Zoning Board of Appeals
Minutes
October 28, 2015
Landuse Meeting Room
Members present: Chair Ethan Berg, (EB); Shawn Leary Considine, (SLC); Robert Fuster, (RF); Robert Fuster Jr., (RFjr); and Ned Douglas, (ND)
Absent with notification: Clifford Snyder (CS)
Staff present: Land Use Director/Town Planner Gwen Miller (GM) and Land Use Clerk Peggy Ammendola, (PA)
Willow Hill Road Solar LLC , 0 Mill Street (Map 2, Lot 36), Variance Section 3.1 “Use Regulations” and the Large Scale Ground Mounted Solar Photovoltaic Installation section of the Lenox Zoning Bylaw to develop an approximately 2.7 megawatt (MW) solar array on a parcel jointly in Lenox and Lee.
Presenting the application were: Briony Angus, Senior Project Manager Associate of Tighe & Bond; Wendy De Wolf, Assistant Project Manager, Energy Management, Inc. (EMI); and Sevag Khatchadourian, Project Developer East Light Solar, LLC
There was no correspondence received.
Others present included the following:
Representatives of the Lee Planning Board-Buck Donovan, Harold Sherman, Peter Bluhm and Jaimy Messana; William Enser of Lee Energy Committee; Residents of Lee-Ed and Clare Lahey and Mark Petell
Ms. De Wolf said that the property where the project is proposed is a closed land fill owned and operated by Schweitzer-Mauduit International, Inc. (SMI) who is represented tonight by SMI’s Landfill Manager, Paul Gaudette. Willow Hill Road Solar is a subsidiary of East Light Solar, a Boston based development company that has built several solar projects. They have a similar project in Dartmouth MA.
Ms. Angus, who is also an environmental consultant, gave a brief overview of the project. The 31 acre site is owned by SMI and the project is located on approximately 3 acres in Lenox and 17 acres in Lee. The landfill is limited to the parcel in Lee, and undevelopable land in Lenox. The portion that is in Lee on the landfill will be ballasted, so that there is no penetration of the land fill surface. On the Lenox side the rack foundation will be screwed or driven into the ground. There will be some property clearing to reduce the shading impacts predominately to the south and west of the site.
The project will be electrically interconnected to existing utility infrastructure on Willow Hill Road. There are two points of electrical interconnection because the site is located in two communities. The entire site is already fenced and will remain so and no lighting is being proposed. EMI is entering into a long term lease with SMI who will be responsible for O&M (operation and maintenance) related to the landfill and general site appurtenances and EMI will assume responsibility for the maintenance of the solar facility.
Ms. Angus explained that at the time of their submission to the ZBA the Town of Lenox’s solar bylaw had not yet passed, so the application sought a variance for approval from the use which is not permitted or specified in the bylaw. Since submission, the solar bylaw has been approved by the Attorney General, but it prohibits solar in a residential district. (The portion in Lenox is in R15 district.) It is felt that residential use on the Lenox portion is not viable and would not be compatible because of the close proximity to the landfill gas collection infrastructure.
Ms. Angus said that solar on closed and capped landfills is an excellent reuse of an underutilized site and this project can be operated with minimal intrusion to abutters and the environment. An application has been submitted to the Town of Lee for a Site Plan Review. Because this project is located in an ACEC, (Areas of Critical Environmental Concern), it is undergoing the MEPA review. (Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act) It is expected that that review process will be wrapped up shortly. An additional permit required is a Post Closure Use Permit for the Lee portion. That application speaks to how the project will be constructed and operated to not impact the closed and capped landfill.
Clare Lahey of 110 Mill Street in Lee asked for assistance in locating the project site to her address. The photos that were taken from various locations around and near the landfill to illustrate visual impact were reviewed. These photos are in Section J of the Petitioner’s application. It was explained that a swath around the array would be cleared and it is not expected that the array will be visible from the properties on Mill or Sunshine Avenue.
Peter Bluhm asked about the number of interconnections. In the application it said that there would be one, but in the presentation two were mentioned. It was explained that DEP sees the parcel as one contiguous parcel, but because of the project being located in two towns, there must be two interconnections. Mr. Bluhm said that interconnections are very expensive and he feels that the cost reduces the benefits to the towns.
Mr. Khatchadourian responded that the interconnections costs, all borne by the company, have no economic impact to the towns.
Mr. Sherman asked about the fencing. It was explained that the existing fencing will remain and additional fencing will be installed surrounding the arrays outside the landfill fence. The Applicant would be open to discussion about screening the property.
