20Solar%20lmpact%20Study 7.26.21.pdf 3 Appendix F -Socioeconomic Impact and Community Benefit Report Page 3 of 12 Ultimately, for all the reasons explained here and, in supporting County applications, both Horus and many involved parties and landowners feel that this is an excellent location for this project, and its features support this view. Horus does encourage the development on brown field sites where it makes sense, but there are simply not enough of them next to good transmission systems to meet the growing demand for energy in the country. This site was selected based in part on the transmission line and the capacity of the existing 115 and 230 -kV lines and supporting transmission, which has been part of the landscape in the area for many years. Also, there was interest from local landowners with regards to both financial reasons and to preserve their farmland long-term for future uses. The team and its projects have at their core the protection of the natural features that characterize the area, its peace and quietness, the energy and passion of its neighbours that make this area of the State so unique. We recognize that the project will present some change for many commenters but believe that this change should be viewed in the context of the rapid changes overall in Weld County and beyond. We also believe it is important to compare this use to others that might be proposed over time. For instance, unlike this use, residential developments, in addition to causing disturbance during construction, present a series of ongoing traffic, visual, noise and other impacts. Horus is a property owner as well, and we deeply respect the vested interests, connection, and unique history each of you has to your property. We understand the passion that these issues often invoke. We would just ask that you consider these points as well as you assess your approach to this project. Again, if it would be useful, we welcome the opportunity to continue to address with you individually or collectively this important issue. General Concern: Traffic We understand that you chose to live out of the city to enjoy such features as the quietness, the peacefulness of driving down country roads, the simple cycle of planting, growing, and harvesting of crops, and the openness of the landscape . Many of you expressed concern that the traffic and congestion from this project would fundamentally shift the ability to enjoy this lifestyle. We really believe that this will not be the case - and will continue to do everything we can going forward to address this concern. Again, it is important to bear in mind that unlike so many other uses now crowding parts of Weld County, the increase in traffic will be temporary during the project's construction. Moreover, with our experts - Kimley Horn - who have and are working with Hudson and other cities - we have carefully designed a path that would minimize noise and disturbance and have limited impacts on the transportation patterns or the roads around the project site. The projects will utilize the existing roadway system, where appropriate, and contribute to upgrade, build, and maintain the other roads that will be utilized during the construction of the projects. Similar to mineral oil and gas production, Weld County rules ensure that adequate roads must exist or be made available prior to construction of the projects. The projects will submit a Road Use Agreement and Access Road Permit application to the County, ensuring compliance with the County design standards. The projects will upgrade any damaged and deteriorated roads and help maintain the same if they fall within the construction path. Safety is a very important aspect for Horus and we strive for a responsible and orderly development. This is also thoroughly reflected in Weld County Code provisions aimed at protecting and serving the health, welfare and safety of the citizens of the County. A Traffic Management Plan will be developed that will implement reduced speed limits on local roads and will require signallers to control the traffic in key areas in the vicinity of the projects, aimed at ensuring careful driving from construction workers. The living fence, in addition to providing visual screening, will also provide additional benefits in this respect, contributing towards an improvement in road safety and a reduction of hazardous driving conditions, by reducing snow drift onto roads, which in turn increases visibility, and reduces maintenance, plowing, and salting costs. Page 4 of 12 While there will be some short-term disruptions in term of noise and traffic, the benefits that the project will bring will be long-lasting. Some will be apparent in the short term like the increase in revenue from local business and hotels, restaurants, suppliers. The native vegetation that will be planted underneath the panels will attract pollinators, a fundamental piece of our ecosystem. The project water tank can be utilized by the Southeast Weld Fire Protection District and its Chief Tom Beach for fire emergencies in the area. Other benefits will be more evident in the long term, like the increase in taxes for Weld County that will help support a wide variety of services upon which all parties rely. General Concern: Dust We appreciate your questions about dust and how this will be mitigated. We have given this topic a lot of thought. We have developed a detailed Dust and Weed Mitigation Plan as part of the projects' land use permit applications, which integrates and adheres to Colorado Department of Health and Environment Land Development Permit requirements establishing acceptable dust levels, which will be monitored closely as the project proceeds.' We will be adapting this as the project progresses to ensure we are minimizing the temporary construction impact created by dust. Again, we might ask that this concern be put in perspective of all the other permanent potential uses that might be made of these lands - that would not only generate much more immediate dust issues but would increase disturbances of this nature for decades to come and change the fundamental agricultural nature of these lands. General Concern: Noise This in our view is one of the many advantages of solar, above nearly all other uses. During operations there will be no noticeable noise from the solar farm. The only components of the project facilities that will emit low levels of noise will be inverters and BESS equipment. However, these facilities will be located at least a quarter mile from residences and noise levels will be well below levels set by County noise ordinances set forth in Chapter 14 Article IX of the Weld County Code. During the life of the project the site will be controlled remotely, and utility personnel will visit on a quarterly basis to conduct routine inspections and maintenance. The transformer typically has a hum similar to an HVAC that can only be heard in close proximity. Buffers on the property are sufficient to make emitted sounds inaudible from the adjoining properties. Transformers will be located at least a quarter mile from residences and noise levels will be well below levels set by County noise ordinances. During construction there will be some noise due to pile driving and equipment backup beeping such as reverse warning sounds, but please note that this noise will again be temporary in nature and is not anticipated to exceed maximum levels at the property boundary for construction activities outlined in Weld County noise ordinances. All told, the solar farms will be a very quiet neighbour, harvesting solar energy passively throughout the project life. General Concern: Impacts from Project Materials Another benefit of solar, compared to nearly other use that might be made of this land, is the negligible use of materials that are in any way hazardous or harmful. We appreciate the concerns expressed about impacts of materials to be used during the construction phase but are very confident that that any impacts from fertilizer, weed control, or other material usage, will be significantly less than typical residential development and most agricultural uses. These issues are further addressed below in our discussion of environmental matters, but it may help to review the basic constituents found in the components of a solar farm. The panels are bi-facial mono - crystalline that have no known leaching issues. The primary materials of a solar panel which are glass, 4 Dust and Weed Mitigation Nan - Appendix D Page 5 of 12 aluminum, silicone, copper, and trace semiconducting metals are inert and don't constitute hazardous materials or waste. There could be trace amounts of lead from soldering material, which is similar to televisions and cell phones. There is no risk of exposure or leakage and any amount contained in the modules is below the EPA limits. Solar panels are recyclable and contain approximately 75 percent glass, 8 percent aluminium, and 5 percent silicon. Approximately 70 percent of the material is recoverable due to the processing required to separate the panel components. These materials, once recycled, are worth about $6 per panel to the solar farm at today's prices. Solar plants use minimal chemicals. There could be some paint to touch up rusted areas on the mounting structure, potentially some oil in the transformers, and we also intend to utilize limited solutions to control the dust and weeds on the site. Further details on these matters are contained in the various plans cited in this response, but all such materials would be used in accordance with risk assessments and method statements ensuring they are used correctly and with suitable safely procedures in place. Also note there is no cadmium telluride in the panels we have proposed. General Concern: Water There were a few comments directed at water usage issues, and we understand that water is a critical element of concern at all levels of the community. Water usage and quality is a great concern for Weld County and Horus and has been a focus of our application materials throughout. Horus is committed to protecting Weld County's waterways and supply. The properties involved in this project have no vested water rights, and irrigated agriculture is accomplished by leasing water from nearby tenants. The project has secured sufficient water resources to supply what will amount to modest water needs for the Project (0.007 -acre feet per acre per year). As compared to many other uses shown in the Application, solar requires minimal water for project operation. The Project's water use plan is intended to preserve the agricultural land base and allow for a return to full agricultural use once the solar project is decommissioned. For planning purposes, Project water needs can be divided into the following categories: 1. Construction/Dust Control Some water will be required to implement the Dust Control Plan and related aspects of the construction phrase. The plan is to utilise outside service companies to supply the water for this need as part of their spray mix system so to not require any contribution of local water from the area. There will also be stormwater controls and related mitigation measures during construction to manage existing surface water flow and maintain water quality, as required by governing regulations. Finally, some water may be needed for initial planting and maintenance of plants used for screening, although species are selected for their minimal ongoing watering requirements. 2. Fire Control - While fire is not a typical concern for PV and BESS systems, the Project's water tank may be utilized by the Southeast Weld Fire District and will provide a key resource for protection against fires in the region, especially in times of drought. This tank will need to be filled periodically. 3. Panel Washing and Maintenance - The only ongoing water supply needed for the Project is for washing and maintaining the solar panels and supporting facilities, in part to maximize energy return. The exact cleaning schedule is a function of precipitation, dust, and other particulate settling on the panels. To minimize cleaning, the Project intends to utilize a commercial contractor to treat neighbouring roads with GMCO CS products, a blend of liquid magnesium chloride and a complex sugar. The product is an environmentally friendly solution for gravel road stabilization and dust control. This will reduce water consumption related to cleaning during the operation period (and reduce dust in residential homes as well). Water needs will be more than adequately met by (1) the occasional purchase or trucking in of outside water where needed, particularly at the construction phrase, (2) the establishment of a large water Page 6 of 12 collection tank near the well on the Janus property to store water from the onsite well, and (3) over the longer term, by the existing onsite water well. The onsite well located is fully in place and secured. Based on initial calculations, the amount of water needed per acre foot of land for the Project is much less than current annual agricultural uses for the Project site. It is also less than the average amount of water per acre of land needed to raise most crops. General Concern: Water Drainage As many of you recognized, one important element of water management is the handling of drainage over the course of the solar project. Horus has commissioned Kim ley Horn to prepare a preliminary drainage report which evaluates pre and post development hydrologic characteristics of the project site and addresses the stormwater requirements of Weld County and the state of Colorado. 5 The study found that peak flow rates will actually be reduced from the existing rates, due to the proposed improvements on the project site, complemented with the findings from the Journal of Hydrologic Engineering focused on researching the hydrologic impacts of utility scale solar generation facilities. The study also concluded that drainage patterns offsite will remain the same as historic conditions. In addition, detention ponds have been designed on the project site to retain the required storage volumes. Generally, solar farms have little to no impact on runoff volumes or rates. Rainfall that falls directly on a solar panel runs to the pervious areas around and under the surrounding panels. General Concern: Conflicts with future land use plans We appreciate your questions related to compatibility of the solar farm with overall uses in the area. Compatibility is thoroughly assessed in the Weld County Code in Chapters 21, 22 and 23 as part of the permit application process, and we refer you to the voluminous project materials and attachments submitted by Horus addressing this subject. For ease of reference, each regulation and associated project compatibility features are outlined below for reference: Chapter 21: Areas and Activities of State Interest, Article III: Site Selection and Construction of Major Facilities of a Public Utility, Division 3: Permit Program for Site Selection and Construction of a Major Facility of a Public Utility • Regulation: All reasonable alternatives to the proposed action, including use of existing rights -of - way and joint use of rights -of -way wherever uses are compatible, have been adequately assessed and the proposed action is compatible with and represents the best interests of the people of the County and represents a fair and reasonable utilization of resources in the impact area. • Project Compliance with Regulations: All reasonable alternatives within the study area were thoroughly assessed to make the Project fully compatible with and representative of the best interests of the people of Weld County. While a larger land area was initially studied, the Project's final footprint was selected because it offered advantages to the community and overall environment while providing opportunities and circumstances favourable to Solar and BESS facilities, specifically 1) existing transmission infrastructure less than 0.2 miles from the property, 2) augmenting, while sustaining for future landowners, current unsustainable primary land use as indicated by the landowners. This offers benefits to land use for the surrounding area. Utilization of local resources within Weld County will be minimal as the Project will not require services such as water, sewage, or emergency services at a level typical of other land uses in the area. Code Chapter 22: Comprehensive Plan, Article II - Principles, Goals, and Objectives • Regulation: Transition between land use types and intensities with buffers. Uses that are incompatible with existing uses must be able to mitigate conflicts and support compatible economic development opportunities. • Project Compliance with Regulations: The project complies with or exceeds all County required buffers from roads, residences, Oil and Gas operations, and other special areas. Adjacent uses 5 Preliminary Drainage Analysis — Appendix J Page 7 of 12 will not be affected, and nearby land can continue to be utilized for agriculture or other compatible u ses. This will support the opportunity for future compatible economic development in the area. Project compatibility is further demonstrated by comparing other land uses in the area. In Weld County the Agricultural zoning district is designed primarily for agricultural uses, but it also accommodates various other special uses, including Oil and Gas Operations, Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), and subdivisions of land for residential development. While these use types are generally accepted in agricultural areas, their impacts to neighbour and e nvironment health are substantial, including for industrial facilities emissions that may result in respiratory issues and water quality contamination. Utility scale solar has fewer direct health impacts as they do not produce air or water pollution and contribute to cleaner energy production, which can have broader public health benefits by reducing reliance on fossil fuels. Chapter 23: Zoning, Article II - Procedures and Permits, Division 4 - Uses by Special Review • Regulation: Permitted uses will be compatible with the existing surrounding land uses and with the future development of the surrounding area as permitted by the existing zone and with future development. Buffering or screening of the proposed use from adjacent properties requirements. • Project Compliance with Regulations: Mitigation of construction impacts and visual impacts have been addressed as described throughout the application. Natural vegetative buffers have been incorporated into the project design on a case -by -case basis to mitigate visual impacts for n eighbours. This includes utilization of multiple layers of vegetation and specific species to ensure each landowner has a screen that works for their specific location and needs. Screening is discussed in more detail below. The proposed use is compatible with existing land uses and future development. The existing site land use is dryland agricultural row crops and rangeland, most similar to tillage/agricultural land classification. While a vital part of the land use base in the area, it does have its impacts. Disturbance to the land from tillage can disrupt the natural soil structure resulting in reduced soil cohesion and structural stability, which may result in increased soil erosion, compaction, and runoff. It also can deplete the soil's organic content, reducing its fertility and affecting its ability to retain moisture and nutrients. The ability to retain moisture in becoming increasingly important in Weld County as water is a precious resource. Disturbed soil is also susceptible to weeds, requiring additional inputs such as herbicides and pesticides, which can further impact soil health and the surrounding environment. Farming this land is becoming increasingly difficult as water becomes scarcer and the soil health declines. This project will allow the landowners to profit from their land without the disturbance that results from tilled agriculture. Temporarily halting ag use of this land for the duration of the project will allow the soil health to improve. Revegetation actions following construction include seeding the land with a county approved seed mix and will promote the growth of native grasses to preserve the quality of the soil and mitigate noxious weeds. By utilizing the county approved native grass seed mix below the panels, the existing tillage/agricultural land areas will be changed to a heavy meadow land classification that reduces peak flow rates and manages stormwater in line with the historic conditions of the site. This will promote water conservation at both the watershed and site levels, with the goal of replicating the native hydrologic characteristics of the sub - watersheds, creating natural ground coverage, and reducing dust. The change in land use from tilled agriculture land to utility scale solar will allow the landowners to increase the health of their land and reduce water use while simultaneously profiting from their land. This is beneficial to adjacent uses as it presents a lesser impact to neighbour and e nvironmental health and is also economically profitable for the County. Upon completion of the solar lease option, the project can be fully decommissioned, and the land returned to agricultural use or open meadow land. Utility scale solar is one of the only land development uses that not only preserves and improves ag land for future use, but is also a low water use, providing conservation benefits as well. Fifty years from now, these developments may be integral to preserving open lands and reducing urban sprawl. Page 8 of 12 General Concern: Screening The screening plan was developed during consultations with adjacent landowners and visual simulations. The goal is to provide screening tailored to your individual property owner requests, and at the same time ensure screening best accounts for water usage needed to sustain the living fence. Screening was developed in consultation with our expert biologist and landscaping team. The size of Rocky Mountain Juniper trees selected (10 -gallon containers for the juniper are about 5' in height and 1.5-2" caliper) was chosen to reduce the risk of mortality from transplant stress. The typical growth rate is one foot a year. A 3 -inch caliper juniper normally utilizes a ball and burlap container system and tends to have higher mortality rates due to the stress/damage to the root ball in transport and planting - which is why the 10 -gallon container tree was recommended. Since Rocky Mountain Juniper is a native species and naturally occurs in that area, we know it can handle the climate and limited water resources, but winter watering should be considered as a precaution (especially if it's a dry winter) to reduce potential for mortality. First season watering was recommended because that should be enough time for root stock to establish at appropriate depths to access ground water. There is a balance between survival and not creating a dependency on watering. Therefore, an adaptive approach would be best where watering is tapered off over 3 years. We have also received questions on how the Skunkbush Sumac will be planted along the Juniper. The two will be planted in a scattered fashion so it looks more natural. We appreciate the recommendation of the American Wild Plum as an alternative to the plants chosen, but American wild plum typically requires more water than the juniper or sumac, so they are not recommended to minimise the use of water, hence why they were not selected in the project design. General Concern: Environment and Wildlife We appreciate your comments on these critical topics, as Horus is committed to promote a responsible development in Weld County, promoting economic development, land stewardship, while at the same time preserving crops and the natural resources and wildlife that make this area so special. To this effect the team has developed several studies which include a Cultural Resource Survey, Wetland and Waterbody Survey, a study on protected species, a Phase 1 Environmental Assessment Report, and Critical Issue Analysis that were completed by archaeological, biological, and ecological experts. The aim and the results of these studies were used to best assess any environmental impact the projects may cause and mitigate the same in the projects design by avoiding waterways, planting native grass mix to enrich the soil and juniper trees lining the fence, and creating a movement corridor along Sand Creek to facilitate big game habitats. The applicant has committed to strict management practices that are detailed in the 1041 /USR application.' This is also embedded within the Weld County Code to ensure that the natural and economic environment and resources of the County are protected and enhanced. With this overarching perspective in mind, the following summarizes and responds to each of the comments received with respect to the environment, wildlife and seeding. Wildlife Corridor We appreciate your comments on the wildlife corridor. Please note that like with so many aspects of this project, we have utilized the expertise of outside local agencies or experts to address this issue. Here, we have designed the corridor in collaboration with experts on wildlife at Colorado Parks and Wildlife ("CPW"). The agency has been consulted since the inception of the projects; they have been involved in the permitting process and provided their referral letters on the projects. To address the loss of open space and the fragmentation of existing and accessible big game habitats caused by the projects, Horus has designed a wildlife corridor of 600ft, wider than the minimum set by CPW (250ft) and followed CPW recommendations for the fencing of the project in order to minimize any potential impact to wildlife. 