Opposition to the proposed solar farm in Pulvers Corners, a potential energy alternative to fossil fuels, was expressed in public comments at a Planning Board meeting on Saturday, June 10. This was the final public hearing before the Planning Board, which has been considering the plan for six months, decides whether the developer, Carson Power, must undergo a full review process under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, a process that would take many more months. Frank Fish of BMT, a consultant to the Planning Board, pointed out that the town’s solar law is stricter than New York State’s. He explained that, according to town law, once there is a decision on the SEQRA review, the board still must consider the granting of a special permit and approve a final site plan.
The Planning Board first heard from Andrew Gordon of Carson Power, the company proposing the solar farm, who responded to questions posed at previous public hearings by speakers or members of the planning board, and reviewed the mitigation measures being undertaken. Documents relevant to the application are available on the Pine Plains website in the Planning Board’s google drive.
In a power point, Gordon showed 3D models or simulations of sightlines from 14 locations, created by Saratoga Associates, who were hired to study potential visual impacts. The images indicated there would be partial views from only two sites. Adjustments made to the initial plan include a reduced footprint, a revised tree disposal plan that would limit chipping and utilize large pieces of wood for lumber or firewood, the voluntary installation of bat boxes, the addition of milkweed to the wild native grasses mix around the panels, the restriction of machinery use and deliveries to weekdays before 6 p.m. during the six-month construction period, and the perpetual conservation of the 172 acres, including 70 acres of trees preserved.
Gordon emphasized that “the goal of the project is environmental protection, to help combat climate change,” and that “the energy from the solar farm will displace 13,000 metric tons of CO2 annually, equivalent of the carbon sequestered by 15,000 acres of trees. This is equivalent to the amount of emissions from 1.5 million gallons of gasoline.”
The first public comment was from John Lyons, a Rhinebeck attorney who specializes in land use and zoning issues, hired to represent landowners who oppose the project. Lyons read a lengthy memorandum which proposed a reconsideration of the solar law and a moratorium on commercial solar, based on preserving community character. He proposed that the project must plan for the forest surrounding the solar array to remain as it is. If a tree dies, Carson Power must replace it with one of comparable size and maturity. In his memorandum, he referred to recommendations solicited from planner Nan Stolzenburg. Warren Replansky, the lawyer who advises the Planning Board, asked for the dates on the study and the letter, as neither had been made available to the planning board or to Carson Power in advance of the meeting. The study was submitted to Lyons on June 8, the memorandum written on June 9, the day before the Planning Board hearing.
Additional speakers opposed the plan. John Forelle asked how the project benefited Pine Plains, aside from the tax benefit to the town of $50,000 per year. Daniel Aronstein insisted that balloons should be deployed during a season when there are no leaves on trees to fully assess visibility of the panels. He also stated that smoke and clouds could interfere with the panels’ effectiveness. Kathleen Augustine, an important voice in Pine Plains United, which opposed the initial Durst plans for the Carvel property, criticized the zoning plans for utility solar. Joan Redmond and Sarah Jones both passionately defended retaining the 26 acres of trees that would be cut down for the project, though neither said they were opposed to the project overall. Redmond noted, “It’s counterproductive to remove the forest. The forest provides carbon sequestration.” Pavan Gattani concurred that there will be loss of forest habitat. Eric Galliher, who works as a pilot, pointed out that the solar array will be an identifiable landmark from the air, and asked, “Is this project consistent with community plans?”
Prior to the end of the 2 1/2 hour meeting, the Planning Board voted that written comments on the SEQRA phase of Carson Power’s application would be accepted until 4:00 p.m., Friday, June 16, at which time the public hearing would be closed. Minutes of previous Planning Board meetings are available on the Town’s website. The Planning Board meets again on Monday, June 19, at 6 p.m. at the Town Hall and will take up the Carson Power application shortly after 7:30.
The issue of a moratorium was brought up in executive session at the Town Board meeting on Thursday, June 15. The Board went into executive session with lawyer Warren Replansky for about 40 minutes early in the meeting. When the board returned from executive session, Replansky explained that the town’s solar law was vetted and created over a period of two years with the recommendations of a planner and was accepted. He said, however, that because of a potential for proliferation of solar installations, a moratorium could be put in place until the law can be tweaked, but such a moratorium would not impact pending applications (i.e., Carson Power’s). The moratorium would apply only to future applications. The Town Board will hold a special meeting on June 27 to consider enacting a commercial solar moratorium.
Editor’s note: This article was amended on June 17 to remove a reference to the Canadian wildfires.