Holyoke Public Meeting & Workshop Reuse Scenarios May 14th, 2015

Holyoke Public Meeting &
Workshop
Reuse Scenarios
May 14th, 2015
Noble Wickersham and Heart Consensus Building Institute | Massachusetts Clean Energy Center
Tonights Agenda
Introductions
Project Context
Background
Public engagement
Mt. Tom site info
Summary of Last Meeting

Reuse principles
Reuse ideas
Scenario Overview
Three Concepts
Regulatory pathways
Development implications
Discussion / Feedback
Project Context
Background
Why are we are doing this study?
What will be the studys outcomes?
What will happen with the study results?
Project Context
Public Engagement Process To Date
Kick O
Mee*ng
Site Condi*ons
Mee*ng
(Dec 2014)
(Feb 2015)
Mobile
Workshops &
Survey
(Mar-Apr 2015)
Scenarios
Mee*ng
(May 2015)
Project Context
Participant Snapshot
170 par*cipants across all
ac*vi*es (not including tonight)
All ac*vi*es in English &
Spanish
Over 100 project email
subscribers
Over 300 unique page views
since website launch
17 local media stories
Project Context
Mt. Tom Parcel

Parcel Size: 128 acres
Plant Opening: 1960
Plant Closure: 2014
Generating Capacity: 146 MW
Project Context
Economic Impact of Mt Tom Power Plant

Property Taxes Paid
$1,700,000
$1,300,000
$573,000
$315,000
2009
2011
2013
Year Closing Announced

28 employees as of
year of closing
announcement
3 were Holyoke
residents
~$3.9m wages &
benets last year of
full opera*on
2014
Project Context
Development Box
Every project has parameters that establish the op3ons
Few Limits
Many Op*ons
Many Limits
Few Op*ons
Understanding the size of the box is cri3cal

Some factors that inuence the size of
the Box

Clean up costs
Flood plain
Site layout and congura*on
Ecological & environmental issues
Infrastructure like power lines &
pipelines
What follows are our

ndings on the
development parameters
that dene the box
Project Context
Site Conditions Summary: Environmental
There are several ash landfills, a former City of

Holyoke landfill, and a private landfill that have
not been closed but a draft closure plan has
been submitted to the Department of
Environmental Protection.
There are topographical barriers (i.e. steep
slopes), which would make recreational access
to the river a challenge.
Project Context
Site Conditions Summary: River Protection
Any changes within 100-foot buffer to the bank

of the river and the 200-foot Riverfront Area
are subject to local and state regulations that
protect the river banks, habitat areas and a
perennial stream that bisects the site.
10
Project Context
Site Conditions Summary: Wetlands Protection
The site includes several wetlands and a

perennial stream so is subject to
wetlands protection regulations.
11
Project Context
Site Conditions Summary: Rare Species Habitat
Portions of the site provide habitat for statelisted rare species including the Bald Eagle,
dragonfly species and mussels (in the river).
12
Project Context
Site Conditions Summary: Flood Plain
The majority of the site is located in the 100year floodplain, which means that new uses
must consider the potential for flooding and
adhere to applicable regulations.
AE: hydrological studies

conducted
A: no hydrology studies conducted
to determine base flood elevation
X500: area subject to 500 yr flood
event
13
Project Context
Site Conditions Summary: Zoning
The site is located in a General Industry

Zoning District and a Flood Plain Overlay
District that corresponds to flood zone.
14
Introductions
Project Context
Scenario Overview
15
Summary of Last Mee5ng
Reuse Principles from the Community