He also asked what provisions were made if this project had to be dismantled for whatever reason. It was explained that there is a lease agreement between Willow Hill Road Solar and SMI that upon expiration of the lease agreement, Willow Hill Road would be required to remove the system. Under MassDEP Solid Waste Solar, which has provisions in place for decommissioning, provides the Town of Lenox with two forms of legal agreement/financial surety that the system will be removed at the end of the serviceable life.
Mr. Enzer questioned if the two interconnections would be tied into one load dump or split between two load dumps. He said that one of problems of interconnections is too much power being generated.
Mr. Khatchadourian said that when WMECO does the interconnection design for the second interconnection, knowing that the first one is already there, they are going to recommend all the protective equipment, relays, etc., to make sure that there is no situation where too much power is going into it and if that is going to be very expensive that is something that the Applicant would have to bear. It is not expected that there will be an issue of too much power.
Ed Lahey claimed that the landfill is extremely toxic based on information shared with him by the brother of a hauler. He also stated that he had been told by neighbors that the site was leaking into Washington Mountain Brook and he passed that information on to EPA. He isn’t adverse to the project, but wanted everyone to be aware and cautious.
Ms. Angus reiterated that there would be no penetration of the landfill, and that the contractors are to abide by health and safety plan for the workers. She said that EMI is required, at least quarterly, to inspect the landfill in accordance with the permit issued by DEP.
Mr. Gaudette said that he has read the report from MassDEP so he is aware of that complaint. He stated that SMI used the landfill for sludge and material generated from the paper mill and MassDEP is very familiar with the site. Since the mills have shut down he said that SMI has done a lot of work and has spent a lot of money doing so. There had been a flare to burn off the methane, but over the years the decomposition has decreased and the flare could not be sustained. A bio-filter has replaced the flare and now the method is to vacuum under the cap to suck out the gas and put through a bio-filter. This was done in 2010 or 2011. There had been a history of methane migration off the boundary which isn’t permitted so they now make sure that this doesn’t occur. Mr. Gaudette said that
since doing that project there has not be an issue at all and every two years the ground water is tested by an independent third party. This is reported to MassDEP as part of the long term operations and maintenance plan. Mr. Gaudette said that he inspects the landfill every month to make sure that it is working properly. Prior to selling all of their properties in Lee, SMI invested money to clean up facilities, e.g., removal of mercury and asbestos. He feels that SMI has done a great job in committing to and protecting the environment and is doing a much better job than the history would say. RF asked and was assured that the array will not exacerbate these issues and the array will not infiltrate into the system.
The Lee Planning Board explained the process for the application that is before them for approval. They will conduct a site visit and offered to coordinate with the Lenox Zoning Board.
GM said that she attended the MEPA consultation for the ENF which included a brief site visit last week. She described the parcel as isolated with a steep slope surrounding that helps with screening. She mentioned a stormwater basin on site which cannot host solar panels. She said that seeing the site confirmed the Applicant needs the Lenox portion for the project.
The Board was polled and all agreed there was no need for a site visit.
RF confirmed with GM that solar panels proposed are not permitted in the R-15 district.
RFjr questioned the Applicant on how the granting of the variance could be justified. Ms. Angus responded that the portion that is in Lenox is a part of the entire capped landfill that is in Lee. It falls under the DEP’s jurisdiction as a solid waste site and the use of the Lenox portion as residential is not viable. To the north and east of the site, the area is industrial, and Mr. Angus stated that it is an undue burden on SMI to not be able to use the Lenox parcel to make this proposed project viable as a benefit to both Lee and Lenox (The portion that is in Lenox is not capped, there is no waste on that portion, but it is still considered part of the landfill.) For clarification, RF restated and Ms. Angus agreed that what distinguishes this property from other properties that are situated in the R15 zone
is that this is a capped landfill and the other properties in the R15 zone are not capped landfills.
RF made a motion to close the public portion of the meeting. ND seconded the motion and the Board voted to agree 5-0.
RFjr made a motion allow the petition for the variance as presented with the same terms, conditions, and requirements as presented. ND seconded the motion and the Board voted to approve 5-0.
GM said that she has spoken to Fire Chief Clifford who requested that there be a sign with illumination at the access gate with emergency information or that the sign be of reflective material. She said that there was no lighting plan in the petition.
RF made a motion to add a condition that a light at the access gate would be provided so that one could read any signage. RFjr seconded the motion and the Board voted to agree 5-0.
Minutes were tabled:
10/07/2015
10/14/2015
Respectfully submitted,
Peggy Ammendola
| 