6 Appendix E - Environmental Protection Measures and Agency Coordination Page 9 of 12 Wildlife Species As part of the projects siting, development and permitting, please note Horus has completed onsite biological reconnaissance studies with expert biologists which revealed there are no species of concern with federal and state statutory protection likely to occur in the project area, with the exception of burrowing owls. Construction will occur outside of nesting season if this species is identified during the planned pre -construction biological surveys. Horus has also consulted with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ("USFWS") and CPW on the same issue, which have also commented on the projects' application. USFWS has expressed no concern of the project resulting in potential impacts to species listed as proposed, threatened, or endangered. CPW has confirmed the project is sited outside High Priority Habitats ("HPHs"), areas defined as sensitive wildlife habitats. Thank you for making us aware of deer, antelope, foxes, elk, and coyotes in the vicinity, and we will remain mindful throughout the life of the project of the vital need to preserve and enhance every opportunity to support these and all wildlife species. Again, in consulting with the experts on these topics, please note that impacts to these species was not identified as a concern during agency reviews of the project with CPW and USFWS. Seeding We agree with you on the importance of pollinators for crops and the local ecosystem. As highlighted in the project application native plant seeding will be incorporated between and around the solar arrays to beautify and restore the appearance of the Project site, but most importantly to promote the return of native species and pollinators. This plan will also preserve and improve soil conditions. General Concern: Glare A Glare Study was performed by Colliers Engineering & Design on the array areas of the Project. A software called Forge Solar was used that determines the potential for glare given the solar farm specifics and looks at potential effects on the human eye at locations where glare is predicted to occur. The analysis was tailored to review the potential effects of the solar farm on nearby residences and on a privately owned landing strip near the project site. Worst -case scenario parameters were used for a conservative estimate. Findings show that with appropriate system settings, it is unlikely that glare from the proposed solar project will be problematic in any manner for the surrounding area and that the project would comply with the Federal Aviation Administration's 2021 policy regarding glint and glare effects to commercial airports. An in-depth explanation of the above conclusion and the details of the full parameters of this study are found in Appendix P of the Weld County Land Use Applications. General Concern: Heat Effects We understand that considering recent temperature increase trends, it is important to be mindful of whether solar farms might have undesired heat effects. Studies show that while the center of the PV field can reach up to 1.9 Celsius above the ambient temperature. This thermal energy completely dissipates to the environment at distances of approximately 16 to 60 feet. PV solar farms do not induce a day -after -day increase in ambient temperature, and therefore, adverse micro -climate changes from a potential PV plant are not a concern.' Also relevant here is the study entitled Analysis of the Potential for a Heat Island Effect in Large Solar Farms from Columbia University, which presents a comprehensive review of the so-called 'heat island' effect. This study contains field data and simulations showing that the dissipation of thermal energy is enhanced by cooling at night, by existing roads between the fields, and by vegetation buffers. 7 "Analysis of the Potential for a Heat Island Effect in Large Solar Farms", Vasilis Fthenakis (2013) Page 10 of 12 General Concern: Electromagnetic Interference In the ever -evolving landscape of technology, electromagnetic interference (EMI) is an important consideration. We have carefully considered whether EMI will occur as a result of these projects. Utility -scale solar fields are integral to our shift towards renewable energy, consisting of extensive arrays of solar panels designed to capture sunlight and convert it into electricity. The panels themselves are not significant sources of EMI; however, the associated equipment, such as inverters and transformers, can produce electromagnetic fields. Inverters are crucial components in solar fields. They convert the direct current (DC) generated by solar panels into alternating current (AC) used by the electrical grid. Inverters and transformers typically operate at power frequencies, around 50-60 Hz, and can produce EMI that might affect nearby electronic devices. Although the frequencies are much lower than those from cell phones, these devices must be carefully designed and shielded to prevent interference. Proper inverter enclosure grounding, filtering, and circuit layout has been incorporated into this project to further reduce EM radiation. Inverters are distributed throughout the project footprint and are located at least a quarter mile from residences, further reducing impacts. For a comparison, cell phones operate using radiofrequency (RF) signals, typically in the GHz range - 900 MHz, 1.8 GHz, and 2.4 GHz - essential for communication. This RF radiation, while essential for connectivity, has sparked ongoing health discussions which may have led to the concern by residents about potential EMI from the proposed solar projects. However, when comparing the health impacts of cell phones and solar field inverters, the differences are notable. The primary concern with cell phones is the higher frequency RF radiation emitted, which can lead to potential health risks if exposure is prolonged. Regulatory standards are in place to mitigate these risks, but ongoing research continues to evaluate the long-term effects of RF exposure on health. The EMI from inverters in solar fields operates at lower frequencies and is generally considered to pose less of a direct health risk compared to RF radiation. However, inverters must be designed to minimize EMI and prevent interference with nearby electronic equipment. The health risks from this type of EMI are typically regarded as minimal, though they still warrant careful management. Proper design and regulatory adherence are essential to mitigate any potential interference. The Janus and Prospect Solar projects will adhere to the strict regulations regarding EMI found in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 47, Part 15 to ensure that the health and safety of Weld County residents is protected. General Concern: Light Pollution Compared to urban areas, industrial facilities, or outdoor recreational lighting, solar farms have a much lower impact in terms of light pollution. The solar panels themselves do not emit light. Lighting at the projects will be limited to the substation and operations and maintenance building. These lights will be downward facing and will be activated by motion sensor. Lights on the substation are the responsibility of the substation operator and can be remotely turned on/off. On the other hand, urban areas and industrial activities often involve extensive, high -intensity lighting that can contribute to significant light pollution, General Concern: Cumulative Impacts With regards to the concern raised by a few commenters that the two projects may have greater impacts being adjacent, please note the team has addressed this concern by preparing the reports and submitting the applications to the County together. The projects will therefore be assessed as a whole rather than independently as the permitting proceeds, and cumulative impacts will be considered. Page 11 of 12 Conclusion The project team would like to thank local residents for taking time to reach out and submit your concerns. We encourage your continued review, input and perspectives. Please contact us by email at ro er.freeman@horuscapital.co.uk, Francesco.cardi@horuscapital.co.uk, and ebitler@logansimpson.com to discuss the project and any follow up or additional questions you may have. We look forward to working with you as we move through the planning and regulatory processes for the project. Thanks so much for your cooperation. Sincerely, Horus Team Page 12 of 12 From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Attachments: Francesco Cardi abbietpeakre()gmail.cona Ernily Bitter; Roger Freeman Response to Community Comments - Neighbour Letter Friday, September 13, 2024 11:52:46 AM Neighbour Letter September 13th 2024 - Fina ,pdf EXHIBiT 1,61e494-60 (3 I 8 CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization. B ock sender I Report Dear Ms. Stewart, Please find attached our comments responding to recent neighbour letters. Thanks so much for your cooperation. Kind Regards, Francesco Paolo Cardi Associate Horus Energy Mobile: +1 303 479 4535 francesco.cardi@horuscapital.co.uk https://horusenergy.co.ukl Response To Community Comments On behalf of Horus Energy, we welcome the opportunity to respond to a series of comments that have been recently submitted to the County by neighbours and other local citizens about our proposed Janus and Prospect solar projects. First and foremost, we greatly appreciate your efforts to work with us throughout the course of this project. Horus has received and closely integrated your input, feedback, request for property -specific adaptations, and all the forms of interest and support expressed for this project. Through a variety of steps taken throughout the project planning, development, and permitting stages, we have been gratified to work closely with your incredible community. In that regard, while we recognize that some commenters have recently voiced strong concerns, we do believe the project enjoys significant landowner and local support. This support has been conveyed to the County in 10 letters of support and non -objection. This includes five neighbours adjacent to the projects, as well as the five landowner partners in the project. Horus directly has received many more informal or oral expressions of positive input from a diverse set of interested parties. This foundation of support is built upon a long series of outreach efforts. As many of you know, we begin reaching out to the community in the earliest development stages of the projects - both through individual contacts and a public meeting held on July 05, 2023. As we explained at that meeting, the initial outreach group was identified under basic rules in Weld County for contacting the local immediate neighbours most proximate to the development. This also included several local agencies and community service entities representing everything from fire response to community planning. These initial contacts have formed the basis for a series of continued communications with many of you about individual property issues or considerations. Some have commented that they wish that they have known of the project sooner and could have attended the prior meeting. Please know that while these initial communications focused on those living closest to the development, they were driven solely by practical and regulatory considerations and are part of a continuing, longstanding, and broad community outreach program that has and will be the cornerstone of our approach to this project throughout its course. In this regard, we have welcomed comments from citizens in any location in Weld County. As reflected in this group response, we understand your interest and have carefully considered all comments. We also note that in addition to providing this collective response, we have continued to reach out to individuals and landowners to try to accommodate individual questions or concerns or mitigate particular property circumstances. We have yet to hear back from some individuals - but understand that some folks may want to do so in a collective way. Others may feel like they want to respond more directly and specifically once a collective response is received. The bottom line is that our doors remain wide open to continue any communication - whether collective or otherwise. With these factors in mind, Horus carefully weighed whether a collective response would serve the community best. We believe that this approach is supported by the fact that the concerns expressed convey a very parallel set of questions or concerns. In fact, many of the comments appeared to be jointly generated and contained the same basic wording. We welcome this joint approach, and the efficiencies created thereby, but remain flexible to meet the community needs going forward. While Horus has attempted to frame and highlight key points from our application materials in this response, we did not choose to include voluminous documents and data equally accessible to all on the public websites. It appears that some of you were able to access that information, and we appreciate your taking the time to do so. We are certainly glad to provide additional references to materials on file, specific studies, or other supporting documentation. Please don't hesitate to reach out to us if we can provide or help access these materials or information. Page 1 of 12 Finally, while we believe we have addressed all individual points raised by the community in recent comments, please let us know immediately if we missed any concerns or have additional specific comments or input that you would like for us to address, either through follow-up communications or upcoming public hearings surrounding these projects. General Concern: Property Values We fully understand the utmost importance of property and land rights to all residents of Weld County and the interest of all commenters in this issue. While every property will have different features relevant to this discussion - and some commenters appear to live quite a distance from the solar farms themselves - we feel that the following discussion applies generally to all. That said, since all comments were from property owners outside the project boundaries itself, we concentrate on adjacent property value issues here. In turn, this discussion does not go into detail about the numerous and compelling benefits generated to the community at large through such attributes as economic, tax, renewable energy generation, and supporting project landowner rights to use and obtain value from their land. These are discussed in detail in our application materials and other sources. The potential impact of solar farms on adjacent properties has been considered in other situations in Colorado and across the nation. As a result, much research has been done to assess the impact of solar on land valuations. We recognize that many commenters cited various studies, and we have carefully considered same in formulating this response. As these studies reflect, appraisers generally determine potential negative impact caused by an external source on adjacent or nearby properties utilizing the following factors: • Hazardous material: As discussed further below, a solar farm involves no hazardous materials or waste byproduct as part of its operation • Odor: Solar farms produce no odor. • Noise: As discussed further below, whether discussing passive fixed solar panels, or single -axis trackers, there is no negative impact associated with noise from a solar farm. No sound is emitted from the facility at night. Solar farms are inaudible from the roadways. • Traffic: As discussed further below, there will be a temporary increase in traffic during construction, and we have provided an extensive report in the application materials describing the efforts made to mitigate traffic impacts to the neighbourhood. Once built, the solar farm will have no onsite employees or staff, and the traffic will be far less than many other typical County uses. The site requires only minimal maintenance. • Stigma: There is no stigma associated with solar farms and people generally respond favourably towards such a use. While an individual may express concerns about proximity to a solar farm, there is no specific stigma associated with a solar farm. Stigma generally refers to things such as adult establishments, prisons, rehabilitation facilities, and so forth. Solar panels have no associated stigma and are found everywhere these days, from schools, churches, oil and gas wells to airports and industrial facilities, and increasingly on farms and agricultural sites as well. They are on roofs in many residential communities. Solar panels on a roof are often cited as an enhancement to the property in marketing brochures. • Appearance: This factor is discussed in detail below, but in terms of property value issues, larger solar farms that use fixed or tracking panels are a passive land use that many feel aligns well with rural residential settings. They are similar in appearance to large greenhouses, which also function as passive solar energy collectors. 1 "Meadow Forge Solar Impact Study", Kirkland Appraisals (2022) Page 2 of 12 With these factors firmly in mind, we have looked closely at the property value issues raised in your comments. The study that we provided, entitled "Property Value Impact Study"2 was published by one of the leading consulting firms, Cohn Reznick, and has been widely cited and utilized in many settings. We do understand your comments that the study was focused on Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan. The Midwest was believed to be a good study area because while it largely incorporated rural settings like this project, housing density is higher, and therefore the impact of solar farms on properties - if any - should be more evident and pronounced. The study shows no measurable impact and consistent difference in property values for properties adjacent to solar farms when compared to similar properties locationally removed from same. Consistently we have found in data from university studies, broker commentary, and other appraisal studies the importance of implementing landscape buffers and proper setbacks to further minimize the prospect of such impacts on property value adjoining the solar farms. The team has kept this in close consideration throughout the development and permitting process, by designing natural screening and respecting setbacks as defined by the Weld County Code. To further explore this and related economic factors, a socioeconomic impact and community benefit report has been commissioned and submitted as part of the permitting process.' The study shows that the projects will result into an enhancement of the socioeconomic environment within Weld County due to the following factors: job creation, economic output, cost-effective locally generated power, increased income to landowners, and positive local health impacts; while having no measurable impact on the value of adjacent properties. Even if there were impacts to property, solar presents numerous balancing economic benefits that are important to consider. Again, these are detailed in our application materials and not the focus of this response, and we highlight just a few here: (1) Utility scale solar presents an opportunity to reserve land for future agricultural use while continuing to support agricultural interests and landowner rights. (2) This Project would provide an increase in property tax payments to Weld County, Fire District, School District and other community services. (3) Local employment opportunities would increase for local construction and operation companies and workers, and increased use of services (accommodations, restaurants) would occur throughout the construction of the Project without taxing social services such as schools, roads, etc., within the county. (4) The renewable energy and storage attributes of the project are firmly aligned with federal, state, local, utility, and other mandates to develop further renewable energy sources and take advantage of the many economic benefits of these systems. General Concern: Appearance and Visual We recognize that the aesthetics of any neighbouring use is a very personal matter to a property owner, and appreciate your sharing concerns on this topic in your comments. The team has endeavoured to its fullest extent to minimize and mitigate the impacts of this facility in the surrounding area with many of the items addressed here (e.g. screening using living fences, buffers, visual simulations, compatibility). For instance, Janus and Prospect will be built at least 500 feet away from existing homes, complying with Weld County regulations. The facility is designed to be low -profile, with heights ranging from 4 to 10 feet, comparable to the height of a cornfield. We also note that efforts to minimize visual and other impacts will continue throughout the project and will always be open to continuing input from the community. 