Generate tax revenue
Go Green (e.g. green energy, carbon neutral)
Make it multi-purpose (e.g. more than one use)
Connect the community to the river
Use existing infrastructure (e.g. rail and electric
switchyard).
16
Summary of Last Mee5ng
Reuse Ideas
Demonstra*ng energy
op*ons. Mul*ple use of the
facility: solar energy, river
access for boa*ng, a color
eld for nature. We suggest
using exis*ng infrastructure
as much as we can
It will never be the slam-dunk it

was before in terms of jobs and tax
revenue. But can we use the site for
innova*ve technology and
partnership with universi*es? Maybe
workforce training and development?
Build a solar eld and train
unemployed folks in Holyoke to
install solar? Or do this with other
green power?
Green energy thats truly

green (maybe solar farms
to *e into electric
switches), agriculture, river
access and recrea*on;
protec*ng the Connec*cut
River watershed
Solar farm seems like the most economical

op*on because the ini*al investment is
probably less than other things and since it
is in a ood plain so we have to assume at
some point we will get a ood. But we
arent talking about major infrastructure.
We already have power lines coming in and
out so thats good. River access would be
great. A pathway through solar farm and
green space with the rest of it.
17
Introductions
Project Context
Scenario Overview
18
Scenario Overview
Reuse Scenarios Structure

Scenarios crafted based on principles, ideas and
discussion points developed with public input
Site maps created to understand how much can fit
given the parameters of the site and design
characteristics of the uses
Explains the regulatory pathway to development
Provides economic implications
All scenarios include assumption the facility will remain
in place
19
Scenario Overview
Base Case
The site sits unused with structures either

remaining or torn down with clean up at the
required levels based on a no reuse
scenario
An active transmission line exists along the
river edge heading north it is reflected in
the following scenario maps
20
Scenario Overview - Concepts
Mt. Tom Reuse Scenarios Snapshot

Scenario 1
Solar PV System
+
Reten5on of exis5ng farm
Scenario 2
Solar PV System
+
Public Access to River
+
Scenario 3
Solar PV System
+
+
Expanded Ag Use
+
Anaerobic Diges5on
+
Note: the exis*ng farm lease has not been renewed

21
Holyoke Reuse Scenarios Structure
Existing power
plant
Existing
agriculture
22
Reoriented Site Map
Existing agriculture
Existing power plant
23
Development Implications
Scenario 1: Large Solar Installation

6.5 acres
11.3 acres
Existing agriculture
2.5 acres
Parking and
support
9.2 acres
Approximate solar
capacity: 5.9 MW
The placement of these

zones for solar energy
development takes into
account regulatory
setbacks, shading, and
topography.
The solar arrays are
within Rare Species
Habitat and wetlands
buffers, which will require
permitting.
24
Scenario 2: Solar Installation and Public Amenities

Path will require
stream crossing
1.5 mile 8ft wide path

shares transmission line
right-of-way
6.5 acres
21.5 acres existing

agriculture, lease not
renewed
Site for
potential
kayak/small
boat launch
11.5 acres
2.5 acres
Parking and
Support
9.2 acres
Unused space is
flood storage
capacity
Approximate solar
capacity: 5.9 MW
The placement of these

zones for solar energy
development takes into
account regulatory
setbacks, shading, and
topography.
The solar arrays are
within Rare Species
Habitat and wetlands
buffers, which will require
permitting.
25
Scenario 3: Solar, Anaerobic Digestion, Agriculture

& Public Amenities
Path shares transmission
line right-of-way
Path will require

stream crossing
Solar, 6.5 acres

Site for
potential
boat/kayak
launch
Greenhouse
agriculture, 17.6
acres
(5.2 acres shown
here under
greenhouses)
Parking and
processing
Solar, 9.2 acres
Parking and
processing
Anaerobic
Digestion
Facility, 4 acres
Requires Right of
Way across Rail
Approximate solar
capacity: 3 MW
The anaerobic digestion

facility includes two 100
diameter storage tanks
and two 50 diameter
storage tanks. The
buildings dimensions are
250 by 250.
26
Scenario Overview Regulatory Pathway
Scenario 1 Large Solar

LOCAL PERMITTING
Zoning
Competing zoning
Flood plain overlay district (FPOD) vs solar facilities which takes precedent?
Depending on answer if FPOD, requires a change in allowed uses
Solar not presently allowed in FPOD
Solar site plan review required for installations over 250kw
Wetlands
Not a barrier may require some mitigation
Bordering Land Subject to Flooding (BLSF), requires an Order of Conditions from
the Holyoke Conservation Commission (ConCom)
200ft riverfront encroachment may trigger some mitigation
Compensatory flood storage offsets possible
If new material is needed for construction
Capping of landfill
27
Scenario 1 Large Solar

