1 From: David Cutaia
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2022 8:45 AM
To: David Cutaia
Subject: RE: Case No. 21-003-GPA AKA Another Ill-Advised Battery Plant From: Tim Morphy <[email protected]>
Date: May 2, 2022 at 4:04:27 PM PDT
To: Paula Perotte <[email protected]>, Stuart Kasdin <[email protected]>, James Kyriaco <[email protected]>, Roger Aceves <[email protected]>, Kyle Richards <[email protected]>
Subject: Case No. 21‐003‐GPA AKA Another Ill‐Advised Battery Plant Mayor and Council Members:
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
I write you today in strong opposition to the proposed General Plan Amendment that will allow for the installation of a Battery Storage facility on the parcel on Viajero (Case No. 21‐003‐GPA). Please note that I am not opposed to this sort of energy storage, only the location of this proposed project.
First and foremost, you need to know that Mr. Imhof and his team have neglected to mention in the Background section of their report that this proposed project is directly next to the location of another proposed battery project a few years ago that was wisely abandoned in favor of a better location in Goleta. There were several good reasons for that decision and while the location is slightly different, that difference actually increases the argument against this project.
As you consider this proposal, please keep in mind:
The proposed location is dangerously closer to a senior living facility. Only a few feet away from being “adjacent”.
The proposed location is dangerously closer to Ellwood Elementary School. The proposed location is dangerously closer to the vital railroad line. The proposed location is dangerously close to the only entrance/exit to/from the eastern half of the Hideaway development containing about 50 homes.
I hope you will also consider the fact that these facilities are not as safe as presented by the proposed developer. If you haven’t already, please take a look at the recent history of the Moss Landing battery plant to our north … two fires in the past year. Do we really want this in the middle of a residential community near an elementary school?
You are changing the zoning for a property that is in the middle of a growing residential area of Goleta to move in the wrong direction.
I hope you will also revisit the work done around the 2019 resolution considered in May 2019. While the presentation may be technically correct that Sovereign Energy’s GPA Initiation remains in effect, the reality is that Sovereign has removed itself from the project and their replacement has found a better location in 2 Goleta for the project … better for the project and better for Goleta. I know this because I participated with Sovereign to consider the issues they faced in proceeding with the ill advised project and helped them find the more suitable location. There is a story here and a lesson to be learned so we don’t repeat our errors in considering the 2019 proposal while considering this new project.
Again, as was the case in 2019, I am in favor of these projects. I am just not in favor of placing these potentially dangerous facilities so close to our communities and schools.
I hope you find your way clear to finding a better solution fro this project.
Tim Morphy
140 Sanderling Lane
Goleta CA
213‐923‐3699