2 "Property Value Impact Study: Adjacent Property Values Solar Impact Study: A Study of Eight Existing Solar Facilities", CohnReznick (2021) https://www.nexteraenergyresources.com/content/dam/neer/us/en/pdf/CohnReznick%20Solar%20lmpact%20Study 7.26.21.pdf 3 Appendix F -Socioeconomic Impact and Community Benefit Report Page 3 of 12 Ultimately, for all the reasons explained here and, in supporting County applications, both Horus and many involved parties and landowners feel that this is an excellent location for this project, and its features support this view. Horus does encourage the development on brown field sites where it makes sense, but there are simply not enough of them next to good transmission systems to meet the growing demand for energy in the country. This site was selected based in part on the transmission line and the capacity of the existing 115 and 230 -kV lines and supporting transmission, which has been part of the landscape in the area for many years. Also, there was interest from local landowners with regards to both financial reasons and to preserve their farmland long-term for future uses. The team and its projects have at their core the protection of the natural features that characterize the area, its peace and quietness, the energy and passion of its neighbours that make this area of the State so unique. We recognize that the project will present some change for many commenters but believe that this change should be viewed in the context of the rapid changes overall in Weld County and beyond. We also believe it is important to compare this use to others that might be proposed over time. For instance, unlike this use, residential developments, in addition to causing disturbance during construction, present a series of ongoing traffic, visual, noise and other impacts. Horus is a property owner as well, and we deeply respect the vested interests, connection, and unique history each of you has to your property. We understand the passion that these issues often invoke. We would just ask that you consider these points as well as you assess your approach to this project. Again, if it would be useful, we welcome the opportunity to continue to address with you individually or collectively this important issue. General Concern: Traffic We understand that you chose to live out of the city to enjoy such features as the quietness, the peacefulness of driving down country roads, the simple cycle of planting, growing, and harvesting of crops, and the openness of the landscape . Many of you expressed concern that the traffic and congestion from this project would fundamentally shift the ability to enjoy this lifestyle. We really believe that this will not be the case - and will continue to do everything we can going forward to address this concern. Again, it is important to bear in mind that unlike so many other uses now crowding parts of Weld County, the increase in traffic will be temporary during the project's construction. Moreover, with our experts - Kimley Horn - who have and are working with Hudson and other cities - we have carefully designed a path that would minimize noise and disturbance and have limited impacts on the transportation patterns or the roads around the project site. The projects will utilize the existing roadway system, where appropriate, and contribute to upgrade, build, and maintain the other roads that will be utilized during the construction of the projects. Similar to mineral oil and gas production, Weld County rules ensure that adequate roads must exist or be made available prior to construction of the projects. The projects will submit a Road Use Agreement and Access Road Permit application to the County, ensuring compliance with the County design standards. The projects will upgrade any damaged and deteriorated roads and help maintain the same if they fall within the construction path. Safety is a very important aspect for Horus and we strive for a responsible and orderly development. This is also thoroughly reflected in Weld County Code provisions aimed at protecting and serving the health, welfare and safety of the citizens of the County. A Traffic Management Plan will be developed that will implement reduced speed limits on local roads and will require signallers to control the traffic in key areas in the vicinity of the projects, aimed at ensuring careful driving from construction workers. The living fence, in addition to providing visual screening, will also provide additional benefits in this respect, contributing towards an improvement in road safety and a reduction of hazardous driving conditions, by reducing snow drift onto roads, which in turn increases visibility, and reduces maintenance, plowing, and salting costs. Page 4 of 12 While there will be some short-term disruptions in term of noise and traffic, the benefits that the project will bring will be long-lasting. Some will be apparent in the short term like the increase in revenue from local business and hotels, restaurants, suppliers. The native vegetation that will be planted underneath the panels will attract pollinators, a fundamental piece of our ecosystem. The project water tank can be utilized by the Southeast Weld Fire Protection District and its Chief Tom Beach for fire emergencies in the area. Other benefits will be more evident in the long term, like the increase in taxes for Weld County that will help support a wide variety of services upon which all parties rely. General Concern: Dust We appreciate your questions about dust and how this will be mitigated. We have given this topic a lot of thought. We have developed a detailed Dust and Weed Mitigation Plan as part of the projects' land use permit applications, which integrates and adheres to Colorado Department of Health and Environment Land Development Permit requirements establishing acceptable dust levels, which will be monitored closely as the project proceeds.' We will be adapting this as the project progresses to ensure we are minimizing the temporary construction impact created by dust. Again, we might ask that this concern be put in perspective of all the other permanent potential uses that might be made of these lands - that would not only generate much more immediate dust issues but would increase disturbances of this nature for decades to come and change the fundamental agricultural nature of these lands. General Concern: Noise This in our view is one of the many advantages of solar, above nearly all other uses. During operations there will be no noticeable noise from the solar farm. The only components of the project facilities that will emit low levels of noise will be inverters and BESS equipment. However, these facilities will be located at least a quarter mile from residences and noise levels will be well below levels set by County noise ordinances set forth in Chapter 14 Article IX of the Weld County Code. During the life of the project the site will be controlled remotely, and utility personnel will visit on a quarterly basis to conduct routine inspections and maintenance. The transformer typically has a hum similar to an HVAC that can only be heard in close proximity. Buffers on the property are sufficient to make emitted sounds inaudible from the adjoining properties. Transformers will be located at least a quarter mile from residences and noise levels will be well below levels set by County noise ordinances. During construction there will be some noise due to pile driving and equipment backup beeping such as reverse warning sounds, but please note that this noise will again be temporary in nature and is not anticipated to exceed maximum levels at the property boundary for construction activities outlined in Weld County noise ordinances. All told, the solar farms will be a very quiet neighbour, harvesting solar energy passively throughout the project life. General Concern: Impacts from Project Materials Another benefit of solar, compared to nearly other use that might be made of this land, is the negligible use of materials that are in any way hazardous or harmful. We appreciate the concerns expressed about impacts of materials to be used during the construction phase but are very confident that that any impacts from fertilizer, weed control, or other material usage, will be significantly less than typical residential development and most agricultural uses. These issues are further addressed below in our discussion of environmental matters, but it may help to review the basic constituents found in the components of a solar farm. The panels are bi-facial mono - crystalline that have no known leaching issues. The primary materials of a solar panel which are glass, 4 Dust and Weed Mitigation Nan - Appendix D Page 5 of 12 aluminum, silicone, copper, and trace semiconducting metals are inert and don't constitute hazardous materials or waste. There could be trace amounts of lead from soldering material, which is similar to televisions and cell phones. There is no risk of exposure or leakage and any amount contained in the modules is below the EPA limits. Solar panels are recyclable and contain approximately 75 percent glass, 8 percent aluminium, and 5 percent silicon. Approximately 70 percent of the material is recoverable due to the processing required to separate the panel components. These materials, once recycled, are worth about $6 per panel to the solar farm at today's prices. Solar plants use minimal chemicals. There could be some paint to touch up rusted areas on the mounting structure, potentially some oil in the transformers, and we also intend to utilize limited solutions to control the dust and weeds on the site. Further details on these matters are contained in the various plans cited in this response, but all such materials would be used in accordance with risk assessments and method statements ensuring they are used correctly and with suitable safely procedures in place. Also note there is no cadmium telluride in the panels we have proposed. General Concern: Water There were a few comments directed at water usage issues, and we understand that water is a critical element of concern at all levels of the community. Water usage and quality is a great concern for Weld County and Horus and has been a focus of our application materials throughout. Horus is committed to protecting Weld County's waterways and supply. The properties involved in this project have no vested water rights, and irrigated agriculture is accomplished by leasing water from nearby tenants. The project has secured sufficient water resources to supply what will amount to modest water needs for the Project (0.007 -acre feet per acre per year). As compared to many other uses shown in the Application, solar requires minimal water for project operation. The Project's water use plan is intended to preserve the agricultural land base and allow for a return to full agricultural use once the solar project is decommissioned. For planning purposes, Project water needs can be divided into the following categories: 1. Construction/Dust Control Some water will be required to implement the Dust Control Plan and related aspects of the construction phrase. The plan is to utilise outside service companies to supply the water for this need as part of their spray mix system so to not require any contribution of local water from the area. There will also be stormwater controls and related mitigation measures during construction to manage existing surface water flow and maintain water quality, as required by governing regulations. Finally, some water may be needed for initial planting and maintenance of plants used for screening, although species are selected for their minimal ongoing watering requirements. 2. Fire Control - While fire is not a typical concern for PV and BESS systems, the Project's water tank may be utilized by the Southeast Weld Fire District and will provide a key resource for protection against fires in the region, especially in times of drought. This tank will need to be filled periodically. 3. Panel Washing and Maintenance - The only ongoing water supply needed for the Project is for washing and maintaining the solar panels and supporting facilities, in part to maximize energy return. The exact cleaning schedule is a function of precipitation, dust, and other particulate settling on the panels. To minimize cleaning, the Project intends to utilize a commercial contractor to treat neighbouring roads with GMCO CS products, a blend of liquid magnesium chloride and a complex sugar. The product is an environmentally friendly solution for gravel road stabilization and dust control. This will reduce water consumption related to cleaning during the operation period (and reduce dust in residential homes as well). Water needs will be more than adequately met by (1) the occasional purchase or trucking in of outside water where needed, particularly at the construction phrase, (2) the establishment of a large water Page 6 of 12 collection tank near the well on the Janus property to store water from the onsite well, and (3) over the longer term, by the existing onsite water well. The onsite well located is fully in place and secured. Based on initial calculations, the amount of water needed per acre foot of land for the Project is much less than current annual agricultural uses for the Project site. It is also less than the average amount of water per acre of land needed to raise most crops. General Concern: Water Drainage As many of you recognized, one important element of water management is the handling of drainage over the course of the solar project. Horus has commissioned Kim ley Horn to prepare a preliminary drainage report which evaluates pre and post development hydrologic characteristics of the project site and addresses the stormwater requirements of Weld County and the state of Colorado. 5 The study found that peak flow rates will actually be reduced from the existing rates, due to the proposed improvements on the project site, complemented with the findings from the Journal of Hydrologic Engineering focused on researching the hydrologic impacts of utility scale solar generation facilities. The study also concluded that drainage patterns offsite will remain the same as historic conditions. In addition, detention ponds have been designed on the project site to retain the required storage volumes. Generally, solar farms have little to no impact on runoff volumes or rates. Rainfall that falls directly on a solar panel runs to the pervious areas around and under the surrounding panels. General Concern: Conflicts with future land use plans We appreciate your questions related to compatibility of the solar farm with overall uses in the area. Compatibility is thoroughly assessed in the Weld County Code in Chapters 21, 22 and 23 as part of the permit application process, and we refer you to the voluminous project materials and attachments submitted by Horus addressing this subject. For ease of reference, each regulation and associated project compatibility features are outlined below for reference: Chapter 21: Areas and Activities of State Interest, Article III: Site Selection and Construction of Major Facilities of a Public Utility, Division 3: Permit Program for Site Selection and Construction of a Major Facility of a Public Utility • Regulation: All reasonable alternatives to the proposed action, including use of existing rights -of - way and joint use of rights -of -way wherever uses are compatible, have been adequately assessed and the proposed action is compatible with and represents the best interests of the people of the County and represents a fair and reasonable utilization of resources in the impact area. • Project Compliance with Regulations: All reasonable alternatives within the study area were thoroughly assessed to make the Project fully compatible with and representative of the best interests of the people of Weld County. While a larger land area was initially studied, the Project's final footprint was selected because it offered advantages to the community and overall environment while providing opportunities and circumstances favourable to Solar and BESS facilities, specifically 1) existing transmission infrastructure less than 0.2 miles from the property, 2) augmenting, while sustaining for future landowners, current unsustainable primary land use as indicated by the landowners. This offers benefits to land use for the surrounding area. Utilization of local resources within Weld County will be minimal as the Project will not require services such as water, sewage, or emergency services at a level typical of other land uses in the area. Code Chapter 22: Comprehensive Plan, Article II - Principles, Goals, and Objectives • Regulation: Transition between land use types and intensities with buffers. Uses that are incompatible with existing uses must be able to mitigate conflicts and support compatible economic development opportunities. • Project Compliance with Regulations: The project complies with or exceeds all County required buffers from roads, residences, Oil and Gas operations, and other special areas. Adjacent uses 5 Preliminary Drainage Analysis — Appendix J Page 7 of 12 will not be affected, and nearby land can continue to be utilized for agriculture or other compatible u ses. This will support the opportunity for future compatible economic development in the area. Project compatibility is further demonstrated by comparing other land uses in the area. In Weld County the Agricultural zoning district is designed primarily for agricultural uses, but it also accommodates various other special uses, including Oil and Gas Operations, Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), and subdivisions of land for residential development. While these use types are generally accepted in agricultural areas, their impacts to neighbour and e nvironment health are substantial, including for industrial facilities emissions that may result in respiratory issues and water quality contamination. Utility scale solar has fewer direct health impacts as they do not produce air or water pollution and contribute to cleaner energy production, which can have broader public health benefits by reducing reliance on fossil fuels. Chapter 23: Zoning, Article II - Procedures and Permits, Division 4 - Uses by Special Review • Regulation: Permitted uses will be compatible with the existing surrounding land uses and with the future development of the surrounding area as permitted by the existing zone and with future development. Buffering or screening of the proposed use from adjacent properties requirements. • Project Compliance with Regulations: Mitigation of construction impacts and visual impacts have been addressed as described throughout the application. Natural vegetative buffers have been incorporated into the project design on a case -by -case basis to mitigate visual impacts for n eighbours. This includes utilization of multiple layers of vegetation and specific species to ensure each landowner has a screen that works for their specific location and needs. Screening is discussed in more detail below. The proposed use is compatible with existing land uses and future development. The existing site land use is dryland agricultural row crops and rangeland, most similar to tillage/agricultural land classification. While a vital part of the land use base in the area, it does have its impacts. Disturbance to the land from tillage can disrupt the natural soil structure resulting in reduced soil cohesion and structural stability, which may result in increased soil erosion, compaction, and runoff. It also can deplete the soil's organic content, reducing its fertility and affecting its ability to retain moisture and nutrients. The ability to retain moisture in becoming increasingly important in Weld County as water is a precious resource. Disturbed soil is also susceptible to weeds, requiring additional inputs such as herbicides and pesticides, which can further impact soil health and the surrounding environment. Farming this land is becoming increasingly difficult as water becomes scarcer and the soil health declines. This project will allow the landowners to profit from their land without the disturbance that results from tilled agriculture. Temporarily halting ag use of this land for the duration of the project will allow the soil health to improve. Revegetation actions following construction include seeding the land with a county approved seed mix and will promote the growth of native grasses to preserve the quality of the soil and mitigate noxious weeds. By utilizing the county approved native grass seed mix below the panels, the existing tillage/agricultural land areas will be changed to a heavy meadow land classification that reduces peak flow rates and manages stormwater in line with the historic conditions of the site. This will promote water conservation at both the watershed and site levels, with the goal of replicating the native hydrologic characteristics of the sub - watersheds, creating natural ground coverage, and reducing dust. The change in land use from tilled agriculture land to utility scale solar will allow the landowners to increase the health of their land and reduce water use while simultaneously profiting from their land. This is beneficial to adjacent uses as it presents a lesser impact to neighbour and e nvironmental health and is also economically profitable for the County. Upon completion of the solar lease option, the project can be fully decommissioned, and the land returned to agricultural use or open meadow land. Utility scale solar is one of the only land development uses that not only preserves and improves ag land for future use, but is also a low water use, providing conservation benefits as well. Fifty years from now, these developments may be integral to preserving open lands and reducing urban sprawl. Page 8 of 12 General Concern: Screening The screening plan was developed during consultations with adjacent landowners and visual simulations. The goal is to provide screening tailored to your individual property owner requests, and at the same time ensure screening best accounts for water usage