STATE/FEDERAL PERMITTING
Rare Species
Priority habitat area for significant portions of the proposed solar farm
Depending on which species are present could present challenges
Potential need for Take of a Threatened or Endangered Species
If found Conservation and Management Permit required with mitigation
that creates a net benefit to the species
Survey required and additional information from Fish & Wildlife
Solid Waste
Closure of landfills require approval of a Corrective Action Design (CAD)
Previously submitted CAD may require modification
Closure of ash landfills may require approval of US EPA
Regulations for coal ash presently under review
28
Scenario 2 Solar Installation & Public Amenities

LOCAL PERMITTING
Zoning
Same issues as Scenario 1
Bike path & boat ramp allowed if municipal owned
FPOD requires a special permitting process
Wetlands
Boat ramp creates a Bank and Land Under Water (BLUW) impact
Ramp under 50ft wide and less than 5000sft permissible under BLUW
Local variance required from ConCom for 50ft No Disturb Zone for boat
ramp and bike path
29
Scenario 2 Solar Installation & Public Amenities

STATE / FEDERAL PERMITTING
Rare Species
Same issues as Scenario 1
Boat ramp potential impact on rare species
Ch. 91 / Army Corp / DEP Water Quality
Triggered by boat ramp
Requires Ch. 91 license from MASS DEP
Army Corp permit
401 Water Quality Certification from DEP
Solid Waste
Same as Scenario 1
30

& Public Amenities
LOCAL PERMITTING
Zoning
Same as Scenario 1& 2
Under IG Zone
Anaerobic Digestion should qualify as an electric plant
Greenhouses may qualify as agriculture
Flood Plain Overlay District (FPOD)
Limited to manufacturing and assembly uses
May require a change in the FPOD for these additional uses
Wetlands
Bordering Land Subject to Flooding (BLSF) is more problematic due to
the loss of flood capacity, requiring a larger compensatory flood storage
basin to be created
31

& Public Access
STATE/FEDERAL PERMITTING
Rare Species
Same issues as Scenario 1 & 2
Depending on species may be more complex given the nature of the buildout
Ch. 91 / Army Corp / DEP Water Quality
Same
Recycling, Composting & Conversion Permit from DEP
Solid Waste
Same as Scenario 1
32
Scenario Overview Development Implications

Relationship between Development & Remediation
33
Scenario Overview Development Implications
Landfill Closure Costs

Regardless of scenario; based on current rules which are slated to change
Assumptions/Rules of Thumb
To close 1.2 acres of solid waste
landfill & 36.5 acres of ash landfill
Based on current proposed caps
Per acre costs for:
Vegetation & Grubbing: $20,000
Hydroseeding: $7,500
Solid Waste Landfill Cap:
$200,000
Ash Landfill Cap: $75,000
Does not consider additional site
grading, fill for grading/shaping,
removal of stumps or other materials
or permitting
Depending on specic clean up

requirements, expenditures in
the range of $3 to $8 million are
possible
34
Scenario Overview Development Implica5ons
Development Patterns Side by Side

Scenario 1
Scenario 3
Scenario 2
Solar PV System
+
Power plant remains

New solar: 29.5 acres

Solar PV System
+
+
Solar PV System
+
+
Expanded Ag Use
+
Anaerobic Diges5on
+
Power plant remains

Solar:
15.6 acres

Digester: 4 acres

Wholesale Greenhouse:
17.6 acres with 5.2 acres of
greenhouse space

Ped/Bike Path: 8m wide
path lacks direct connec*on
to exis*ng trail system

Massachusetts Clean Energy Center
Power plant remains

New solar: 29.5 acres

Ped/Bike Path: 8m wide
path lacks direct
connec*on to exis*ng trail
system

Noble Wickersham and Heart Consensus Building Institute |
35
Economic & Employment Side by Side

Scenario 1
Scenario 2
Scenario 3
Economic
Power:
~ 6MW solar power
produc*on
Power:
~ 6MW solar power
produc*on

Power:
~ 3MW solar power
produc*on

500kw digester

Greenhouse:
produc*on varies widely
by crop & method
Employment
Solar: 1-3
Solar: 1-3
Solar: 1-3
Digester: 2-5

