The Envoy Solar Farm, located at the old AP Green Plant, was completed earlier this year and is now operational.

At its Dec. 8 meeting, the Mexico City Council unanimously accepted and passed a decommissioning bond and decommissioning plan for Envoy Solar in accordance with the city’s code for commercial solar farms.

“The bond is meant to ensure we don’t have a scenario where someone just leaves the solar farm, such a large facility, and doesn’t do any kind of remediation on the site,” Drew Williford, deputy city manager, said.

City staff have been monitoring cases of abandoned solar farms in the West, bearing those in mind when considering the decommissioning plan, and the city’s engineering division ensured the roughly $6 million bond was in compliance with city ordinance.

“We have worked with Envoy Solar LLC to manage and develop a practical plan that would protect the city, that would still serve Envoy Solar, the site itself, and make sure the site serves well into its 40-year expectation here,” Williford said.

With a four-decade timeline, considerations for longevity were made. Even if the solar farm was sold, Williford said the decommissioning bond would transfer with ownership, and making sure that the bond translates throughout the years has been a major focus.

The decommissioning plan includes the disassembly and disposal of all solar collectors and components, the removal of all pads and underground electrical wires, reclamation of the site to a depth of four feet, the removal of all gravel roadways and recovery of the terrain prior to the start of construction.

Costs have been calculated over 50 years with a projected 2% inflation per year and restoration is estimated to take between 90 and 180 days.

Council Member Larry Webber commented on the screening efforts at the solar farm.

While the land is adequately zoned for industrial use, Envoy Solar agreed to plant trees to screen the solar farm and meet city code, but progress is slower than expected.

“I don’t find it really effective,” Webber said. “I think if they agreed to screen it, they should screen it.”

Webber is a former member of the Planning and Zoning Commission, and he called on that experience twice that night.

At the meeting, the city council also approved an additional use permit for Shawn Bradford, who requested to place two shipping containers on his property at 700 E. Liberty St.

Before it came to the council, Bradford’s request went before the Planning and Zoning Commission. Additionally, 23 letters were mailed to surrounding properties within 300 feet of the building.

Staff received only one phone call regarding the request, but it was for clarification about the location and no additional concerns were raised.

Council member Chris Miller called the project a “love-hate situation.”

“I’d hate to think that we’d halt any type of business in Mexico although, it hasn’t been but about two years ago, we got a real beatdown for putting on in a residential area big time,” he said.

Bradford, who was at the meeting, offered some insight into the project for the council’s consideration.

He assured the council that the shipping containers would be freshly painted. Additionally, there will be an 8-foot chain link fence with privacy slats along the portion of the property where the containers will be located. Bradford said that only the top six inches of the container would be visible.

“We have no intention of making anything look worse and would like to make it a little better, honestly,” Bradford said.

When considering an additional use permit, the City Council must ensure the request meets the following criteria. The council was asked whether the request would substantially increase traffic hazards or congestion, substantially increase fire hazards, adversely affect the character of the neighborhood, adversely affect the general welfare of the community or overtax public utilities.

The Planning and Zoning Commission findings were negative to the above criteria, but there was a debate on the character portion at city council.

“A billion years ago, I was on the Planning and Zoning Commission, and we made a recommendation to the council and the council did just the opposite, 180 degrees, of what we suggested and we were so mad at the council,” Webber said. “But now I understand.”

The council determined that there would be no substantial increase to traffic or fire hazards and that it would not overtax public utilities or adversely affect the welfare of the community, but council members Ron Ray and Webber agreed that it would adversely affect the look of the neighborhood; Miller was on the fence.

Ultimately, the city council agreed to grant the additional use permit.