needed to sustain the living fence. Screening was developed in consultation with our expert biologist and landscaping team. The size of Rocky Mountain Juniper trees selected (10 -gallon containers for the juniper are about 5' in height and 1.5-2" caliper) was chosen to reduce the risk of mortality from transplant stress. The typical growth rate is one foot a year. A 3 -inch caliper juniper normally utilizes a ball and burlap container system and tends to have higher mortality rates due to the stress/damage to the root ball in transport and planting - which is why the 10 -gallon container tree was recommended. Since Rocky Mountain Juniper is a native species and naturally occurs in that area, we know it can handle the climate and limited water resources, but winter watering should be considered as a precaution (especially if it's a dry winter) to reduce potential for mortality. First season watering was recommended because that should be enough time for root stock to establish at appropriate depths to access ground water. There is a balance between survival and not creating a dependency on watering. Therefore, an adaptive approach would be best where watering is tapered off over 3 years. We have also received questions on how the Skunkbush Sumac will be planted along the Juniper. The two will be planted in a scattered fashion so it looks more natural. We appreciate the recommendation of the American Wild Plum as an alternative to the plants chosen, but American wild plum typically requires more water than the juniper or sumac, so they are not recommended to minimise the use of water, hence why they were not selected in the project design. General Concern: Environment and Wildlife We appreciate your comments on these critical topics, as Horus is committed to promote a responsible development in Weld County, promoting economic development, land stewardship, while at the same time preserving crops and the natural resources and wildlife that make this area so special. To this effect the team has developed several studies which include a Cultural Resource Survey, Wetland and Waterbody Survey, a study on protected species, a Phase 1 Environmental Assessment Report, and Critical Issue Analysis that were completed by archaeological, biological, and ecological experts. The aim and the results of these studies were used to best assess any environmental impact the projects may cause and mitigate the same in the projects design by avoiding waterways, planting native grass mix to enrich the soil and juniper trees lining the fence, and creating a movement corridor along Sand Creek to facilitate big game habitats. The applicant has committed to strict management practices that are detailed in the 1041 /USR application.' This is also embedded within the Weld County Code to ensure that the natural and economic environment and resources of the County are protected and enhanced. With this overarching perspective in mind, the following summarizes and responds to each of the comments received with respect to the environment, wildlife and seeding. Wildlife Corridor We appreciate your comments on the wildlife corridor. Please note that like with so many aspects of this project, we have utilized the expertise of outside local agencies or experts to address this issue. Here, we have designed the corridor in collaboration with experts on wildlife at Colorado Parks and Wildlife ("CPW"). The agency has been consulted since the inception of the projects; they have been involved in the permitting process and provided their referral letters on the projects. To address the loss of open space and the fragmentation of existing and accessible big game habitats caused by the projects, Horus has designed a wildlife corridor of 600ft, wider than the minimum set by CPW (250ft) and followed CPW recommendations for the fencing of the project in order to minimize any potential impact to wildlife. 6 Appendix E - Environmental Protection Measures and Agency Coordination Page 9 of 12 Wildlife Species As part of the projects siting, development and permitting, please note Horus has completed onsite biological reconnaissance studies with expert biologists which revealed there are no species of concern with federal and state statutory protection likely to occur in the project area, with the exception of burrowing owls. Construction will occur outside of nesting season if this species is identified during the planned pre -construction biological surveys. Horus has also consulted with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ("USFWS") and CPW on the same issue, which have also commented on the projects' application. USFWS has expressed no concern of the project resulting in potential impacts to species listed as proposed, threatened, or endangered. CPW has confirmed the project is sited outside High Priority Habitats ("HPHs"), areas defined as sensitive wildlife habitats. Thank you for making us aware of deer, antelope, foxes, elk, and coyotes in the vicinity, and we will remain mindful throughout the life of the project of the vital need to preserve and enhance every opportunity to support these and all wildlife species. Again, in consulting with the experts on these topics, please note that impacts to these species was not identified as a concern during agency reviews of the project with CPW and USFWS. Seeding We agree with you on the importance of pollinators for crops and the local ecosystem. As highlighted in the project application native plant seeding will be incorporated between and around the solar arrays to beautify and restore the appearance of the Project site, but most importantly to promote the return of native species and pollinators. This plan will also preserve and improve soil conditions. General Concern: Glare A Glare Study was performed by Colliers Engineering & Design on the array areas of the Project. A software called Forge Solar was used that determines the potential for glare given the solar farm specifics and looks at potential effects on the human eye at locations where glare is predicted to occur. The analysis was tailored to review the potential effects of the solar farm on nearby residences and on a privately owned landing strip near the project site. Worst -case scenario parameters were used for a conservative estimate. Findings show that with appropriate system settings, it is unlikely that glare from the proposed solar project will be problematic in any manner for the surrounding area and that the project would comply with the Federal Aviation Administration's 2021 policy regarding glint and glare effects to commercial airports. An in-depth explanation of the above conclusion and the details of the full parameters of this study are found in Appendix P of the Weld County Land Use Applications. General Concern: Heat Effects We understand that considering recent temperature increase trends, it is important to be mindful of whether solar farms might have undesired heat effects. Studies show that while the center of the PV field can reach up to 1.9 Celsius above the ambient temperature. This thermal energy completely dissipates to the environment at distances of approximately 16 to 60 feet. PV solar farms do not induce a day -after -day increase in ambient temperature, and therefore, adverse micro -climate changes from a potential PV plant are not a concern.' Also relevant here is the study entitled Analysis of the Potential for a Heat Island Effect in Large Solar Farms from Columbia University, which presents a comprehensive review of the so-called 'heat island' effect. This study contains field data and simulations showing that the dissipation of thermal energy is enhanced by cooling at night, by existing roads between the fields, and by vegetation buffers. 7 "Analysis of the Potential for a Heat Island Effect in Large Solar Farms", Vasilis Fthenakis (2013) Page 10 of 12 General Concern: Electromagnetic Interference In the ever -evolving landscape of technology, electromagnetic interference (EMI) is an important consideration. We have carefully considered whether EMI will occur as a result of these projects. Utility -scale solar fields are integral to our shift towards renewable energy, consisting of extensive arrays of solar panels designed to capture sunlight and convert it into electricity. The panels themselves are not significant sources of EMI; however, the associated equipment, such as inverters and transformers, can produce electromagnetic fields. Inverters are crucial components in solar fields. They convert the direct current (DC) generated by solar panels into alternating current (AC) used by the electrical grid. Inverters and transformers typically operate at power frequencies, around 50-60 Hz, and can produce EMI that might affect nearby electronic devices. Although the frequencies are much lower than those from cell phones, these devices must be carefully designed and shielded to prevent interference. Proper inverter enclosure grounding, filtering, and circuit layout has been incorporated into this project to further reduce EM radiation. Inverters are distributed throughout the project footprint and are located at least a quarter mile from residences, further reducing impacts. For a comparison, cell phones operate using radiofrequency (RF) signals, typically in the GHz range - 900 MHz, 1.8 GHz, and 2.4 GHz - essential for communication. This RF radiation, while essential for connectivity, has sparked ongoing health discussions which may have led to the concern by residents about potential EMI from the proposed solar projects. However, when comparing the health impacts of cell phones and solar field inverters, the differences are notable. The primary concern with cell phones is the higher frequency RF radiation emitted, which can lead to potential health risks if exposure is prolonged. Regulatory standards are in place to mitigate these risks, but ongoing research continues to evaluate the long-term effects of RF exposure on health. The EMI from inverters in solar fields operates at lower frequencies and is generally considered to pose less of a direct health risk compared to RF radiation. However, inverters must be designed to minimize EMI and prevent interference with nearby electronic equipment. The health risks from this type of EMI are typically regarded as minimal, though they still warrant careful management. Proper design and regulatory adherence are essential to mitigate any potential interference. The Janus and Prospect Solar projects will adhere to the strict regulations regarding EMI found in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 47, Part 15 to ensure that the health and safety of Weld County residents is protected. General Concern: Light Pollution Compared to urban areas, industrial facilities, or outdoor recreational lighting, solar farms have a much lower impact in terms of light pollution. The solar panels themselves do not emit light. Lighting at the projects will be limited to the substation and operations and maintenance building. These lights will be downward facing and will be activated by motion sensor. Lights on the substation are the responsibility of the substation operator and can be remotely turned on/off. On the other hand, urban areas and industrial activities often involve extensive, high -intensity lighting that can contribute to significant light pollution, General Concern: Cumulative Impacts With regards to the concern raised by a few commenters that the two projects may have greater impacts being adjacent, please note the team has addressed this concern by preparing the reports and submitting the applications to the County together. The projects will therefore be assessed as a whole rather than independently as the permitting proceeds, and cumulative impacts will be considered. Page 11 of 12 Conclusion The project team would like to thank local residents for taking time to reach out and submit your concerns. We encourage your continued review, input and perspectives. Please contact us by email at ro er.freeman@horuscapital.co.uk, Francesco.cardi@horuscapital.co.uk, and ebitler@logansimpson.com to discuss the project and any follow up or additional questions you may have. We look forward to working with you as we move through the planning and regulatory processes for the project. Thanks so much for your cooperation. Sincerely, Horus Team Page 12 of 12 EXHIBIT aglietet3 From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Attachments: Francesco Cardi arpyherpaodez77Pgrpail.com Roger Freeman; Emily Bitler Response to Community Comments - Neighbour Letter Friday, September 13, 2024 11:44:01 AM Neighbour Letter September 13th 2024 - Firm tpdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization. Block sender I Bid Dear Ms. Hernandez, Please find attached our comments responding to recent neighbour letters. Thanks so much for your cooperation. Kind Regards, Francesco Paolo Cardi Associate Horus Energy Mobile: +1 303 479 4535 francesco.cardiattruscapital.co.uk htfps://horusenergy,co. uk/ Response To Community Comments On behalf of Horus Energy, we welcome the opportunity to respond to a series of comments that have been recently submitted to the County by neighbours and other local citizens about our proposed Janus and Prospect solar projects. First and foremost, we greatly appreciate your efforts to work with us throughout the course of this project. Horus has received and closely integrated your input, feedback, request for property -specific adaptations, and all the forms of interest and support expressed for this project. Through a variety of steps taken throughout the project planning, development, and permitting stages, we have been gratified to work closely with your incredible community. In that regard, while we recognize that some commenters have recently voiced strong concerns, we do believe the project enjoys significant landowner and local support. This support has been conveyed to the County in 10 letters of support and non -objection. This includes five neighbours adjacent to the projects, as well as the five landowner partners in the project. Horus directly has received many more informal or oral expressions of positive input from a diverse set of interested parties. This foundation of support is built upon a long series of outreach efforts. As many of you know, we begin reaching out to the community in the earliest development stages of the projects - both through individual contacts and a public meeting held on July 05, 2023. As we explained at that meeting, the initial outreach group was identified under basic rules in Weld County for contacting the local immediate neighbours most proximate to the development. This also included several local agencies and community service entities representing everything from fire response to community planning. These initial contacts have formed the basis for a series of continued communications with many of you about individual property issues or considerations. Some have commented that they wish that they have known of the project sooner and could have attended the prior meeting. Please know that while these initial communications focused on those living closest to the development, they were driven solely by practical and regulatory considerations and are part of a continuing, longstanding, and broad community outreach program that has and will be the cornerstone of our approach to this project throughout its course. In this regard, we have welcomed comments from citizens in any location in Weld County. As reflected in this group response, we understand your interest and have carefully considered all comments. We also note that in addition to providing this collective response, we have continued to reach out to individuals and landowners to try to accommodate individual questions or concerns or mitigate particular property circumstances. We have yet to hear back from some individuals - but understand that some folks may want to do so in a collective way. Others may feel like they want to respond more directly and specifically once a collective response is received. The bottom line is that our doors remain wide open to continue any communication - whether collective or otherwise. With these factors in mind, Horus carefully weighed whether a collective response would serve the community best. We believe that this approach is supported by the fact that the concerns expressed convey a very parallel set of questions or concerns. In fact, many of the comments appeared to be jointly generated and contained the same basic wording. We welcome this joint approach, and the efficiencies created thereby, but remain flexible to meet the community needs going forward. While Horus has attempted to frame and highlight key points from our application materials in this response, we did not choose to include voluminous documents and data equally accessible to all on the public websites. It appears that some of you were able to access that information, and we appreciate your taking the time to do so. We are certainly glad to provide additional references to materials on file, specific studies, or other supporting documentation. Please don't hesitate to reach out to us if we can provide or help access these materials or information. Page 1 of 12 Finally, while we believe we have addressed all individual points raised by the community in recent comments, please let us know immediately if we missed any concerns or have additional specific comments or input that you would like for us to address, either through follow-up communications or upcoming public hearings surrounding these projects. General Concern: Property Values We fully understand the utmost importance of property and land rights to all residents of Weld County and the interest of all commenters in this issue. While every property will have different features relevant to this discussion - and some commenters appear to live quite a distance from the solar farms themselves - we feel that the following discussion applies generally to all. That said, since all comments were from property owners outside the project boundaries itself, we concentrate on adjacent property value issues here. In turn, this discussion does not go into detail about the numerous and compelling benefits generated to the community at large through such attributes as economic, tax, renewable energy generation, and supporting project landowner rights to use and obtain value from their land. These are discussed in detail in our application materials and other sources. The potential impact of solar farms on adjacent properties has been considered in other situations in Colorado and across the nation. As a result, much research has been done to assess the impact of solar on land valuations. We recognize that many commenters cited various studies, and we have carefully considered same in formulating this response. As these studies reflect, appraisers generally determine potential negative impact caused by an external source on adjacent or nearby properties utilizing the following factors: • Hazardous material: As discussed further below, a solar farm involves no hazardous materials or waste byproduct as part of its operation • Odor: Solar farms produce no odor. • Noise: As discussed further below, whether discussing passive fixed solar panels, or single -axis trackers, there is no negative impact associated with noise from a solar farm. No sound is emitted from the facility at night. Solar farms are inaudible from the roadways. • Traffic: As discussed further below, there will be a temporary increase in traffic during construction, and we have provided an extensive report in the application materials describing the efforts made to mitigate traffic impacts to the neighbourhood. Once built, the solar farm will have no onsite employees or staff, and the traffic will be far less than many other typical County uses. The site requires only minimal maintenance. • Stigma: There is no stigma associated with solar farms and people generally respond favourably towards such a use. While an individual may express concerns about proximity to a solar farm, there is no specific stigma associated with a solar farm. Stigma generally refers to things such as adult establishments, prisons, rehabilitation facilities, and so forth. Solar panels have no associated stigma and are found everywhere these days, from schools, churches, oil and gas wells to airports and industrial facilities, and increasingly on farms and agricultural sites as well. They are on roofs in many residential communities. Solar panels on a roof are often cited as an enhancement to the property in marketing brochures. • Appearance: This factor is discussed in detail below, but in terms of property value issues, larger solar farms that use fixed or tracking panels are a passive land use that many feel aligns well with rural residential settings. They are similar in appearance to large greenhouses, which also function as passive solar energy collectors. 1 "Meadow Forge Solar Impact Study", Kirkland Appraisals (2022) Page 2 of 12 With these factors firmly in mind, we have looked closely at the property value issues raised in your comments. The study that we provided, entitled "Property Value Impact Study"2 was published by one of the leading consulting firms, Cohn Reznick, and has been widely cited and utilized in many settings. We do understand your comments that the study was focused on Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan. The Midwest was believed to be a good study area because while it largely incorporated rural settings like this project, housing density is higher, and therefore the impact of solar farms on properties - if any - should be more evident and pronounced. The study shows no measurable impact and consistent difference in property values for properties adjacent to solar farms when compared to similar properties locationally removed from same. Consistently we have found in data from university studies, broker commentary, and other appraisal studies the importance of implementing landscape buffers and proper setbacks to further minimize the prospect of such impacts on property value adjoining the solar farms. The team has kept this in close consideration throughout the development and permitting process, by designing natural screening and respecting setbacks as defined by the Weld County Code. To further explore this and related economic factors, a socioeconomic impact and community benefit report has been commissioned and submitted as part of the permitting process.' The study shows that the projects will result into an enhancement of the socioeconomic environment within Weld County due to the following factors: job creation, economic output, cost-effective locally generated power, increased income to landowners, and positive local health impacts; while having no measurable impact on the value of adjacent properties. Even if there were impacts to property, solar presents numerous balancing economic benefits that are important to consider. Again, these are detailed in our application materials and not the focus of this response, and we highlight just a few here: (1) Utility scale solar presents an opportunity to reserve land for future agricultural use while continuing to support agricultural interests and landowner rights. (2) This Project would provide an increase in property tax payments to Weld County, Fire District, School District and other community services. (3) Local employment opportunities would increase for local construction and operation companies and workers, and increased use of services (accommodations, restaurants) would occur throughout the construction of the Project without taxing social services such as schools, roads, etc., within the county. (4) The renewable energy and storage attributes of the project are firmly aligned with federal, state, local, utility, and other mandates to develop further renewable energy sources and take advantage of the many economic benefits of these systems. General Concern: Appearance and Visual We recognize that the aesthetics of any neighbouring use is a very personal matter to a property owner, and appreciate your sharing concerns on this topic in your comments. The team has endeavoured to its fullest extent to minimize and mitigate the impacts of this facility in the surrounding area with many of the items addressed here (e.g. screening using living fences, buffers, visual simulations, compatibility). For instance, Janus and Prospect will be built at least 500 feet away from existing homes, complying with Weld County regulations. The facility is designed to be low -profile, with heights ranging from 4 to 10 feet, comparable to the height of a cornfield. We also note that efforts to minimize visual and other impacts will continue throughout the project and will always be open to continuing input from the community. 