THE BLOG HAS MOVED

Friday, January 6, 2012

Article from the Patch outlining the meeting last night.

http://holliston.patch.com/articles/holliston-residents-fight-against-bullard-solar-plant

One of the main points that several residents tried to bring up is the fact that the project does not belong in site plan review.  It has not been adequately determined if this facility is an "allowed" use in this zone.  If town council does not intervene and correct this mistake, the Planning Board will not have the power to deny this project, and would only be able to put restrictions and limitations on it - WHAT A TRAVESTY!  This is a zoning issue and should be debated in a public forum in regards to that. 


I believe the site plan review is premature, and the developer is averting what should be a careful and well-thought public process.

The site plan review appears to be required only when a project is clearly permitted within the zone in which it is being proposed (as opposed to a special permit hearing or a variance).   I do not believe that the applicant for the Bullard Farm solar power plant has adequately proven that the use intended is allowed within the Schedule of Use regulations found in Holliston’s zoning bylaws.

The applicant has cited Massachusetts General Law (MGL) 40A Section 3, and declared that they do not need to do more to prove that the project can be placed anywhere they would like within the town of Holliston.  This argument is invalid on its face.  The law states,

No zoning ordinance or by-law shall prohibit or unreasonably regulate the installation of solar energy systems or the building of structures that facilitate the collection of solar energy, except where necessary to protect the public health, safety or welfare.

Requiring the applicant to define an appropriate use in accordance with the town bylaws does not prohibit nor unreasonably regulate the facility and therefore, does not violate MGL 40A Section 3.  Further, if the board were to find that the project is not permitted within a residential zone according to the use table, this is also not a violation of the law as it is not an outright prohibition of the facility within the town, nor does it unreasonably regulate the facility. 

This law does not state, as the applicant would lead you to believe, that we must allow this facility anywhere in our town.  It is not an “unreasonable regulation” to require that industrial facilities operate in industrial areas only.  This is not, and should not be considered a prohibition of the facility; rather, it is an appropriate zoning activity. 

As evidence that this is the intended reading of MGL 40A Section 3, a quick search of bylaws of towns across the Commonwealth shows that many of those that have created specific by laws in regards to solar energy generating facilities have restricted these facilities to industrial and commercial areas (and often landfills using an overlay district).  These by laws have been approved by the Attorney General.  If it was the intent of this law to allow these facilities “as-of-right” in any zone, these by laws would not have passed through the Attorney General’s office.[i]

The Department of Energy Resources (DOER) is responsible for the Green Communities Act (MGL 25A, Section 10).  In consultation with the DOER, it is clear that a town should not have to accept large scale solar facilities in all zones or locations.  The DOER feels so strongly about this that they go so far as to state in documents, “it is not clear whether M.G.L. ch. 40A § 3 applies to the construction of large scale ground-mounted systems.”[ii]  In fact, the first criterion to become a green community is to designate locations where these facilities are as-of-right.  If indeed, MGL 40A Section 3 were meant to indicate that they were as-of-right everywhere, why would this even be necessary?  Further, the DOER along with the National Department of Energy (DOE) crafted a model zoning bylaw to help towns govern this type of project.  The DOE notes that even instances of as-of-right siting of such facilities the right only exists within designated locations as noted by local zoning by laws.  

An essential part of “as-of-right” siting is the establishment of designated locations. Once the location(s) is (are) designated within a local jurisdiction, a solar development may proceed without the need for any special permits. A standard building permit and compliance with local zoning bylaws would be required.[iii]

Absence of a specific bylaw that indicates where these facilities may be built as of right clearly does not mean they are as-of-right in all locations; therefore, existing provisions within current town zoning bylaws would be applicable.  While it does not appear to be within the power of town officials to deny solar energy facilities in all zones, as this would prohibit or unreasonably regulate a facility; towns do have the power to indicate which zones in which they feel solar power plants are appropriate. 

Therefore, it is my contention that using the Site Plan Review process for this application is premature.  The applicant must first prove that the proposed power plant is an appropriate use pursuant to the Town of Holliston Zoning by laws Section III Schedule of Use Regulations.  If the applicant is unable to do so, the Planning Board should require the applicant to withdraw the application, or file for a variance. 


[i] Note: as-of-right, meaning the facility may proceed to site plan review without the need for special permit or variance.
[ii] Model As-of-Right Zoning Bylaw: Allowing Use of Large-Scale Ground-Mounted Solar Photovoltaic Installations
Prepared by: Department of Energy Resources Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs. December 2010.

[iii] http://www.doe.gov/savings/model-right-zoning-ordinance-or-bylaw-allowing-use-large-scale-solar-energy-facilities.   January 2, 2012

No comments:

Post a Comment