Balance is the correct word. As an engineer where a large part of my effort was working for communities, large and small, the statement, “we moved here from the city to get away from the congestion” is truly one’s perspective. I’ve set in Township boards and in City Councils and Planning Commission meetings and was always amazed at people’s perspectives. In Romulus neighbors would argue against development or even zoning changes which could lead to development using those words. Me, growing up in Fowlerville with you Steve, thought to myself, this City is not open country as I knew it growing up. People moved from Detroit to Romulus to enjoy the open spaces. Sitting on the Planning Commission and Genoa Township Board in the ‘70s found me hearing the same comments, “we moved from Redford or Romulus for the open space”. Heck, coming from Fowlerville moving almost to Brighton was as close to development that I wanted.
I learned over time that once we moved from areas with paved roads, water mains, sewers and other conveniences, we would eventually “crave” them in our new locations. As people moved out of the cities and suburbs, they needed housing, schools, stores, emergency services and jobs. As you have said, the new comer sees open field, the farmer see a lifetime of investment (monetary as well and physical) which he too should enjoy. This might mean passing it on to his family to continue or selling it to fund his well deserved retirement. This is what we all need to consider, balance. My needs AND your needs.
One planning meeting I attended for one of my client regarded a resining in compliance with their Master Plan. The 40 acres parcel was next to a “middle class” fully developed subdivision. The entire subdivision turned out to oppose this “planned” use because their kids utilized the vacant property as a park and playground. The owner offered to sell the property to the subdivision but they didn’t want to buy it, just use it for their own purposes. They failed to reach a balance between their desires and those of the property owner. This is what is needed, balance. We want the increase energy, just not in my backyard. In the ‘70s, this was known as NIMBY.
I love the open spaces and cherish the time spent with my grandparents on their farm north of Fowlerville. Everyone should have that experience. It hurts my heart to see those farms and land repurposed but I also understand the need for that development. Let’s work together to find that balance.
Thank you for writing this and bringing more attention to the matter. There are many many more factor's to this situation that need to be considered. It's not just a "not in my backyard" or "doesn't fit the rural character" land use argument. There is also more than just one developer who is leasing land. It is more like 7,000 acres by atleast 3 different developers than just the one project area you and other news outlets are referring to. Once one developer applies and a project is approved, this sets a precidence for the next developer or applicant coming in.
This situation is a prime example of why ample time needs to be given to these small rural Townships with little resources and near volunteer Planning Commissions to enact proper ordinances that will protect the residents living within those communities without the pressure of developers pushing aggressively with where they believe project areas should be and without developers pressuring Townships to write ordinances that will maximize their profits and disregard those residential areas that have been built up slowly and thoughtfully over a span of many years.
When considering ordinances and land use there are many factors that come into play for communities and being a former Planning Commissioner, it was clear that many rural Townships throughout our state were not prepared or had any visual ideas of the vast scale and amount of land that would be desired for these projects and to be honest the amount of land being leased in our communities is a grave example of why regulation is needed throughout the state and Townships need to be given time to do this right for each community without the threat of lawsuits from developers who are litigious. I've seen what this does to a community first hand.
To be fair, the land owners leasing their land may be generational farmers, but most do not even live in our Townships anymore or never have. A very very small amount of money from these projects are even going directly to our Townships and according to appraisal reports and lawsuits from other states such as Kentucky, that have seen the large scale rural solar farms absolutely reduce the values of the homes nearby up to 30%.
I watched as I sat on the Planning Commission, homes of these land owners and of family members go up for sale, wondering if those purchasing the homes knew that their newly purchased homes would potentially be surrounded by hundreds of acres of solar panels. I have found out since, many of them did not. I listened to land owners who granted easements for projects that weren't even applied for yet talk about farmer friends who sold their homes after they signed their intent to lease because they "didn't want to live by it." It raises more than land use issues for our Township. Being a family who was a victim of real estate fraud and who lost everything, it also raises issues of disclosure and of ethics.
When money is thrown at something such as money is being thrown at aggressively pushing renewables, it unfortunately brings out some horrible consequences and actions of people who may otherwise not act that way. It's why there is the saying money is the root of all evil. It has given light to many issues in our Townships about the people we chose to run our Boards and Planning Commissions, their attitudes towards their public, the people who elect them and trust them by voting for them to be fair and diligent in their efforts to protect the health and well being of their community and those who actually live in it.