2 "Property Value Impact Study: Adjacent Property Values Solar Impact Study: A Study of Eight Existing Solar Facilities", CohnReznick (2021) https://www.nexteraenergyresources.com/content/dam/neer/us/en/pdf/CohnReznick%20Solar%20lmpact%20Study 7.26.21.pdf 3 Appendix F -Socioeconomic Impact and Community Benefit Report Page 3 of 12 Ultimately, for all the reasons explained here and, in supporting County applications, both Horus and many involved parties and landowners feel that this is an excellent location for this project, and its features support this view. Horus does encourage the development on brown field sites where it makes sense, but there are simply not enough of them next to good transmission systems to meet the growing demand for energy in the country. This site was selected based in part on the transmission line and the capacity of the existing 115 and 230 -kV lines and supporting transmission, which has been part of the landscape in the area for many years. Also, there was interest from local landowners with regards to both financial reasons and to preserve their farmland long-term for future uses. The team and its projects have at their core the protection of the natural features that characterize the area, its peace and quietness, the energy and passion of its neighbours that make this area of the State so unique. We recognize that the project will present some change for many commenters but believe that this change should be viewed in the context of the rapid changes overall in Weld County and beyond. We also believe it is important to compare this use to others that might be proposed over time. For instance, unlike this use, residential developments, in addition to causing disturbance during construction, present a series of ongoing traffic, visual, noise and other impacts. Horus is a property owner as well, and we deeply respect the vested interests, connection, and unique history each of you has to your property. We understand the passion that these issues often invoke. We would just ask that you consider these points as well as you assess your approach to this project. Again, if it would be useful, we welcome the opportunity to continue to address with you individually or collectively this important issue. General Concern: Traffic We understand that you chose to live out of the city to enjoy such features as the quietness, the peacefulness of driving down country roads, the simple cycle of planting, growing, and harvesting of crops, and the openness of the landscape . Many of you expressed concern that the traffic and congestion from this project would fundamentally shift the ability to enjoy this lifestyle. We really believe that this will not be the case - and will continue to do everything we can going forward to address this concern. Again, it is important to bear in mind that unlike so many other uses now crowding parts of Weld County, the increase in traffic will be temporary during the project's construction. Moreover, with our experts - Kimley Horn - who have and are working with Hudson and other cities - we have carefully designed a path that would minimize noise and disturbance and have limited impacts on the transportation patterns or the roads around the project site. The projects will utilize the existing roadway system, where appropriate, and contribute to upgrade, build, and maintain the other roads that will be utilized during the construction of the projects. Similar to mineral oil and gas production, Weld County rules ensure that adequate roads must exist or be made available prior to construction of the projects. The projects will submit a Road Use Agreement and Access Road Permit application to the County, ensuring compliance with the County design standards. The projects will upgrade any damaged and deteriorated roads and help maintain the same if they fall within the construction path. Safety is a very important aspect for Horus and we strive for a responsible and orderly development. This is also thoroughly reflected in Weld County Code provisions aimed at protecting and serving the health, welfare and safety of the citizens of the County. A Traffic Management Plan will be developed that will implement reduced speed limits on local roads and will require signallers to control the traffic in key areas in the vicinity of the projects, aimed at ensuring careful driving from construction workers. The living fence, in addition to providing visual screening, will also provide additional benefits in this respect, contributing towards an improvement in road safety and a reduction of hazardous driving conditions, by reducing snow drift onto roads, which in turn increases visibility, and reduces maintenance, plowing, and salting costs. Page 4 of 12 While there will be some short-term disruptions in term of noise and traffic, the benefits that the project will bring will be long-lasting. Some will be apparent in the short term like the increase in revenue from local business and hotels, restaurants, suppliers. The native vegetation that will be planted underneath the panels will attract pollinators, a fundamental piece of our ecosystem. The project water tank can be utilized by the Southeast Weld Fire Protection District and its Chief Tom Beach for fire emergencies in the area. Other benefits will be more evident in the long term, like the increase in taxes for Weld County that will help support a wide variety of services upon which all parties rely. General Concern: Dust We appreciate your questions about dust and how this will be mitigated. We have given this topic a lot of thought. We have developed a detailed Dust and Weed Mitigation Plan as part of the projects' land use permit applications, which integrates and adheres to Colorado Department of Health and Environment Land Development Permit requirements establishing acceptable dust levels, which will be monitored closely as the project proceeds.' We will be adapting this as the project progresses to ensure we are minimizing the temporary construction impact created by dust. Again, we might ask that this concern be put in perspective of all the other permanent potential uses that might be made of these lands - that would not only generate much more immediate dust issues but would increase disturbances of this nature for decades to come and change the fundamental agricultural nature of these lands. General Concern: Noise This in our view is one of the many advantages of solar, above nearly all other uses. During operations there will be no noticeable noise from the solar farm. The only components of the project facilities that will emit low levels of noise will be inverters and BESS equipment. However, these facilities will be located at least a quarter mile from residences and noise levels will be well below levels set by County noise ordinances set forth in Chapter 14 Article IX of the Weld County Code. During the life of the project the site will be controlled remotely, and utility personnel will visit on a quarterly basis to conduct routine inspections and maintenance. The transformer typically has a hum similar to an HVAC that can only be heard in close proximity. Buffers on the property are sufficient to make emitted sounds inaudible from the adjoining properties. Transformers will be located at least a quarter mile from residences and noise levels will be well below levels set by County noise ordinances. During construction there will be some noise due to pile driving and equipment backup beeping such as reverse warning sounds, but please note that this noise will again be temporary in nature and is not anticipated to exceed maximum levels at the property boundary for construction activities outlined in Weld County noise ordinances. All told, the solar farms will be a very quiet neighbour, harvesting solar energy passively throughout the project life. General Concern: Impacts from Project Materials Another benefit of solar, compared to nearly other use that might be made of this land, is the negligible use of materials that are in any way hazardous or harmful. We appreciate the concerns expressed about impacts of materials to be used during the construction phase but are very confident that that any impacts from fertilizer, weed control, or other material usage, will be significantly less than typical residential development and most agricultural uses. These issues are further addressed below in our discussion of environmental matters, but it may help to review the basic constituents found in the components of a solar farm. The panels are bi-facial mono - crystalline that have no known leaching issues. The primary materials of a solar panel which are glass, 4 Dust and Weed Mitigation Nan - Appendix D Page 5 of 12 aluminum, silicone, copper, and trace semiconducting metals are inert and don't constitute hazardous materials or waste. There could be trace amounts of lead from soldering material, which is similar to televisions and cell phones. There is no risk of exposure or leakage and any amount contained in the modules is below the EPA limits. Solar panels are recyclable and contain approximately 75 percent glass, 8 percent aluminium, and 5 percent silicon. Approximately 70 percent of the material is recoverable due to the processing required to separate the panel components. These materials, once recycled, are worth about $6 per panel to the solar farm at today's prices. Solar plants use minimal chemicals. There could be some paint to touch up rusted areas on the mounting structure, potentially some oil in the transformers, and we also intend to utilize limited solutions to control the dust and weeds on the site. Further details on these matters are contained in the various plans cited in this response, but all such materials would be used in accordance with risk assessments and method statements ensuring they are used correctly and with suitable safely procedures in place. Also note there is no cadmium telluride in the panels we have proposed. General Concern: Water There were a few comments directed at water usage issues, and we understand that water is a critical element of concern at all levels of the community. Water usage and quality is a great concern for Weld County and Horus and has been a focus of our application materials throughout. Horus is committed to protecting Weld County's waterways and supply. The properties involved in this project have no vested water rights, and irrigated agriculture is accomplished by leasing water from nearby tenants. The project has secured sufficient water resources to supply what will amount to modest water needs for the Project (0.007 -acre feet per acre per year). As compared to many other uses shown in the Application, solar requires minimal water for project operation. The Project's water use plan is intended to preserve the agricultural land base and allow for a return to full agricultural use once the solar project is decommissioned. For planning purposes, Project water needs can be divided into the following categories: 1. Construction/Dust Control Some water will be required to implement the Dust Control Plan and related aspects of the construction phrase. The plan is to utilise outside service companies to supply the water for this need as part of their spray mix system so to not require any contribution of local water from the area. There will also be stormwater controls and related mitigation measures during construction to manage existing surface water flow and maintain water quality, as required by governing regulations. Finally, some water may be needed for initial planting and maintenance of plants used for screening, although species are selected for their minimal ongoing watering requirements. 2. Fire Control - While fire is not a typical concern for PV and BESS systems, the Project's water tank may be utilized by the Southeast Weld Fire District and will provide a key resource for protection against fires in the region, especially in times of drought. This tank will need to be filled periodically. 3. Panel Washing and Maintenance - The only ongoing water supply needed for the Project is for washing and maintaining the solar panels and supporting facilities, in part to maximize energy return. The exact cleaning schedule is a function of precipitation, dust, and other particulate settling on the panels. To minimize cleaning, the Project intends to utilize a commercial contractor to treat neighbouring roads with GMCO CS products, a blend of liquid magnesium chloride and a complex sugar. The product is an environmentally friendly solution for gravel road stabilization and dust control. This will reduce water consumption related to cleaning during the operation period (and reduce dust in residential homes as well). Water needs will be more than adequately met by (1) the occasional purchase or trucking in of outside water where needed, particularly at the construction phrase, (2) the establishment of a large water Page 6 of 12 collection tank near the well on the Janus property to store water from the onsite well, and (3) over the longer term, by the existing onsite water well. The onsite well located is fully in place and secured. Based on initial calculations, the amount of water needed per acre foot of land for the Project is much less than current annual agricultural uses for the Project site. It is also less than the average amount of water per acre of land needed to raise most crops. General Concern: Water Drainage As many of you recognized, one important element of water management is the handling of drainage over the course of the solar project. Horus has commissioned Kim ley Horn to prepare a preliminary drainage report which evaluates pre and post development hydrologic characteristics of the project site and addresses the stormwater requirements of Weld County and the state of Colorado. 5 The study found that peak flow rates will actually be reduced from the existing rates, due to the proposed improvements on the project site, complemented with the findings from the Journal of Hydrologic Engineering focused on researching the hydrologic impacts of utility scale solar generation facilities. The study also concluded that drainage patterns offsite will remain the same as historic conditions. In addition, detention ponds have been designed on the project site to retain the required storage volumes. Generally, solar farms have little to no impact on runoff volumes or rates. Rainfall that falls directly on a solar panel runs to the pervious areas around and under the surrounding panels. General Concern: Conflicts with future land use plans We appreciate your questions related to compatibility of the solar farm with overall uses in the area. Compatibility is thoroughly assessed in the Weld County Code in Chapters 21, 22 and 23 as part of the permit application process, and we refer you to the voluminous project materials and attachments submitted by Horus addressing this subject. For ease of reference, each regulation and associated project compatibility features are outlined below for reference: Chapter 21: Areas and Activities of State Interest, Article III: Site Selection and Construction of Major Facilities of a Public Utility, Division 3: Permit Program for Site Selection and Construction of a Major Facility of a Public Utility • Regulation: All reasonable alternatives to the proposed action, including use of existing rights -of - way and joint use of rights -of -way wherever uses are compatible, have been adequately assessed and the proposed action is compatible with and represents the best interests of the people of the County and represents a fair and reasonable utilization of resources in the impact area. • Project Compliance with Regulations: All reasonable alternatives within the study area were thoroughly assessed to make the Project fully compatible with and representative of the best interests of the people of Weld County. While a larger land area was initially studied, the Project's final footprint was selected because it offered advantages to the community and overall environment while providing opportunities and circumstances favourable to Solar and BESS facilities, specifically 1) existing transmission infrastructure less than 0.2 miles from the property, 2) augmenting, while sustaining for future landowners, current unsustainable primary land use as indicated by the landowners. This offers benefits to land use for the surrounding area. Utilization of local resources within Weld County will be minimal as the Project will not require services such as water, sewage, or emergency services at a level typical of other land uses in the area. Code Chapter 22: Comprehensive Plan, Article II - Principles, Goals, and Objectives • Regulation: Transition between land use types and intensities with buffers. Uses that are incompatible with existing uses must be able to mitigate conflicts and support compatible economic development opportunities. • Project Compliance with Regulations: The project complies with or exceeds all County required buffers from roads, residences, Oil and Gas operations, and other special areas. Adjacent uses 5 Preliminary Drainage Analysis — Appendix J Page 7 of 12 will not be affected, and nearby land can continue to be utilized for agriculture or other compatible u ses. This will support the opportunity for future compatible economic development in the area. Project compatibility is further demonstrated by comparing other land uses in the area. In Weld County the Agricultural zoning district is designed primarily for agricultural uses, but it also accommodates various other special uses, including Oil and Gas Operations, Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), and subdivisions of land for residential development. While these use types are generally accepted in agricultural areas, their impacts to neighbour and e nvironment health are substantial, including for industrial facilities emissions that may result in respiratory issues and water quality contamination. Utility scale solar has fewer direct health impacts as they do not produce air or water pollution and contribute to cleaner energy production, which can have broader public health benefits by reducing reliance on fossil fuels. Chapter 23: Zoning, Article II - Procedures and Permits, Division 4 - Uses by Special Review • Regulation: Permitted uses will be compatible with the existing surrounding land uses and with the future development of the surrounding area as permitted by the existing zone and with future development. Buffering or screening of the proposed use from adjacent properties requirements. • Project Compliance with Regulations: Mitigation of construction impacts and visual impacts have been addressed as described throughout the application. Natural vegetative buffers have been incorporated into the project design on a case -by -case basis to mitigate visual impacts for n eighbours. This includes utilization of multiple layers of vegetation and specific species to ensure each landowner has a screen that works for their specific location and needs. Screening is discussed in more detail below. The proposed use is compatible with existing land uses and future development. The existing site land use is dryland agricultural row crops and rangeland, most similar to tillage/agricultural land classification. While a vital part of the land use base in the area, it does have its impacts. Disturbance to the land from tillage can disrupt the natural soil structure resulting in reduced soil cohesion and structural stability, which may result in increased soil erosion, compaction, and runoff. It also can deplete the soil's organic content, reducing its fertility and affecting its ability to retain moisture and nutrients. The ability to retain moisture in becoming increasingly important in Weld County as water is a precious resource. Disturbed soil is also susceptible to weeds, requiring additional inputs such as herbicides and pesticides, which can further impact soil health and the surrounding environment. Farming this land is becoming increasingly difficult as water becomes scarcer and the soil health declines. This project will allow the landowners to profit from their land without the disturbance that results from tilled agriculture. Temporarily halting ag use of this land for the duration of the project will allow the soil health to improve. Revegetation actions following construction include seeding the land with a county approved seed mix and will promote the growth of native grasses to preserve the quality of the soil and mitigate noxious weeds. By utilizing the county approved native grass seed mix below the panels, the existing tillage/agricultural land areas will be changed to a heavy meadow land classification that reduces peak flow rates and manages stormwater in line with the historic conditions of the site. This will promote water conservation at both the watershed and site levels, with the goal of replicating the native hydrologic characteristics of the sub - watersheds, creating natural ground coverage, and reducing dust. The change in land use from tilled agriculture land to utility