Jump to content
Matt Kaiser

Six Flags Great Adventure Now Powered by Solar Energy

Recommended Posts

I hope that means that more Solar Panels will be added to other Six Flags parks. Six Flags America has 100+ acres for solar panels. Plus this should get the company MAJOR tax breaks (Lets not get into the politics here)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"But at the end of the day, we did do our homework. We ensured that we're not damaging the habitats of any of the endangered or threatened species in the area, and we're sure of that"

I hope he's right about that.

 

Either way, it's over. Still not happy about the large amount of trees being removed but it is great that they will be running on clean energy, so I guess I can't say that I am really disappointed with this.

Edited by SFGadv123
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope that means that more Solar Panels will be added to other Six Flags parks. Six Flags America has 100+ acres for solar panels. Plus this should get the company MAJOR tax breaks (Lets not get into the politics here)

 

I believe they actually pay more taxes (at least to Jackson), since that land was previously not taxed, or something like that. Could be wrong. Maybe their net taxes will be lower though, including state and federal taxes/incentives/whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awwww, they opposition had a "Go Fund" me page for their legal fees to fight it and it ony raised $1,100 bucks. Like i was saying, a "drawn-out" Court battle is just what the Park wanted (if it didn't get immediate Approval) because these kind's of cases ALWAYS come down to who runs out of Money for the Lawyer's first. They even elude to that a little at the end of the article. With everyhting that is riding on this, no way the Park was losing this fight. Being completely Energy Independent is the 1st step of us finally getting a Hotel "on Property", and us being a year-round resort Complex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although I don't love the amount of trees being cut down for this, I'm glad the park will be running on clean energy well into the future. Also hoping the money they save long-term will get us some bigger ride additions :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also hoping the money they save long-term will get us some bigger ride additions :)

 

Lol, fat chance. I'm sure JRA's bonus will become that much heftier, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On hold for now....

 

 

 

 

 

Six Flags tree-clearing on hold, for now
JACKSON - Six Flags Great Adventure isn’t backing off its plans to remove thousands of trees to build a solar farm on its property, but the clear-cutting won’t happen while a legal challenge to the project is underway, environmental groups said Monday.


Six New Jersey environmental groups — Clean Water Action, the New Jersey Conservation Foundation, Save Barnegat Bay, Environment New Jersey, the Sierra Club of New Jersey and Crosswicks-Doctors Creek Watershed Association — filed suit last year to stop the project, arguing it violates the township’s master plan.


The groups' leaders don't believe any of the roughly 15,000 trees slated to be cut down have been cleared on the site as of yet, but in recent weeks they became concerned that the work might commence soon.

The groups were worried that they might prevail in court after the forest was already cleared, but the theme park operator has assured them that it will hold off while the litigation is underway, Jeff Tittel, the state Sierra Club director, said Monday.


In response, Six Flags issued a terse statement: "This past summer we agreed to postpone construction until 2017," it said.

Bedminister-based KD Solar, Six Flags’ partner in the project, plans to construct a 21-megawatt solar facility on a undeveloped 66-acre tract along Reed Road. While the facility would be capable of generating virtually all the power the theme park needs, opponents say sacrificing a forest for the sake of “green” energy is a poor trade-off.

Source

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Solar Panel Issue Before Superior Court

By Jennifer Peacock

jt-1-2-solar-arrays-300x200.jpg

Six Flags Great Adventure and KDC Solar agreed to postpone its clearing of 70 acres of woods it owns, as it awaits a decision by a Superior Court judge. Environmental and citizen groups are suing to stop the project. (Photo by Jennifer Peacock)

JACKSON – A Superior Court judge will decide if Jackson Township’s solar array ordinances are lawful.

 

That trial is set for December 19 in Ocean County’s Superior Court by Judge Marlene Lynch Ford.

 

Six Flags Great Adventure and KDC Solar agreed to postpone its clearing of 70 acres of woods it owns by Reed Road to let a Superior Court judge decide if the Jackson Township ordinance allowing the project is legal. Environmental and citizen groups are suing to stop the project.

 

Attorney Michele Donato, who has represented numerous environmental groups throughout this battle, said if the judge upholds the validity of the Jackson Township ordinance, she will then proceed to challenge the township planning board’s approval of the project.

 

“The placement of solar facilities on open space is an issue on the national level and there are scholarly studies regarding the negative effects of consuming valuable open space with solar panels,” Donato said.

 

As The Jackson Times previously reported, the original plan, which faced opposition from environmental groups, called for razing 90 acres of forest owned by Great Adventure located by the Colliers Mills Wildlife Management Area and constructing a solar panel field which would provide energy for the park’s use. Nearly 26,000 trees would have been planted throughout the park. The solar arrays would be close to residential homes on and near Reed Road.