Economic development, when done properly and well thought out, can be a beautiful thing for a community. Economic development, when done because developers are pressuring underserved areas with Planning Commissions which were less than well equipped with proper information for fair regulation of a land use, is a disaster waiting to happen. It's not a personal issue with the land owners or even about land rights, it's about land use and proper siting. Proper siting considers many factors and rural communities across the state, they should be granted the time needed by a state wide Moratorium on these large scale power plants, so that they aren't all bankrupt by lawsuits brought forth by developers and have time to consider where it's appropriate within their Township or if it's even appropriate at all . Some officials are learning the full capacity of regulation after being misled to believe they had to allow it on all the agricultural land within the Township. That is not the case, Townships can regulate where this goes through zoning. Master Plans and Zoning Maps need to be updated, which is what is suggested by MSU Extension, strong ordinances need to be written with the help of legal experts who specialize in this issue to protect the public as stated in the Moratorium for all the Townships under Moratorium currently in the county.
Lastly, the attendance for the Public Hearing should be verified with the Township Supervisor. I believe it was well over 300 possibly closer to 400 attendees minus a couple of individuals from out of town who spoke in favor of it invited by the developer.
Steve, I enjoyed reading this article. As you pointed out this is complex land use issue and residents are concerned. These industrial solar power plants are large tracts of land, Headland Solar LLC is 1,500 acres, DTE energy Corp has another 1,200 acres between the two the townships. We see other developers like Potomac Solar LLC on the Shiawassee, Livingston county borderline along Lovejoy (Antrim Twp., Conway Twp.) road with more large tracts of land leased for this same purpose. In the neighboring township of Locke (Ingham County) it was just announced in the Lansing State Journal before the holidays that they also have a large scale industrial solar power plant being proposed along the M52 corridor. I am happy to see the local townships of Conway and Cohoctah taking the time to enact proper zoning ordinances to protect all landowners within the community.
Thanks for a sage and compelling review of the issue. I appreciate both sides of the issues. Coming from Livonia to Marion Township 32 years ago to our 10 acre home/retreat, I can understand and sympathize with the resident who does not want to look out at 10 acres or more of solar panels. Also understand the development that is needed for our community and environment. Just "not in my backyard." why not use land that is undesirable for homes and desirable for factories or the like? Bring with the solar panels better roads for all residents and other needed improvements that we can't seem to get from our county government. I agree with Steve there has to be a reasonable solution somewhere.
Balance is the correct word. As an engineer where a large part of my effort was working for communities, large and small, the statement, “we moved here from the city to get away from the congestion” is truly one’s perspective. I’ve set in Township boards and in City Councils and Planning Commission meetings and was always amazed at people’s perspectives. In Romulus neighbors would argue against development or even zoning changes which could lead to development using those words. Me, growing up in Fowlerville with you Steve, thought to myself, this City is not open country as I knew it growing up. People moved from Detroit to Romulus to enjoy the open spaces. Sitting on the Planning Commission and Genoa Township Board in the ‘70s found me hearing the same comments, “we moved from Redford or Romulus for the open space”. Heck, coming from Fowlerville moving almost to Brighton was as close to development that I wanted.
I learned over time that once we moved from areas with paved roads, water mains, sewers and other conveniences, we would eventually “crave” them in our new locations. As people moved out of the cities and suburbs, they needed housing, schools, stores, emergency services and jobs. As you have said, the new comer sees open field, the farmer see a lifetime of investment (monetary as well and physical) which he too should enjoy. This might mean passing it on to his family to continue or selling it to fund his well deserved retirement. This is what we all need to consider, balance. My needs AND your needs.
One planning meeting I attended for one of my client regarded a resining in compliance with their Master Plan. The 40 acres parcel was next to a “middle class” fully developed subdivision. The entire subdivision turned out to oppose this “planned” use because their kids utilized the vacant property as a park and playground. The owner offered to sell the property to the subdivision but they didn’t want to buy it, just use it for their own purposes. They failed to reach a balance between their desires and those of the property owner. This is what is needed, balance. We want the increase energy, just not in my backyard. In the ‘70s, this was known as NIMBY.
I love the open spaces and cherish the time spent with my grandparents on their farm north of Fowlerville. Everyone should have that experience. It hurts my heart to see those farms and land repurposed but I also understand the need for that development. Let’s work together to find that balance.
Thank you for writing this and bringing more attention to the matter. There are many many more factor's to this situation that need to be considered. It's not just a "not in my backyard" or "doesn't fit the rural character" land use argument. There is also more than just one developer who is leasing land. It is more like 7,000 acres by atleast 3 different developers than just the one project area you and other news outlets are referring to. Once one developer applies and a project is approved, this sets a precidence for the next developer or applicant coming in.