scale solar will allow the landowners to increase the health of their land and reduce water use while simultaneously profiting from their land. This is beneficial to adjacent uses as it presents a lesser impact to neighbour and e nvironmental health and is also economically profitable for the County. Upon completion of the solar lease option, the project can be fully decommissioned, and the land returned to agricultural use or open meadow land. Utility scale solar is one of the only land development uses that not only preserves and improves ag land for future use, but is also a low water use, providing conservation benefits as well. Fifty years from now, these developments may be integral to preserving open lands and reducing urban sprawl. Page 8 of 12 General Concern: Screening The screening plan was developed during consultations with adjacent landowners and visual simulations. The goal is to provide screening tailored to your individual property owner requests, and at the same time ensure screening best accounts for water usage needed to sustain the living fence. Screening was developed in consultation with our expert biologist and landscaping team. The size of Rocky Mountain Juniper trees selected (10 -gallon containers for the juniper are about 5' in height and 1.5-2" caliper) was chosen to reduce the risk of mortality from transplant stress. The typical growth rate is one foot a year. A 3 -inch caliper juniper normally utilizes a ball and burlap container system and tends to have higher mortality rates due to the stress/damage to the root ball in transport and planting - which is why the 10 -gallon container tree was recommended. Since Rocky Mountain Juniper is a native species and naturally occurs in that area, we know it can handle the climate and limited water resources, but winter watering should be considered as a precaution (especially if it's a dry winter) to reduce potential for mortality. First season watering was recommended because that should be enough time for root stock to establish at appropriate depths to access ground water. There is a balance between survival and not creating a dependency on watering. Therefore, an adaptive approach would be best where watering is tapered off over 3 years. We have also received questions on how the Skunkbush Sumac will be planted along the Juniper. The two will be planted in a scattered fashion so it looks more natural. We appreciate the recommendation of the American Wild Plum as an alternative to the plants chosen, but American wild plum typically requires more water than the juniper or sumac, so they are not recommended to minimise the use of water, hence why they were not selected in the project design. General Concern: Environment and Wildlife We appreciate your comments on these critical topics, as Horus is committed to promote a responsible development in Weld County, promoting economic development, land stewardship, while at the same time preserving crops and the natural resources and wildlife that make this area so special. To this effect the team has developed several studies which include a Cultural Resource Survey, Wetland and Waterbody Survey, a study on protected species, a Phase 1 Environmental Assessment Report, and Critical Issue Analysis that were completed by archaeological, biological, and ecological experts. The aim and the results of these studies were used to best assess any environmental impact the projects may cause and mitigate the same in the projects design by avoiding waterways, planting native grass mix to enrich the soil and juniper trees lining the fence, and creating a movement corridor along Sand Creek to facilitate big game habitats. The applicant has committed to strict management practices that are detailed in the 1041 /USR application.' This is also embedded within the Weld County Code to ensure that the natural and economic environment and resources of the County are protected and enhanced. With this overarching perspective in mind, the following summarizes and responds to each of the comments received with respect to the environment, wildlife and seeding. Wildlife Corridor We appreciate your comments on the wildlife corridor. Please note that like with so many aspects of this project, we have utilized the expertise of outside local agencies or experts to address this issue. Here, we have designed the corridor in collaboration with experts on wildlife at Colorado Parks and Wildlife ("CPW"). The agency has been consulted since the inception of the projects; they have been involved in the permitting process and provided their referral letters on the projects. To address the loss of open space and the fragmentation of existing and accessible big game habitats caused by the projects, Horus has designed a wildlife corridor of 600ft, wider than the minimum set by CPW (250ft) and followed CPW recommendations for the fencing of the project in order to minimize any potential impact to wildlife. 6 Appendix E - Environmental Protection Measures and Agency Coordination Page 9 of 12 Wildlife Species As part of the projects siting, development and permitting, please note Horus has completed onsite biological reconnaissance studies with expert biologists which revealed there are no species of concern with federal and state statutory protection likely to occur in the project area, with the exception of burrowing owls. Construction will occur outside of nesting season if this species is identified during the planned pre -construction biological surveys. Horus has also consulted with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ("USFWS") and CPW on the same issue, which have also commented on the projects' application. USFWS has expressed no concern of the project resulting in potential impacts to species listed as proposed, threatened, or endangered. CPW has confirmed the project is sited outside High Priority Habitats ("HPHs"), areas defined as sensitive wildlife habitats. Thank you for making us aware of deer, antelope, foxes, elk, and coyotes in the vicinity, and we will remain mindful throughout the life of the project of the vital need to preserve and enhance every opportunity to support these and all wildlife species. Again, in consulting with the experts on these topics, please note that impacts to these species was not identified as a concern during agency reviews of the project with CPW and USFWS. Seeding We agree with you on the importance of pollinators for crops and the local ecosystem. As highlighted in the project application native plant seeding will be incorporated between and around the solar arrays to beautify and restore the appearance of the Project site, but most importantly to promote the return of native species and pollinators. This plan will also preserve and improve soil conditions. General Concern: Glare A Glare Study was performed by Colliers Engineering & Design on the array areas of the Project. A software called Forge Solar was used that determines the potential for glare given the solar farm specifics and looks at potential effects on the human eye at locations where glare is predicted to occur. The analysis was tailored to review the potential effects of the solar farm on nearby residences and on a privately owned landing strip near the project site. Worst -case scenario parameters were used for a conservative estimate. Findings show that with appropriate system settings, it is unlikely that glare from the proposed solar project will be problematic in any manner for the surrounding area and that the project would comply with the Federal Aviation Administration's 2021 policy regarding glint and glare effects to commercial airports. An in-depth explanation of the above conclusion and the details of the full parameters of this study are found in Appendix P of the Weld County Land Use Applications. General Concern: Heat Effects We understand that considering recent temperature increase trends, it is important to be mindful of whether solar farms might have undesired heat effects. Studies show that while the center of the PV field can reach up to 1.9 Celsius above the ambient temperature. This thermal energy completely dissipates to the environment at distances of approximately 16 to 60 feet. PV solar farms do not induce a day -after -day increase in ambient temperature, and therefore, adverse micro -climate changes from a potential PV plant are not a concern.' Also relevant here is the study entitled Analysis of the Potential for a Heat Island Effect in Large Solar Farms from Columbia University, which presents a comprehensive review of the so-called 'heat island' effect. This study contains field data and simulations showing that the dissipation of thermal energy is enhanced by cooling at night, by existing roads between the fields, and by vegetation buffers. 7 "Analysis of the Potential for a Heat Island Effect in Large Solar Farms", Vasilis Fthenakis (2013) Page 10 of 12 General Concern: Electromagnetic Interference In the ever -evolving landscape of technology, electromagnetic interference (EMI) is an important consideration. We have carefully considered whether EMI will occur as a result of these projects. Utility -scale solar fields are integral to our shift towards renewable energy, consisting of extensive arrays of solar panels designed to capture sunlight and convert it into electricity. The panels themselves are not significant sources of EMI; however, the associated equipment, such as inverters and transformers, can produce electromagnetic fields. Inverters are crucial components in solar fields. They convert the direct current (DC) generated by solar panels into alternating current (AC) used by the electrical grid. Inverters and transformers typically operate at power frequencies, around 50-60 Hz, and can produce EMI that might affect nearby electronic devices. Although the frequencies are much lower than those from cell phones, these devices must be carefully designed and shielded to prevent interference. Proper inverter enclosure grounding, filtering, and circuit layout has been incorporated into this project to further reduce EM radiation. Inverters are distributed throughout the project footprint and are located at least a quarter mile from residences, further reducing impacts. For a comparison, cell phones operate using radiofrequency (RF) signals, typically in the GHz range - 900 MHz, 1.8 GHz, and 2.4 GHz - essential for communication. This RF radiation, while essential for connectivity, has sparked ongoing health discussions which may have led to the concern by residents about potential EMI from the proposed solar projects. However, when comparing the health impacts of cell phones and solar field inverters, the differences are notable. The primary concern with cell phones is the higher frequency RF radiation emitted, which can lead to potential health risks if exposure is prolonged. Regulatory standards are in place to mitigate these risks, but ongoing research continues to evaluate the long-term effects of RF exposure on health. The EMI from inverters in solar fields operates at lower frequencies and is generally considered to pose less of a direct health risk compared to RF radiation. However, inverters must be designed to minimize EMI and prevent interference with nearby electronic equipment. The health risks from this type of EMI are typically regarded as minimal, though they still warrant careful management. Proper design and regulatory adherence are essential to mitigate any potential interference. The Janus and Prospect Solar projects will adhere to the strict regulations regarding EMI found in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 47, Part 15 to ensure that the health and safety of Weld County residents is protected. General Concern: Light Pollution Compared to urban areas, industrial facilities, or outdoor recreational lighting, solar farms have a much lower impact in terms of light pollution. The solar panels themselves do not emit light. Lighting at the projects will be limited to the substation and operations and maintenance building. These lights will be downward facing and will be activated by motion sensor. Lights on the substation are the responsibility of the substation operator and can be remotely turned on/off. On the other hand, urban areas and industrial activities often involve extensive, high -intensity lighting that can contribute to significant light pollution, General Concern: Cumulative Impacts With regards to the concern raised by a few commenters that the two projects may have greater impacts being adjacent, please note the team has addressed this concern by preparing the reports and submitting the applications to the County together. The projects will therefore be assessed as a whole rather than independently as the permitting proceeds, and cumulative impacts will be considered. Page 11 of 12 Conclusion The project team would like to thank local residents for taking time to reach out and submit your concerns. We encourage your continued review, input and perspectives. Please contact us by email at ro er.freeman@horuscapital.co.uk, Francesco.cardi@horuscapital.co.uk, and ebitler@logansimpson.com to discuss the project and any follow up or additional questions you may have. We look forward to working with you as we move through the planning and regulatory processes for the project. Thanks so much for your cooperation. Sincerely, Horus Team Page 12 of 12 From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Attachments: Francesco Cardi ,Jeff Erker Emily Bitter; Roger Freeman Response to Community Comments - Neighbor Letter Friday, September 13, 2024 11:39:27 AM Neighbour Letter September 13th 2024 - Final.pdf EXHIBIT usrzau -Oro0 Go 1 CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization. Block sender I Report Dear Mr. and Mrs. Erker, Please find attached our comments responding to recent neighbour letters. We wanted to add one note specific to your comments. • Setback 500 ft from existing plotted subdivision lotst Reference attechid Recorded Exemption No,1479-20-4 Rj-4104 dated August Z 2005, in Weld County. Note Lot C 8uildingEnvelope is recorded in the SW corner of this subdivision, and it appears the proposed solar development encroaches on the required 500 ft setback. Please note the solar development does not encroach the 500ft setback as the subdivision referenced is not an approved subdivision plat. Please note in Colorado a recorded exemption is the process for dividing land into separate lots on land which is not part of an approved subdivision. The process does not create an approved subdivision. Therefore, the 500 -foot setback requirement does not apply to the property subject to Recorded Exemption No. 1479- 30-4 RE -4104. Thanks so much for your cooperation. Kind Regards, Francesco Paolo Cardi Associate Horus Energy Mobile: +1 303 479 4535 francesco.cArdj@horuscapital.co.uk https://horusener9Y.co.uki Response To Community Comments On behalf of Horus Energy, we welcome the opportunity to respond to a series of comments that have been recently submitted to the County by neighbours and other local citizens about our proposed Janus and Prospect solar projects. First and foremost, we greatly appreciate your efforts to work with us throughout the course of this project. Horus has received and closely integrated your input, feedback, request for property -specific adaptations, and all the forms of interest and support expressed for this project. Through a variety of steps taken throughout the project planning, development, and permitting stages, we have been gratified to work closely with your incredible community. In that regard, while we recognize that some commenters have recently voiced strong concerns, we do believe the project enjoys significant landowner and local support. This support has been conveyed to the County in 10 letters of support and non -objection. This includes five neighbours adjacent to the projects, as well as the five landowner partners in the project. Horus directly has received many more informal or oral expressions of positive input from a diverse set of interested parties. This foundation of support is built upon a long series of outreach efforts. As many of you know, we begin reaching out to the community in the earliest development stages of the projects - both through individual contacts and a public meeting held on July 05, 2023. As we explained at that meeting, the initial outreach group was identified under basic rules in Weld County for contacting the local immediate neighbours most proximate to the development. This also included several local agencies and community service entities representing everything from fire response to community planning. These initial contacts have formed the basis for a series of continued communications with many of you about individual property issues or considerations. Some have commented that they wish that they have known of the project sooner and could have attended the prior meeting. Please know that while these initial communications focused on those living closest to the development, they were driven solely by practical and regulatory considerations and are part of a continuing, longstanding, and broad community outreach program that has and will be the cornerstone of our approach to this project throughout its course. In this regard, we have welcomed comments from citizens in any location in Weld County. As reflected in this group response, we understand your interest and have carefully considered all comments. We also note that in addition to providing this collective response, we have continued to reach out to individuals and landowners to try to accommodate individual questions or concerns or mitigate particular property circumstances. We have yet to hear back from some individuals - but understand that some folks may want to do so in a collective way. Others may feel like they want to respond more directly and specifically once a collective response is received. The bottom line is that our doors remain wide open to continue any communication - whether collective or otherwise. With these factors in mind, Horus carefully weighed whether a collective response would serve the community best. We believe that this approach is supported by the fact that the concerns expressed convey a very parallel set of questions or concerns. In fact, many of the comments appeared to be jointly generated and contained the same basic wording. We welcome this joint approach, and the efficiencies created thereby, but remain flexible to meet the community needs going forward. While Horus has attempted to frame and highlight key points from our application materials in this response, we did not choose to include voluminous documents and data equally accessible to all on the public websites. It appears that some of you were able to access that information, and we appreciate your taking the time to do so. We are certainly glad to provide additional references to materials on file, specific studies, or other supporting documentation. Please don't hesitate to reach out to us if we can provide or help access these materials or information. Page 1 of 12 Finally, while we believe we have addressed all individual points raised by the community in recent comments, please let us know immediately if we missed any concerns or have additional specific comments or input that you would like for us to address, either through follow-up communications or upcoming public hearings surrounding these projects. General Concern: Property Values We fully understand the utmost importance of property and land rights to all residents of Weld County and the interest of all commenters in this issue. While every property will have different features relevant to this discussion - and some commenters appear to live quite a distance from the solar farms themselves - we feel that the following discussion applies generally to all. That said, since all comments were from property owners outside the project boundaries itself, we concentrate on adjacent property value issues here. In turn, this discussion does not go into detail about the numerous and compelling benefits generated to the community at large through such attributes as economic, tax, renewable energy generation, and supporting project landowner rights to use and obtain value from their land. These are discussed in detail in our application materials and other sources. The potential impact of solar farms on adjacent properties has been considered in other situations in Colorado and across the nation. As a result, much research has been done to assess the impact of solar on land valuations. We recognize that many commenters cited various studies, and we have carefully considered same in formulating this response. As these studies reflect, appraisers generally determine potential negative impact caused by an external source on adjacent or nearby properties utilizing the following factors: • Hazardous material: As discussed further below, a solar farm involves no hazardous materials or waste byproduct as part of its operation • Odor: Solar farms produce no odor. • Noise: As discussed further below, whether discussing passive fixed solar panels, or single -axis trackers, there is no negative impact associated with noise from a solar farm. No sound is emitted from the facility at night. Solar farms are inaudible from the roadways. • Traffic: As discussed further below, there will be a temporary increase in traffic during construction, and we have provided an extensive report in the application materials describing the efforts made to mitigate traffic impacts to the neighbourhood. Once built, the solar farm will have no onsite employees or staff, and the traffic will be far less than many other typical County uses. The site requires only minimal maintenance. • Stigma: There is no stigma associated with solar farms and people generally respond favourably towards such a use. While an individual may express concerns about proximity to a solar farm, there is no specific stigma associated with a solar farm. Stigma generally refers to things such as adult establishments, prisons, rehabilitation facilities, and so forth. Solar panels have no associated stigma and are found everywhere these days, from schools, churches, oil and gas wells to airports and industrial facilities, and increasingly on farms and agricultural sites as well. They are on roofs in many residential communities. Solar panels on a roof are often cited as an enhancement to the property in marketing brochures. • Appearance: This factor is discussed in detail below, but in terms of property value issues, larger solar farms that use fixed or tracking panels are a passive land use that many feel aligns well with rural residential settings. They are similar in appearance to large greenhouses, which also function as passive solar energy collectors. 