Board turns down solar project application in Westmoreland
The Westmoreland Joint Zoning Board of Appeals and Planning Board denied an application for a proposed solar project in the town that would have turned more than 140 acres of farmland …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
Never miss a story
Subscribe now to get unlimited access to our digital content
Board turns down solar project application in Westmoreland
WESTMORELAND — An application for a proposed solar project in Westmoreland — that would have turned more than 140 acres of farmland into host sites for six solar arrays — was denied at a Tuesday night Westmoreland Joint Zoning Board of Appeals and Planning Board meeting.
Residents packed the meeting room — as they did at an initial public hearing on the project in April — as the board revisited SunEast Skyline Solar's project. The company had submitted an application for a special use permit to construct a 20 MW solar electric generating facility around the intersection of Griffin and Valley View roads within the towns of Westmoreland and Kirkland.
Chairman Joseph Malecki said the board worked on the application for some time, with a lot of information and written comments coming in. To aid residents, the board has created a companion site, www.westmoreland-pzba.org, which contained documents relevant to the SunEast application and applications going back to January.
"Although the public hearing (SunEast Solar) is over, we're still getting letters and comments," he said. "But that all has to do with people's feelings, and we have to look at it legally and logistically submitted by SunEast, and we need to afford them every opportunity to state their case."
Since the last meeting, SunEast Solar has gone through part one of the State Environmental Quality Review, or SEQR; the board was responsible for putting together part two of the SEQR.
The SEQR looks at the project’s environmental impact, including the impact on the soil and rainwater runoff to the animals and the impact on the scenery. For part two, a positive or negative declaration is given, where a negative declaration means nothing was found, and a positive declaration means there were issues present.
Malecki said Vernon-based Delta Engineering went through part one of the SEQR assessment forms. Delta came back with 19 different points that needed to be addressed. And while some items are smaller and can be brought into compliance via a small revision in the applications, others are larger.
"There were some things to be concerned about, like the removal of eight acres of woodland and the impact on the animals and birds in the area," Malecki said. "And there's a big impact on agricultural resources. NYSERDA values agricultural land, which is some of the best land Westmoreland has. And that's not an opinion — that's recognized by the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets."
On top of this, the area is identified as a scenic overview. And the board found that the construction of the solar array without proper sightline mitigation would substantially impact the community's character.
And while several points concern the board that would have resulted in a positive declaration, the first point of Delta's report got the board's attention. It came to the Board's attention that the farmland in question that SunEast wishes to build on is actually still owned by the farmers.
"Local law No. 2, 2021, very specifically states that applications that contain multiple parcels, owned by multiple owners, shall not be considered or approved," Malecki said. "And based on that, I question whether or not we can move forward or not. To my knowledge, the property on which these panels would sit is owned by individual people."
Malecki addressed the board, asking for their opinion on the matter.
"When I look at it," said Board Member Paul Kulpa. "One of the things pointed out was insufficient screening to help with the visual impacts. It will be highly visible from Griffin and Valley View Road. There are also concerns with stormwater runoff because significant portions of the land have slopes of 5 to 10 degrees. And then there's the property owner issue. Based on everything, I feel the same way (as Malecki)."
"Unless there's some documentation the board hasn't seen that there is one parcel landowner, and I know we accepted the application many months ago on the assumption we had that," Board Member Roger Potenski said. "But now we question whether it's met the town law."
Potenski did clarify that local law two of 2021 states "...all applicable parcels are under one owner or corporate entity." If SunEast were the owner of all the parcels, this would not be an issue.
"(But) the farmers haven't sold their land," Malecki said.
On top of this, Potenski cited a 2019 law, town law four, and felt that large-scale solar farms were not in alignment with the town's master plan.
The board made a motion and denied the application with consideration of the town's laws.
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here