Greenhouse: 30-40
Total wages: $200k

Avg Salary
Solar: $30-40k
Total wages: $480k

Avg Salary
Solar: $30-40k
Digester: $40k
Greenhouse: $20k-30k

Wages
Total wages: $200k

Avg Salary
Solar: $30-40k
Note: it is assumed exis*ng farm stays and not included in these calcula*ons.
36
Property Taxes Side by Side

Annual Tax
Poten*al
(PILOT)
Municipal services
impact
Scenario 1
Scenario 2
$30k

$30K

minimal
minimal
Scenario 3
Solar =$15k
AD (Full/PILOT) = $99k / $10k
Greenhouse = $226k
minimal
Notes:

Conserva*ve es*mates: reects only new developments: excludes land, any remaining buildings

Solar Array: Exis*ng city PILOT of $5k per MW

Anaerobic Digester: Likely taxed as commercial/industrial $39.93/$1000 or PILOT of $20,000 / MW

Greenhouse: Likely taxed as commercial/industrial $39.93/$1000
37
Questions for Consideration by the City

Which zoning framework will take precedent -- flood
plain overlay or solar facilities?
Should the city take ownership of any of the public
amenities to ease the permitting process?
How will the property be classified for purposes of
taxation particularly if structures are removed?
Create connection of site bike path to larger bike
trail system?
38
Key Questions for the Workshop

What did we miss?
Based on the findings should any of the
scenarios be eliminated?
Based on the findings should any of the
scenarios be revised? If so, how?
39
Introductions
Project Context
Scenario Overview
40
Next Steps
Community feedback on potential reuse
options (see project website for survey)
Final report expected fall 2015
41

Holyoke Public Meeting & Workshop Reuse Scenarios May 14th, 2015

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Holyoke Public Meeting & Workshop Reuse Scenarios May 14th, 2015

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Holyoke Public Meeting &

Summary of Last Meeting

Public Engagement Process To Date

Mt. Tom Parcel

Economic Impact of Mt Tom Power Plant

Year Closing Announced

Understanding the size of the box is cri3cal

What follows are our

Site Conditions Summary: Environmental

There are several ash landfills, a former City of

Site Conditions Summary: River Protection

Any changes within 100-foot buffer to the bank

Site Conditions Summary: Wetlands Protection

The site includes several wetlands and a

Site Conditions Summary: Rare Species Habitat

Site Conditions Summary: Flood Plain

AE: hydrological studies

Site Conditions Summary: Zoning

The site is located in a General Industry

Summary of Last Mee5ng

Reuse Principles from the Community

Summary of Last Mee5ng

It will never be the slam-dunk it

Green energy thats truly

Solar farm seems like the most economical

Reuse Scenarios Structure

The site sits unused with structures either

Scenario Overview - Concepts

Mt. Tom Reuse Scenarios Snapshot

Note: the exis*ng farm lease has not been renewed

Scenario Overview - Concepts

Holyoke Reuse Scenarios Structure

Scenario Overview - Concepts

Reoriented Site Map

Existing power plant

Scenario 1: Large Solar Installation

The placement of these

Scenario 2: Solar Installation and Public Amenities

1.5 mile 8ft wide path

21.5 acres existing

The placement of these

Scenario 3: Solar, Anaerobic Digestion, Agriculture

Path will require

Solar, 6.5 acres

The anaerobic digestion

Scenario Overview Regulatory Pathway

Scenario 1 Large Solar

Scenario Overview Regulatory Pathway

Scenario 1 Large Solar

Scenario Overview Regulatory Pathway

Scenario 2 Solar Installation & Public Amenities

Scenario Overview Regulatory Pathway

Scenario 2 Solar Installation & Public Amenities

Scenario Overview Regulatory Pathway

Scenario 3: Solar, Anaerobic Digestion, Agriculture

Scenario Overview Regulatory Pathway

Scenario 3: Solar, Anaerobic Digestion, Agriculture

Scenario Overview Development Implications

Scenario Overview Development Implications

Landfill Closure Costs

Depending on specic clean up

Scenario Overview Development Implica5ons