1 "Meadow Forge Solar Impact Study", Kirkland Appraisals (2022) Page 2 of 12 With these factors firmly in mind, we have looked closely at the property value issues raised in your comments. The study that we provided, entitled "Property Value Impact Study"2 was published by one of the leading consulting firms, Cohn Reznick, and has been widely cited and utilized in many settings. We do understand your comments that the study was focused on Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan. The Midwest was believed to be a good study area because while it largely incorporated rural settings like this project, housing density is higher, and therefore the impact of solar farms on properties - if any - should be more evident and pronounced. The study shows no measurable impact and consistent difference in property values for properties adjacent to solar farms when compared to similar properties locationally removed from same. Consistently we have found in data from university studies, broker commentary, and other appraisal studies the importance of implementing landscape buffers and proper setbacks to further minimize the prospect of such impacts on property value adjoining the solar farms. The team has kept this in close consideration throughout the development and permitting process, by designing natural screening and respecting setbacks as defined by the Weld County Code. To further explore this and related economic factors, a socioeconomic impact and community benefit report has been commissioned and submitted as part of the permitting process.' The study shows that the projects will result into an enhancement of the socioeconomic environment within Weld County due to the following factors: job creation, economic output, cost-effective locally generated power, increased income to landowners, and positive local health impacts; while having no measurable impact on the value of adjacent properties. Even if there were impacts to property, solar presents numerous balancing economic benefits that are important to consider. Again, these are detailed in our application materials and not the focus of this response, and we highlight just a few here: (1) Utility scale solar presents an opportunity to reserve land for future agricultural use while continuing to support agricultural interests and landowner rights. (2) This Project would provide an increase in property tax payments to Weld County, Fire District, School District and other community services. (3) Local employment opportunities would increase for local construction and operation companies and workers, and increased use of services (accommodations, restaurants) would occur throughout the construction of the Project without taxing social services such as schools, roads, etc., within the county. (4) The renewable energy and storage attributes of the project are firmly aligned with federal, state, local, utility, and other mandates to develop further renewable energy sources and take advantage of the many economic benefits of these systems. General Concern: Appearance and Visual We recognize that the aesthetics of any neighbouring use is a very personal matter to a property owner, and appreciate your sharing concerns on this topic in your comments. The team has endeavoured to its fullest extent to minimize and mitigate the impacts of this facility in the surrounding area with many of the items addressed here (e.g. screening using living fences, buffers, visual simulations, compatibility). For instance, Janus and Prospect will be built at least 500 feet away from existing homes, complying with Weld County regulations. The facility is designed to be low -profile, with heights ranging from 4 to 10 feet, comparable to the height of a cornfield. We also note that efforts to minimize visual and other impacts will continue throughout the project and will always be open to continuing input from the community. 2 "Property Value Impact Study: Adjacent Property Values Solar Impact Study: A Study of Eight Existing Solar Facilities", CohnReznick (2021) https://www.nexteraenergyresources.com/content/dam/neer/us/en/pdf/CohnReznick%20Solar%20lmpact%20Study 7.26.21.pdf 3 Appendix F -Socioeconomic Impact and Community Benefit Report Page 3 of 12 Ultimately, for all the reasons explained here and, in supporting County applications, both Horus and many involved parties and landowners feel that this is an excellent location for this project, and its features support this view. Horus does encourage the development on brown field sites where it makes sense, but there are simply not enough of them next to good transmission systems to meet the growing demand for energy in the country. This site was selected based in part on the transmission line and the capacity of the existing 115 and 230 -kV lines and supporting transmission, which has been part of the landscape in the area for many years. Also, there was interest from local landowners with regards to both financial reasons and to preserve their farmland long-term for future uses. The team and its projects have at their core the protection of the natural features that characterize the area, its peace and quietness, the energy and passion of its neighbours that make this area of the State so unique. We recognize that the project will present some change for many commenters but believe that this change should be viewed in the context of the rapid changes overall in Weld County and beyond. We also believe it is important to compare this use to others that might be proposed over time. For instance, unlike this use, residential developments, in addition to causing disturbance during construction, present a series of ongoing traffic, visual, noise and other impacts. Horus is a property owner as well, and we deeply respect the vested interests, connection, and unique history each of you has to your property. We understand the passion that these issues often invoke. We would just ask that you consider these points as well as you assess your approach to this project. Again, if it would be useful, we welcome the opportunity to continue to address with you individually or collectively this important issue. General Concern: Traffic We understand that you chose to live out of the city to enjoy such features as the quietness, the peacefulness of driving down country roads, the simple cycle of planting, growing, and harvesting of crops, and the openness of the landscape . Many of you expressed concern that the traffic and congestion from this project would fundamentally shift the ability to enjoy this lifestyle. We really believe that this will not be the case - and will continue to do everything we can going forward to address this concern. Again, it is important to bear in mind that unlike so many other uses now crowding parts of Weld County, the increase in traffic will be temporary during the project's construction. Moreover, with our experts - Kimley Horn - who have and are working with Hudson and other cities - we have carefully designed a path that would minimize noise and disturbance and have limited impacts on the transportation patterns or the roads around the project site. The projects will utilize the existing roadway system, where appropriate, and contribute to upgrade, build, and maintain the other roads that will be utilized during the construction of the projects. Similar to mineral oil and gas production, Weld County rules ensure that adequate roads must exist or be made available prior to construction of the projects. The projects will submit a Road Use Agreement and Access Road Permit application to the County, ensuring compliance with the County design standards. The projects will upgrade any damaged and deteriorated roads and help maintain the same if they fall within the construction path. Safety is a very important aspect for Horus and we strive for a responsible and orderly development. This is also thoroughly reflected in Weld County Code provisions aimed at protecting and serving the health, welfare and safety of the citizens of the County. A Traffic Management Plan will be developed that will implement reduced speed limits on local roads and will require signallers to control the traffic in key areas in the vicinity of the projects, aimed at ensuring careful driving from construction workers. The living fence, in addition to providing visual screening, will also provide additional benefits in this respect, contributing towards an improvement in road safety and a reduction of hazardous driving conditions, by reducing snow drift onto roads, which in turn increases visibility, and reduces maintenance, plowing, and salting costs. Page 4 of 12 While there will be some short-term disruptions in term of noise and traffic, the benefits that the project will bring will be long-lasting. Some will be apparent in the short term like the increase in revenue from local business and hotels, restaurants, suppliers. The native vegetation that will be planted underneath the panels will attract pollinators, a fundamental piece of our ecosystem. The project water tank can be utilized by the Southeast Weld Fire Protection District and its Chief Tom Beach for fire emergencies in the area. Other benefits will be more evident in the long term, like the increase in taxes for Weld County that will help support a wide variety of services upon which all parties rely. General Concern: Dust We appreciate your questions about dust and how this will be mitigated. We have given this topic a lot of thought. We have developed a detailed Dust and Weed Mitigation Plan as part of the projects' land use permit applications, which integrates and adheres to Colorado Department of Health and Environment Land Development Permit requirements establishing acceptable dust levels, which will be monitored closely as the project proceeds.' We will be adapting this as the project progresses to ensure we are minimizing the temporary construction impact created by dust. Again, we might ask that this concern be put in perspective of all the other permanent potential uses that might be made of these lands - that would not only generate much more immediate dust issues but would increase disturbances of this nature for decades to come and change the fundamental agricultural nature of these lands. General Concern: Noise This in our view is one of the many advantages of solar, above nearly all other uses. During operations there will be no noticeable noise from the solar farm. The only components of the project facilities that will emit low levels of noise will be inverters and BESS equipment. However, these facilities will be located at least a quarter mile from residences and noise levels will be well below levels set by County noise ordinances set forth in Chapter 14 Article IX of the Weld County Code. During the life of the project the site will be controlled remotely, and utility personnel will visit on a quarterly basis to conduct routine inspections and maintenance. The transformer typically has a hum similar to an HVAC that can only be heard in close proximity. Buffers on the property are sufficient to make emitted sounds inaudible from the adjoining properties. Transformers will be located at least a quarter mile from residences and noise levels will be well below levels set by County noise ordinances. During construction there will be some noise due to pile driving and equipment backup beeping such as reverse warning sounds, but please note that this noise will again be temporary in nature and is not anticipated to exceed maximum levels at the property boundary for construction activities outlined in Weld County noise ordinances. All told, the solar farms will be a very quiet neighbour, harvesting solar energy passively throughout the project life. General Concern: Impacts from Project Materials Another benefit of solar, compared to nearly other use that might be made of this land, is the negligible use of materials that are in any way hazardous or harmful. We appreciate the concerns expressed about impacts of materials to be used during the construction phase but are very confident that that any impacts from fertilizer, weed control, or other material usage, will be significantly less than typical residential development and most agricultural uses. These issues are further addressed below in our discussion of environmental matters, but it may help to review the basic constituents found in the components of a solar farm. The panels are bi-facial mono - crystalline that have no known leaching issues. The primary materials of a solar panel which are glass, 4 Dust and Weed Mitigation Nan - Appendix D Page 5 of 12 aluminum, silicone, copper, and trace semiconducting metals are inert and don't constitute hazardous materials or waste. There could be trace amounts of lead from soldering material, which is similar to televisions and cell phones. There is no risk of exposure or leakage and any amount contained in the modules is below the EPA limits. Solar panels are recyclable and contain approximately 75 percent glass, 8 percent aluminium, and 5 percent silicon. Approximately 70 percent of the material is recoverable due to the processing required to separate the panel components. These materials, once recycled, are worth about $6 per panel to the solar farm at today's prices. Solar plants use minimal chemicals. There could be some paint to touch up rusted areas on the mounting structure, potentially some oil in the transformers, and we also intend to utilize limited solutions to control the dust and weeds on the site. Further details on these matters are contained in the various plans cited in this response, but all such materials would be used in accordance with risk assessments and method statements ensuring they are used correctly and with suitable safely procedures in place. Also note there is no cadmium telluride in the panels we have proposed. General Concern: Water There were a few comments directed at water usage issues, and we understand that water is a critical element of concern at all levels of the community. Water usage and quality is a great concern for Weld County and Horus and has been a focus of our application materials throughout. Horus is committed to protecting Weld County's waterways and supply. The properties involved in this project have no vested water rights, and irrigated agriculture is accomplished by leasing water from nearby tenants. The project has secured sufficient water resources to supply what will amount to modest water needs for the Project (0.007 -acre feet per acre per year). As compared to many other uses shown in the Application, solar requires minimal water for project operation. The Project's water use plan is intended to preserve the agricultural land base and allow for a return to full agricultural use once the solar project is decommissioned. For planning purposes, Project water needs can be divided into the following categories: 1. Construction/Dust Control Some water will be required to implement the Dust Control Plan and related aspects of the construction phrase. The plan is to utilise outside service companies to supply the water for this need as part of their spray mix system so to not require any contribution of local water from the area. There will also be stormwater controls and related mitigation measures during construction to manage existing surface water flow and maintain water quality, as required by governing regulations. Finally, some water may be needed for initial planting and maintenance of plants used for screening, although species are selected for their minimal ongoing watering requirements. 2. Fire Control - While fire is not a typical concern for PV and BESS systems, the Project's water tank may be utilized by the Southeast Weld Fire District and will provide a key resource for protection against fires in the region, especially in times of drought. This tank will need to be filled periodically. 3. Panel Washing and Maintenance - The only ongoing water supply needed for the Project is for washing and maintaining the solar panels and supporting facilities, in part to maximize energy return. The exact cleaning schedule is a function of precipitation, dust, and other particulate settling on the panels. To minimize cleaning, the Project intends to utilize a commercial contractor to treat neighbouring roads with GMCO CS products, a blend of liquid magnesium chloride and a complex sugar. The product is an environmentally friendly solution for gravel road stabilization and dust control. This will reduce water consumption related to cleaning during the operation period (and reduce dust in residential homes as well). Water needs will be more than adequately met by (1) the occasional purchase or trucking in of outside water where needed, particularly at the construction phrase, (2) the establishment of a large water Page 6 of 12 collection tank near the well on the Janus property to store water from the onsite well, and (3) over the longer term, by the existing onsite water well. The onsite well located is fully in place and secured. Based on initial calculations, the amount of water needed per acre foot of land for the Project is much less than current annual agricultural uses for the Project site. It is also less than the average amount of water per acre of land needed to raise most crops. General Concern: Water Drainage As many of you recognized, one important element of water management is the handling of drainage over the course of the solar project. Horus has commissioned Kim ley Horn to prepare a preliminary drainage report which evaluates pre and post development hydrologic characteristics of the project site and addresses the stormwater requirements of Weld County and the state of Colorado. 5 The study found that peak flow rates will actually be reduced from the existing rates, due to the proposed improvements on the project site, complemented with the findings from the Journal of Hydrologic Engineering focused on researching the hydrologic impacts of utility scale solar generation facilities. The study also concluded that drainage patterns offsite will remain the same as historic conditions. In addition, detention ponds have been designed on the project site to retain the required storage volumes. Generally, solar farms have little to no impact on runoff volumes or rates. Rainfall that falls directly on a solar panel runs to the pervious areas around and under the surrounding panels. General Concern: Conflicts with future land use plans We appreciate your questions related to compatibility of the solar farm with overall uses in the area. Compatibility is thoroughly assessed in the Weld County Code in Chapters 21, 22 and 23 as part of the permit application process, and we refer you to the voluminous project materials and attachments submitted by Horus addressing this subject. For ease of reference, each regulation and associated project compatibility features are outlined below for reference: Chapter 21: Areas and Activities of State Interest, Article III: Site Selection and Construction of Major Facilities of a Public Utility, Division 3: Permit Program for Site Selection and Construction of a Major Facility of a Public Utility • Regulation: All reasonable alternatives to the proposed action, including use of existing rights -of - way and joint use of rights -of -way wherever uses are compatible, have been adequately assessed and the proposed action is compatible with and represents the best interests of the people of the County and represents a fair and reasonable utilization of resources in the impact area. • Project Compliance with Regulations: All reasonable alternatives within the study area were thoroughly assessed to make the Project fully compatible with and representative of the best interests of the people of Weld County. While a larger land area was initially studied, the Project's final footprint was selected because it offered advantages to the community and overall environment while providing opportunities and circumstances favourable to Solar and BESS facilities, specifically 1) existing transmission infrastructure less than 0.2 miles from the property, 2) augmenting, while sustaining for future landowners, current unsustainable primary land use as indicated by the landowners. This offers benefits to land use for the surrounding area. Utilization of local resources within Weld County will be minimal as the Project will not require services such as water, sewage, or emergency services at a level typical of other land uses in the area. Code Chapter 22: Comprehensive Plan, Article II - Principles, Goals, and Objectives • Regulation: Transition between land use types and intensities with buffers. Uses that are incompatible with existing uses must be able to mitigate conflicts and support compatible economic development opportunities. • Project Compliance with Regulations: The project complies with or exceeds all County required buffers from roads, residences, Oil and Gas operations, and other special areas. Adjacent uses 5 Preliminary Drainage Analysis — Appendix J Page 7 of 12 will not be affected, and nearby land can continue to be utilized for agriculture or other compatible u ses. This will support the opportunity for future compatible economic development in the area. Project compatibility is further demonstrated by comparing other land uses in the area. In Weld County the Agricultural zoning district is designed primarily for agricultural uses, but it also accommodates various other special uses, including Oil and Gas Operations, Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), and subdivisions of land for residential development. While these use types are generally accepted in agricultural areas, their impacts to neighbour and e nvironment health are substantial, including for industrial facilities emissions that may result in respiratory issues and water quality contamination. Utility scale solar has fewer direct health impacts as they do not produce air or water pollution and contribute to cleaner energy production, which can have broader public health benefits by reducing reliance on fossil fuels. Chapter 23: Zoning, Article II - Procedures and Permits, Division 4 - Uses by Special Review • Regulation: Permitted uses will be compatible with the existing surrounding land uses and with the future development of the surrounding area as permitted by the existing zone and with future development. Buffering or screening of the proposed use from adjacent properties requirements. • Project Compliance with Regulations: Mitigation of construction impacts and visual impacts have been addressed as described throughout the application. Natural vegetative buffers have been incorporated into the project design on a case -by -case basis to mitigate visual impacts for n eighbours. This includes utilization of multiple layers of vegetation and specific species to ensure each landowner has a screen that works for their specific location and needs. Screening is discussed in more detail below. The proposed use is compatible with existing land uses and future development. The existing site land use is dryland agricultural row crops