 

The revamped plan, approved by the planning board back in March and which incorporates the environmental groups’ demands to put solar arrays in the parking lots, would still raze 67 acres of trees which Great Adventure has deemed in poor health. Great Adventure promised to plant 19,000 trees. Some of the solar arrays would be placed over the employee parking lot, but not the main parking lots.

Any plans to start the work were put on hold. Great Adventure and KDC Solar agreed with environmental groups to wait until the court resolves the issue.

 

“We strongly support solar power, but there are better alternatives Six Flags and KDC can take other than this clear-cut plan. If Six Flags would have put solar panels on their parking lot, they would be operating already. This proves that this is a bad project because after all this time and all this money spent, there’s still no solar,” Jeff Tittel, director of New Jersey Sierra Club, said in October. “We are going to Court because this is a good project in the wrong place. Instead of clear-cutting 16,000 trees, there are other alternatives Six Flags could take that do not impact habitat, water quality and flooding. We need them to stop the clear-cut because it will undermine all the benefits of clean energy.”

 

Great Adventure’s legal representation has said solar arrays in the visitor parking lots would cause a security hazard while also causing a loss of parking spaces.

 

The Jackson Times reached out to Great Adventure for comment on the upcoming trial. A representative from Great Adventure president John Fitzgerald’s office said Great Adventure had no comment on the upcoming court date, but did provide a fact sheet detailing the project.

 

“Six Flags has been, and will remain, a good custodian of the environment. We are also good corporate citizens, and along with KDC Solar, are committed to mitigating any impact to the environment,” Great Adventure public relations supervisor Kaitlyn Pitts wrote. “We are excited about the fact that this project will reduce carbon emissions by 31 times more than the trees and shrubs that will be removed, and that we will become the world’s first solar-powered theme park. This project is a positive for the environment and will not harm the habitats of threatened or endangered species, nor impair protected wetlands or watersheds. Clean energy is right for the environment and our future, and this project is a giant step toward becoming a net-zero carbon theme park.”

http://micromediapubs.com/solar-panel-issue-superior-court/

 

Interested to see the outcome of this. I just really wish that they could find some other way so that they don't have to removed so many trees.

Edited by SFGadv123
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://micromediapubs.com/solar-panel-issue-superior-court/

 

Interested to see the outcome of this. I just really wish that they could find some other way so that they don't have to removed so many trees.

Agree'd. I wonder if they put solar panels in the parking lot, in the employee lot, and on top of every building (only ones where the solar panels would be hidden, like Skull Mountain, Grannies, TDK, etc), would they then only have to cut down a small amount of trees?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree'd. I wonder if they put solar panels in the parking lot, in the employee lot, and on top of every building (only ones where the solar panels would be hidden, like Skull Mountain, Grannies, TDK, etc), would they then only have to cut down a small amount of trees?

Matt Kaiser made a post a while back about that and based on his calculations if they out the solar panels were placed in the lots, as well as on top of buildings, it would come out to about 70 acres. So if they did that, there would clearly be a much less amount of trees that would have to be cut to finish the project. Of course they have been strongly opposed to placing them in any lot other than the employee. It seems feasible to me and other places that do it. I even contacted them about it and they told me the parking lot was not suitable for safety concerns, as well as special events and future plans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's hilarious that they cite safety concerns in the parking lot, considering that security booth is staffed about 5% of the time. At least the structures holding up the panels could have cameras that someone could watch for suspicious activity.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Six Flags solar farm: Trial delayed until 2017

Mike Davis , @byMikeDavis4:51 p.m. EST December 23, 2016

 

35553589001_4190208248001_solar.jpg

Environmental activists gather along the border of a 90-acre forest to denounce Six Flags Great Adventure's plans to clear cut 18,000 trees and build a solar farm. STAFF VIDEO BY THOMAS P. COSTELLO

B9320314539Z.1_20160101154537_000_GEPD13

(Photo: Getty Images/Stocktrek Images)

JACKSON — Should Six Flags Great Adventure cut down a forest to make room for solar panels?

An Ocean County judge is expected to hear the case early next year after a last-minute postponement, the latest hiccup in a nearly two-year-long legal battle over a proposed solar farm on an undeveloped piece of land.

Jackson Township attorney Jean Cipriani said the date hasn't been finalized but is penciled in for the first week in January. It's anticipated to be wrapped up within two days, Cipriani said. There was not enough time to complete the trial this week, causing the postponement, she said.

FLASHBACK: Jackson OKs Six Flags solar farm

While Six Flags and developer KDC Solar argue that it would provide more than 98 percent of the park's power, environmentalists have argued it takes one step forward and two steps back: In order to build the solar farm, developers would cut down nearly 15,000 trees, many of which are linked to the Pinelands National Reserve but not under the same protections.