This situation is a prime example of why ample time needs to be given to these small rural Townships with little resources and near volunteer Planning Commissions to enact proper ordinances that will protect the residents living within those communities without the pressure of developers pushing aggressively with where they believe project areas should be and without developers pressuring Townships to write ordinances that will maximize their profits and disregard those residential areas that have been built up slowly and thoughtfully over a span of many years.
When considering ordinances and land use there are many factors that come into play for communities and being a former Planning Commissioner, it was clear that many rural Townships throughout our state were not prepared or had any visual ideas of the vast scale and amount of land that would be desired for these projects and to be honest the amount of land being leased in our communities is a grave example of why regulation is needed throughout the state and Townships need to be given time to do this right for each community without the threat of lawsuits from developers who are litigious. I've seen what this does to a community first hand.
To be fair, the land owners leasing their land may be generational farmers, but most do not even live in our Townships anymore or never have. A very very small amount of money from these projects are even going directly to our Townships and according to appraisal reports and lawsuits from other states such as Kentucky, that have seen the large scale rural solar farms absolutely reduce the values of the homes nearby up to 30%.
I watched as I sat on the Planning Commission, homes of these land owners and of family members go up for sale, wondering if those purchasing the homes knew that their newly purchased homes would potentially be surrounded by hundreds of acres of solar panels. I have found out since, many of them did not. I listened to land owners who granted easements for projects that weren't even applied for yet talk about farmer friends who sold their homes after they signed their intent to lease because they "didn't want to live by it." It raises more than land use issues for our Township. Being a family who was a victim of real estate fraud and who lost everything, it also raises issues of disclosure and of ethics.
When money is thrown at something such as money is being thrown at aggressively pushing renewables, it unfortunately brings out some horrible consequences and actions of people who may otherwise not act that way. It's why there is the saying money is the root of all evil. It has given light to many issues in our Townships about the people we chose to run our Boards and Planning Commissions, their attitudes towards their public, the people who elect them and trust them by voting for them to be fair and diligent in their efforts to protect the health and well being of their community and those who actually live in it.
Economic development, when done properly and well thought out, can be a beautiful thing for a community. Economic development, when done because developers are pressuring underserved areas with Planning Commissions which were less than well equipped with proper information for fair regulation of a land use, is a disaster waiting to happen. It's not a personal issue with the land owners or even about land rights, it's about land use and proper siting. Proper siting considers many factors and rural communities across the state, they should be granted the time needed by a state wide Moratorium on these large scale power plants, so that they aren't all bankrupt by lawsuits brought forth by developers and have time to consider where it's appropriate within their Township or if it's even appropriate at all . Some officials are learning the full capacity of regulation after being misled to believe they had to allow it on all the agricultural land within the Township. That is not the case, Townships can regulate where this goes through zoning. Master Plans and Zoning Maps need to be updated, which is what is suggested by MSU Extension, strong ordinances need to be written with the help of legal experts who specialize in this issue to protect the public as stated in the Moratorium for all the Townships under Moratorium currently in the county.
Lastly, the attendance for the Public Hearing should be verified with the Township Supervisor. I believe it was well over 300 possibly closer to 400 attendees minus a couple of individuals from out of town who spoke in favor of it invited by the developer.
Steve, I enjoyed reading this article. As you pointed out this is complex land use issue and residents are concerned. These industrial solar power plants are large tracts of land, Headland Solar LLC is 1,500 acres, DTE energy Corp has another 1,200 acres between the two the townships. We see other developers like Potomac Solar LLC on the Shiawassee, Livingston county borderline along Lovejoy (Antrim Twp., Conway Twp.) road with more large tracts of land leased for this same purpose. In the neighboring township of Locke (Ingham County) it was just announced in the Lansing State Journal before the holidays that they also have a large scale industrial solar power plant being proposed along the M52 corridor. I am happy to see the local townships of Conway and Cohoctah taking the time to enact proper zoning ordinances to protect all landowners within the community.
Thanks for a sage and compelling review of the issue. I appreciate both sides of the issues. Coming from Livonia to Marion Township 32 years ago to our 10 acre home/retreat, I can understand and sympathize with the resident who does not want to look out at 10 acres or more of solar panels. Also understand the development that is needed for our community and environment. Just "not in my backyard." why not use land that is undesirable for homes and desirable for factories or the like? Bring with the solar panels better roads for all residents and other needed improvements that we can't seem to get from our county government. I agree with Steve there has to be a reasonable solution somewhere.