and rangeland, most similar to tillage/agricultural land classification. While a vital part of the land use base in the area, it does have its impacts. Disturbance to the land from tillage can disrupt the natural soil structure resulting in reduced soil cohesion and structural stability, which may result in increased soil erosion, compaction, and runoff. It also can deplete the soil's organic content, reducing its fertility and affecting its ability to retain moisture and nutrients. The ability to retain moisture in becoming increasingly important in Weld County as water is a precious resource. Disturbed soil is also susceptible to weeds, requiring additional inputs such as herbicides and pesticides, which can further impact soil health and the surrounding environment. Farming this land is becoming increasingly difficult as water becomes scarcer and the soil health declines. This project will allow the landowners to profit from their land without the disturbance that results from tilled agriculture. Temporarily halting ag use of this land for the duration of the project will allow the soil health to improve. Revegetation actions following construction include seeding the land with a county approved seed mix and will promote the growth of native grasses to preserve the quality of the soil and mitigate noxious weeds. By utilizing the county approved native grass seed mix below the panels, the existing tillage/agricultural land areas will be changed to a heavy meadow land classification that reduces peak flow rates and manages stormwater in line with the historic conditions of the site. This will promote water conservation at both the watershed and site levels, with the goal of replicating the native hydrologic characteristics of the sub - watersheds, creating natural ground coverage, and reducing dust. The change in land use from tilled agriculture land to utility scale solar will allow the landowners to increase the health of their land and reduce water use while simultaneously profiting from their land. This is beneficial to adjacent uses as it presents a lesser impact to neighbour and e nvironmental health and is also economically profitable for the County. Upon completion of the solar lease option, the project can be fully decommissioned, and the land returned to agricultural use or open meadow land. Utility scale solar is one of the only land development uses that not only preserves and improves ag land for future use, but is also a low water use, providing conservation benefits as well. Fifty years from now, these developments may be integral to preserving open lands and reducing urban sprawl. Page 8 of 12 General Concern: Screening The screening plan was developed during consultations with adjacent landowners and visual simulations. The goal is to provide screening tailored to your individual property owner requests, and at the same time ensure screening best accounts for water usage needed to sustain the living fence. Screening was developed in consultation with our expert biologist and landscaping team. The size of Rocky Mountain Juniper trees selected (10 -gallon containers for the juniper are about 5' in height and 1.5-2" caliper) was chosen to reduce the risk of mortality from transplant stress. The typical growth rate is one foot a year. A 3 -inch caliper juniper normally utilizes a ball and burlap container system and tends to have higher mortality rates due to the stress/damage to the root ball in transport and planting - which is why the 10 -gallon container tree was recommended. Since Rocky Mountain Juniper is a native species and naturally occurs in that area, we know it can handle the climate and limited water resources, but winter watering should be considered as a precaution (especially if it's a dry winter) to reduce potential for mortality. First season watering was recommended because that should be enough time for root stock to establish at appropriate depths to access ground water. There is a balance between survival and not creating a dependency on watering. Therefore, an adaptive approach would be best where watering is tapered off over 3 years. We have also received questions on how the Skunkbush Sumac will be planted along the Juniper. The two will be planted in a scattered fashion so it looks more natural. We appreciate the recommendation of the American Wild Plum as an alternative to the plants chosen, but American wild plum typically requires more water than the juniper or sumac, so they are not recommended to minimise the use of water, hence why they were not selected in the project design. General Concern: Environment and Wildlife We appreciate your comments on these critical topics, as Horus is committed to promote a responsible development in Weld County, promoting economic development, land stewardship, while at the same time preserving crops and the natural resources and wildlife that make this area so special. To this effect the team has developed several studies which include a Cultural Resource Survey, Wetland and Waterbody Survey, a study on protected species, a Phase 1 Environmental Assessment Report, and Critical Issue Analysis that were completed by archaeological, biological, and ecological experts. The aim and the results of these studies were used to best assess any environmental impact the projects may cause and mitigate the same in the projects design by avoiding waterways, planting native grass mix to enrich the soil and juniper trees lining the fence, and creating a movement corridor along Sand Creek to facilitate big game habitats. The applicant has committed to strict management practices that are detailed in the 1041 /USR application.' This is also embedded within the Weld County Code to ensure that the natural and economic environment and resources of the County are protected and enhanced. With this overarching perspective in mind, the following summarizes and responds to each of the comments received with respect to the environment, wildlife and seeding. Wildlife Corridor We appreciate your comments on the wildlife corridor. Please note that like with so many aspects of this project, we have utilized the expertise of outside local agencies or experts to address this issue. Here, we have designed the corridor in collaboration with experts on wildlife at Colorado Parks and Wildlife ("CPW"). The agency has been consulted since the inception of the projects; they have been involved in the permitting process and provided their referral letters on the projects. To address the loss of open space and the fragmentation of existing and accessible big game habitats caused by the projects, Horus has designed a wildlife corridor of 600ft, wider than the minimum set by CPW (250ft) and followed CPW recommendations for the fencing of the project in order to minimize any potential impact to wildlife. 6 Appendix E - Environmental Protection Measures and Agency Coordination Page 9 of 12 Wildlife Species As part of the projects siting, development and permitting, please note Horus has completed onsite biological reconnaissance studies with expert biologists which revealed there are no species of concern with federal and state statutory protection likely to occur in the project area, with the exception of burrowing owls. Construction will occur outside of nesting season if this species is identified during the planned pre -construction biological surveys. Horus has also consulted with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ("USFWS") and CPW on the same issue, which have also commented on the projects' application. USFWS has expressed no concern of the project resulting in potential impacts to species listed as proposed, threatened, or endangered. CPW has confirmed the project is sited outside High Priority Habitats ("HPHs"), areas defined as sensitive wildlife habitats. Thank you for making us aware of deer, antelope, foxes, elk, and coyotes in the vicinity, and we will remain mindful throughout the life of the project of the vital need to preserve and enhance every opportunity to support these and all wildlife species. Again, in consulting with the experts on these topics, please note that impacts to these species was not identified as a concern during agency reviews of the project with CPW and USFWS. Seeding We agree with you on the importance of pollinators for crops and the local ecosystem. As highlighted in the project application native plant seeding will be incorporated between and around the solar arrays to beautify and restore the appearance of the Project site, but most importantly to promote the return of native species and pollinators. This plan will also preserve and improve soil conditions. General Concern: Glare A Glare Study was performed by Colliers Engineering & Design on the array areas of the Project. A software called Forge Solar was used that determines the potential for glare given the solar farm specifics and looks at potential effects on the human eye at locations where glare is predicted to occur. The analysis was tailored to review the potential effects of the solar farm on nearby residences and on a privately owned landing strip near the project site. Worst -case scenario parameters were used for a conservative estimate. Findings show that with appropriate system settings, it is unlikely that glare from the proposed solar project will be problematic in any manner for the surrounding area and that the project would comply with the Federal Aviation Administration's 2021 policy regarding glint and glare effects to commercial airports. An in-depth explanation of the above conclusion and the details of the full parameters of this study are found in Appendix P of the Weld County Land Use Applications. General Concern: Heat Effects We understand that considering recent temperature increase trends, it is important to be mindful of whether solar farms might have undesired heat effects. Studies show that while the center of the PV field can reach up to 1.9 Celsius above the ambient temperature. This thermal energy completely dissipates to the environment at distances of approximately 16 to 60 feet. PV solar farms do not induce a day -after -day increase in ambient temperature, and therefore, adverse micro -climate changes from a potential PV plant are not a concern.' Also relevant here is the study entitled Analysis of the Potential for a Heat Island Effect in Large Solar Farms from Columbia University, which presents a comprehensive review of the so-called 'heat island' effect. This study contains field data and simulations showing that the dissipation of thermal energy is enhanced by cooling at night, by existing roads between the fields, and by vegetation buffers. 7 "Analysis of the Potential for a Heat Island Effect in Large Solar Farms", Vasilis Fthenakis (2013) Page 10 of 12 General Concern: Electromagnetic Interference In the ever -evolving landscape of technology, electromagnetic interference (EMI) is an important consideration. We have carefully considered whether EMI will occur as a result of these projects. Utility -scale solar fields are integral to our shift towards renewable energy, consisting of extensive arrays of solar panels designed to capture sunlight and convert it into electricity. The panels themselves are not significant sources of EMI; however, the associated equipment, such as inverters and transformers, can produce electromagnetic fields. Inverters are crucial components in solar fields. They convert the direct current (DC) generated by solar panels into alternating current (AC) used by the electrical grid. Inverters and transformers typically operate at power frequencies, around 50-60 Hz, and can produce EMI that might affect nearby electronic devices. Although the frequencies are much lower than those from cell phones, these devices must be carefully designed and shielded to prevent interference. Proper inverter enclosure grounding, filtering, and circuit layout has been incorporated into this project to further reduce EM radiation. Inverters are distributed throughout the project footprint and are located at least a quarter mile from residences, further reducing impacts. For a comparison, cell phones operate using radiofrequency (RF) signals, typically in the GHz range - 900 MHz, 1.8 GHz, and 2.4 GHz - essential for communication. This RF radiation, while essential for connectivity, has sparked ongoing health discussions which may have led to the concern by residents about potential EMI from the proposed solar projects. However, when comparing the health impacts of cell phones and solar field inverters, the differences are notable. The primary concern with cell phones is the higher frequency RF radiation emitted, which can lead to potential health risks if exposure is prolonged. Regulatory standards are in place to mitigate these risks, but ongoing research continues to evaluate the long-term effects of RF exposure on health. The EMI from inverters in solar fields operates at lower frequencies and is generally considered to pose less of a direct health risk compared to RF radiation. However, inverters must be designed to minimize EMI and prevent interference with nearby electronic equipment. The health risks from this type of EMI are typically regarded as minimal, though they still warrant careful management. Proper design and regulatory adherence are essential to mitigate any potential interference. The Janus and Prospect Solar projects will adhere to the strict regulations regarding EMI found in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 47, Part 15 to ensure that the health and safety of Weld County residents is protected. General Concern: Light Pollution Compared to urban areas, industrial facilities, or outdoor recreational lighting, solar farms have a much lower impact in terms of light pollution. The solar panels themselves do not emit light. Lighting at the projects will be limited to the substation and operations and maintenance building. These lights will be downward facing and will be activated by motion sensor. Lights on the substation are the responsibility of the substation operator and can be remotely turned on/off. On the other hand, urban areas and industrial activities often involve extensive, high -intensity lighting that can contribute to significant light pollution, General Concern: Cumulative Impacts With regards to the concern raised by a few commenters that the two projects may have greater impacts being adjacent, please note the team has addressed this concern by preparing the reports and submitting the applications to the County together. The projects will therefore be assessed as a whole rather than independently as the permitting proceeds, and cumulative impacts will be considered. Page 11 of 12 Conclusion The project team would like to thank local residents for taking time to reach out and submit your concerns. We encourage your continued review, input and perspectives. Please contact us by email at ro er.freeman@horuscapital.co.uk, Francesco.cardi@horuscapital.co.uk, and ebitler@logansimpson.com to discuss the project and any follow up or additional questions you may have. We look forward to working with you as we move through the planning and regulatory processes for the project. Thanks so much for your cooperation. Sincerely, Horus Team Page 12 of 12 To Weld County Planning Commission and all concerned parties, EXHIBIT iA9UU%G-03 dl I am writing in support of the project that will be coming before the Planning Commission on October 1St by Horus Energy. I am a participating land owner and have a vested interest in the project coming to fruition. The first argument I want to make for the project is the development of a solar energy plant is a chance to provide locally produced energy to our area in a safe and reliable fashion that should prove to be at a lower cost than current production methods. This helps everyone keep utility bills reasonable, and can keep more income from energy production in our community. Secondly, energy production constitutes the "best use" of our property. As landowners, we have a right to pursue the best use of our land as long as that use follows regulations and does not cause an undue burden on our neighbors and down -stream parties. As a registered voter I support land owner rights including the right to make decisions on its use. Of course a project like this must be done responsibly with respect to neighbors and natural resources. The last 2 years of working with Horus has shown me they are dedicated to getting things done right the first time. They have worked diligently to look at every possible way to have the least negative impacts and have engaged all interested parties to get their input. I am convinced that any concerns will be heard and addressed. I will also continue to use my influence as a land owner to prevent damage to my property including its water resources and water run-off during construction and operation of the project. Once all of your concerns and questions have been met, I hope you join me in support of this project. I am available anytime for a conversation if that would be helpful. Sincerely, Kerry Madole RECEIVED SEP 2 5 2024 Weld County Planning Department From: Diana Aungst Sent: Friday, September 20, 2024 5:38 AM To: Jeff Erker Cc Chris Gathman Subject Re: Planning Cases USA -0012 and US 44013 Hi Jeff: The restrictions are for solar facilities. You as the property owner have no restrictions and may build closer than 500 feet. Thanks, Diana Aungst AICP, CFM Principal Planner Weld County Department of Planning Services 1402 N. 17th Avenue. Greeleve Co!crdgs SQ632 D. 970-400-352410: 970-4004100 www.weld.gow I daU gs 4 Ids, Confidentialiiy Notice: Thls electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are Intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from dbclosun. M you have received this communication in error, please immedishily notify sender by tetum e -mall and destroy the communes. My disclosure, copying, distribution or the taldrrg et any action concealing the contents of this communication or any attadvnents by anyone otter than the named redpient is *idly prohibited. From: Jeff Erker lefferkergigmaiI com> Sent: Friday, September 20, 2024 5:35:26 AM To: Diana Aungst cdaun t weid.go+ Cc: Chris Gathman ccgathma n@weld.gov> Subject: Re: Planning Cases USRI4-0012 and USR24-0013 Caution: This email originated from outside of weld County Government Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello, Understood for now. However when we go to build on Lot C in the future, will we be allowed to since the solar farm will be closer than 500 feet? On Fri, Sep 20, 2024, 5:20 AM Diana Aungst <kun t weld.eo wrote: Good morning: The response from Horus Is correct. The Lots in the area are not considered a platted subdivision. The solar energy facility would be required to be 500 ft from the house; If It meets the 500 ft distance from the house then technically no screening would be required. 1 Thanks, Diana Aungst AICP, CFM Principal Planner Weld County Department of Planning Services 1402 N. 17th Avenue. Greeley, Colorado 80632 D: 970-400--35241 O: 970-400-6100 www.weld.gov I daungste.weld.gov Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited. From: Jeff Erker <iefferker@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2024 7:46:00 AM To: Diana Aungst <daungst@weld.gov> Cc: Chris Gathman <cgathman@weld.gov> Subject: Re: Planning Cases USR24-0012 and USR24-0013 Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello Diana and Chris, Thank you for reviewing our previous comments we sent in regarding these Planning Cases USR24-0012 and USR24- 0013. We did receive the response below in red from the developer as well as the attached letter. I wanted to get the County's understanding of the 500ft setback requirement based on what the developer states below. Could you please let me know where you stand on this setback? We wanted to add one note specific to your comments. Setback 500 ft from existing plotted subdivision lots. Reference attached Record 4104 dated August2, 2005, in Weld County. Note Lot C Building Envelope is recorded in the SW corner of this subdivision, and it appears the proposed solar development encroaches on the required 500 ft setback. _Please note the solar development does not encroach the SOOft setback as the subdivision referenced is not an approved subdivision plat. Please note in Colorado a recorded exemption is the process for dividing land into separate lots on land which is not part of an approved subdivision. The process does not create an approved subdivision. Therefore, the 500 -foot setback requirement does not apply to the property subject to Recorded Exemption No. 1479- 30-4 RE -4104. Thanks so much for your cooperation. Kind Regards, Francesco Paolo Cardi 2 Associate Horus Energy Mobile: +1 303 479 4535 Please note the recorded exemption has 3 designated building lots, and one of those lots has been developed with our house, the other two lots are being set up for building other homes. Thanks again for your time, Jeff Erker 303-810-2456 On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 12:24 PM Diana Aungst <daungst@weld.gov>wrote: Mr. Jeff Erker: Thank you for your email and letter ft will be attached to the file. Regards, Future out of office dates: June 28 thin) July 5. Diana A ungst AICP, CFM Planner Ill Weld County Department of Planning Services 1402 N. 17th Avenue, PO Box 758, Greeley, Colorado 80632 D: 970-400-3524 O: 970-400-6100 Fax: 970-304-6498 daungst©weld.gov www. weld. qo v 3 Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited. From: Jeff Erker <iefferker@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 8:45 PM To: Chris Gathman <cgathman@weld.gov>; Diana Aungst <daungst@weld.gov> Cc: Jeff Erker <jefferker@gmail.com> Subject: Planning Cases USR24-0012 and USR24-OO13 Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Chris & Diana, We are mailing the attached letter as it pertains to Property Owners comments for the mentioned Planning Cases USr24-0012 and USR24-0013. Please accept the attached documents and note hard copies will arrive in the mail shortly. Thank you, 4 EXH 1W1 i+sgag-dnr3 esn_a____ WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 2024 Date: 7/2/24 Attn: Weld County Department of Planning Services 1402 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80632 I We Keith & Carey Thoene , as the owner(s) of property located adjacent to the p p Y � proposed solar farms known as Prospect and Janus Solar currently being developed by Horus Energy, state that, based on information received from Horus about these projects, I we (circle one) Luppor have no objections to these projects. We view them as compatible with neighboring land uses, in the best interests of the people of the County, and believe that they represent a fair and reasonable utilization of resources in the area. Signature of Property Owner(s) Keith & Carey Thoene Printed Name of Property Owner(s) 1601 CR 49, Hudson CO 80642 Address Hello