B9317334439Z.1_20150513123447_000_G93APABuy Photo

(Photo: THOMAS P. COSTELLO)

“Any delay is good. Time is on our side with these kinds of projects,” said Jeff Tittel, executive director of the Sierra Club of New Jersey, one of six groups suing to stop the solar farm. “The longer it takes to go to court and get approvals, the more likely that public opinion and the market conditions change and projects like this will fall under their own weight.”

MORE: Six Flags won't unplug solar plan

The six environmental groups formally opposing the project had long argued for the installation of solar canopies over the 100-acre parking lot, as it would provide comparable solar energy without removing trees. Six Flags has dismissed that concept, as it would require the removal of cherished parking spaces.

The project was the subject of a nine-month-long planning board hearing, focusing mostly on neighboring residents' fears of flooding and loss of property value. But the lawsuit itself centers around a 2015 zoning change that allowed solar farms to be constructed in conservation areas.

The plaintiffs argue that zoning change was cherry-picked as a favor to Six Flags and KDC Solar, with the solar farm project in mind.

35553589001_4202999701001_solar.jpg

Six Flags Great Adventure president John Fitzgerald comments on theme park's plan to build a solar farm on their property. STAFF VIDEO BY THOMAS P. COSTELLO STAFF VIDEO BY THOMAS P. COSTELLO

MORE: 9 residents' complaints on Six Flags solar farm

The January trial won't likely be the end of the solar farm fight. Dave Pringle, campaign director for plaintiff Clean Water Action, said Tuesday that the organization plans on appealing any decision not in the environmentalists' favor. If the ordinance change is proved valid, they will contest the planning board decision.

“We have one and possibly two court cases to pursue here. Great Adventure could fix it by doing the right thing in the first place and save everybody time and money," Pringle said.

A Six Flags Great Adventure spokeswoman declined comment on the legal case. However, Six Flags has agreed to refrain from any construction until the case is heard in court.

www.app.com/story/news/local/redevelopment/2016/12/20/six-flags-great-adventure-solar-farm-project/95660856/

Edited by SFGadv123

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Classic case of environmentalists fighting over what's more environmentally friendly - trees or regenerative clean power. LOL

 

They should just do what Stockton University (down near Atlantic City) did in their dorm parking lots, with no clearing required. My daughter attended there, and the supports for the panels were not intrusive and didn't seem to take up a lot of room, thereby reducing parking capacity. While SFGA is a different animal, I still think it could work.

 

http://intraweb.stockton.edu/eyos/president/newsletter/11-09/

 

 

 

Stockton Dedicates One of Nation's Largest Solar Carports
story1.jpg
Aerial view of solar carport

Through the use of photovoltaic panels mounted on top of new solar carports, Stockton, New Jersey’s Green College, is harnessing energy radiating downward from 93 million miles away. In the process, Stockton is reducing its carbon footprint and providing students the opportunity to park in the shade and out of the elements.

Stockton formally dedicated one of the nation’s largest solar carports on October 27. Rather than cutting the traditional ribbon, President Herman J. Saatkamp, Jr., “flipped the switch” on a new era in energy savings and environmental stewardship. The carport, located in Parking Lot 7 next to student housing, has a solar generating capacity of 846 kilowatts, making it one of the largest structures of its kind in the United States. The carport provides protection for more than 500 cars. With additional implementation planned for 2010, Stockton will have the largest application in an institutional setting.

Edited by dougdrummer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they're worried about losing parking spaces, How about the tree people fund a parking garage?

Has an amusement park ever had a parking garage? I think the access/egress rate would not be fast enough for the mass of cars they have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has an amusement park ever had a parking garage? I think the access/egress rate would not be fast enough for the mass of cars they have.

Universal Orlando has all guests park in a large parking garage near City Walk. Disneyland California also has one I believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Classic case of environmentalists fighting over what's more environmentally friendly - trees or regenerative clean power. LOL

 

They should just do what Stockton University (down near Atlantic City) did in their dorm parking lots, with no clearing required. My daughter attended there, and the supports for the panels were not intrusive and didn't seem to take up a lot of room, thereby reducing parking capacity. While SFGA is a different animal, I still think it could work.

 

http://intraweb.stockton.edu/eyos/president/newsletter/11-09/

 

 

 

 

 

This is everyone's obvious suggestion. You should read through my earlier posts in this topic.

Based on Stockton's figures, Great Adventure would need over 26 of the same size lot. Stockton's lot was probably a few million dollars (1-5?), so SF would be looking at a cost of at least $26 million to.... $130 million?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A parking garage would certainly be an interesting idea, I doubt they would do it though. Any word on what's going on with this? Last I heard the trial date was moved to 2017, but here we are in March and still no date set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest I cannot imagine trying to get out of a parking garage when traffic leaving some nights is awful enough. People would never be able to get out of the spaces and whatnot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...