Environmental organizations want to turn out the lights on a solar power project that is slated for construction on property owned by the Six Flags Great Adventure theme park in Jackson.
The construction of the solar power facility is expected to require thousands of trees to be cut down at the location where Six Flags wants to build the project. The electricity generated by the solar array would be used by the theme park, according to park executives.
A group of environmental organizations has filed a lawsuit in state Superior Court, Toms River, that seeks to invalidate the approvals that have been granted for the project.
The 56-page complaint from the Crosswicks Creek Doctors Creek Watershed Association, Clean Water Action, the New Jersey Conservation Foundation and Save Barnegat Bay asserts that the recently approved 90-acre solar power site is counter-productive to the benefits of solar power.
“Great Adventure’s position that it must destroy the forest to combat climate change is illogical and uninformed,” said Janet Tauro, New Jersey board chair of Clean Water Action. “You don’t kill the Earth to save the Earth.”
Earlier this year, Six Flags touted the initiative as the state’s “largest net-metered solar project,” with an estimated 22 megawatts of electricity expected to be generated at the site once it is completed in the second half of 2016.
Six Flags spokeswoman Kristin Siebeneicher declined to comment on the legal action, but said executives were aware of the environmentally sensitive nature of the project.
“Six Flags has been a good custodian of the environment and believes the solar project is a net benefit to the environment, despite whatever concerns may have been raised,” Siebeneicher said.
According to the theme park’s announcement on March 26, KDC Solar LLC will construct, own and operate the system on Six Flags property just off Reed Road in Jackson.
Opponents of the project say the planned deforestation of the property could harm the local watershed and nearby water sources. “The proposed forest removal for the installation of the solar collection field would be occurring in the headwaters of the Crosswicks Doctors Creek Watershed,” said Marc Covitz, who is the president of the Crosswicks Creek Doctors Creek Watershed Association.
“Headwaters are critical areas in a watershed, and activity of this scale and degree can impact both water quantity and quality of the creek, as well as the thousands of acres of publicly funded preserved land surrounding the Crosswicks Creek and its tributaries,” Covitz said.
The plaintiffs assert that the project’s environmental impact statement failed to locate alternate locations for the solar project that would generate power for Six Flags, but not require thousands of trees to be cut down.
Attorney Michele Donato is representing the environmental groups. She said her clients do not believe the Jackson Planning Board properly considered how the deforestation of 90 acres of woodlands would impact the local environment.
Attorneys representing the township and the board could not be reached for comment.
The complaint claims the solar power project violates Jackson’s master plan because the property is zoned for low intensity recreational use and is subject to conservation overlay zone restrictions.
The complaint also claims the project violates Jackson’s tree ordinance. It states that the application did not call for a survey of the property by a certified land surveyor.
According to Donato, on Jan. 29 an ordinance permitting solar facilities to be constructed in commercial recreation zones was adopted by the Township Council on the same day Six Flags and KDC submitted an application for such a facility to the Planning Board.
On March 2, the board approved the project.
On March 30, the township’s Environmental Commission addressed the application in a letter that raised several issues with the solar project. The commission ultimately voted to endorse the project.
The complaint states the plaintiffs believe the Environmental Commission’s vote was “coerced and illegal.”
The complaint claims the proposed deforestation will negatively impact the habitats of the Barred Owl, the Eastern Whip-poor-will and the Northern pine snake.