There’s more to the Pitkin County solar farm story
Your reporter chose to report on my exchange with the board, leaving out the reason: The board was allowed unlimited time to express their opinions (Commissioner Steve Child used approximately 17 minutes), while the comments from the attendees were limited strictly to three minutes (“Pitkin County board approves solar farm,” Nov. 14, aspentimes.com).
I did not mention where I live as my concern was the Entrance to Aspen, not how it might impact my view; it does not.
He did not mention that I represented that the hundreds of pages supporting this proposal were rife with misleading, self-serving and false statements. All of the consultants presenting and letters shown were supporting the installation; someone out there must have a different opinion.
I believe everyone present at the meeting is in favor of renewable energy. Does it have to be at the Entrance to Aspen is my concern.
When the reporter said I suggested it go to a vote, he left out the fact that for 20 years we have had public votes on the S-curve Entrance to Aspen, so why does this solar farm (which is a more dramatic visual change than the S-curve), which is at the Entrance to Aspen and Snowmass, not have a public vote?
Nor did he mention that there were 20 other sites; they would cost more money and not produce revenue for the Aspen Sanitation District. To some extent money drove the location — maybe more than anything else!
Some extracts from the reports supporting this installation:
• “While the previous use of biosolid disposal gave the appearance of a field, solar panels will now exist within the field.” I think it is a field, and not to mention that it is the last large open field that could be used for recreation.”
• It mentions limited visibility from some areas but not full visibility from Brush Creek Road.
• “The project will not significantly degrade visual quality.” They are saying that 35 acres (42 football fields) of black panels is the same as an open field with wild vegetation.
It was apparent that the meeting was to reenforce that the decision to proceed was made and no objections, no matter how valid, would change this decision.
Support Local Journalism
Support Local Journalism
Readers around Aspen and Snowmass Village make the Aspen Times’ work possible. Your financial contribution supports our efforts to deliver quality, locally relevant journalism.
Now more than ever, your support is critical to help us keep our community informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having locally. Every contribution, however large or small, will make a difference.
Each donation will be used exclusively for the development and creation of increased news coverage.
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.
User Legend: Moderator Trusted User
I’m writing in strong favor of the affordable housing project that is under discussion with the county, and feel that Mick Ireland’s commentary Feb. 22 in the Daily News of hit the nail on the…