The 24,000-panel commercial solar farm proposed by Carson Power to be built on part of a 174-acre stretch of farmland in Pulvers Corners made a significant stride toward final approval at the June 19 meeting of the Pine Plains Planning Board.
Meeting at Town Hall, the board voted unanimously that the solar project would not create “significant” harmful impact, environmentally or otherwise. The board’s decision amounts to a negative declaration regarding the necessity for a State Environmental Quality Review, or SEQR, which would have delayed the project for months or longer.
Carson’s proposal is part of New York state’s sustainable energy drive, which seeks to obtain 70% of the state’s electricity from renewable sources by 2030. The milestone town Planning Board decision comes after more than six months of deliberation – Carson Power first applied for a permit in November 2022 – that included three public hearings, in January, March and June.
Many at those hearings spoke in opposition to the project, citing potential impact on homeowner value and longer-term recycling plans once the solar panels reach the end of their operational lifespan. Others expressed concern about the project’s proposal to fell some two dozen acres of woodlands, including tree varieties that provide habitat for endangered bat species.
Ten homeowners, many with property that runs adjacent to the proposed solar farm site, hired John Lyons of the Rhinebeck law firm Grant & Lyons to represent their case. Lyons commissioned a study by the Hudsonia nonprofit environmental research institute and presented arguments to the board for proceeding with a full SEQR review.
Credit: Daisy Sindelar
In April, the Planning Board requested a full environmental assessment form (EAF), which includes 18 possible impact issues. In response to board inquiries and public concerns, Carson Power made changes including removing proposed panels from the ridge line and on bedrock, providing for more environmentally appropriate usage of cut trees, and creating a wildlife-friendly fence and pollinator plantings. Analysis by the town’s engineer revealed that there were no wetlands on the property, and state and federal authorities stated that there would be no negative impact on endangered species as long as tree cutting happened during the winter, when the endangered bats move to caves for hibernation. A visual impact analysis revealed that the completed project would be visible from only one house.
During the June 19 meeting, Frank Fish of BFJ Planners – which had been hired by the Planning Board to assist in vetting the solar application – said that many of the 18 potential impacts had either been satisfactorily addressed by the EAF or did not apply to the Pulvers Corners project.
He added that three concerns remained open for deliberation: community character, local habitat and visibility. Fish said that Carson Power has been responsive in presenting plans to mitigate these potential impacts, but that it was ultimately up to the Planning Board to determine whether those factors were “significant” and warranted a SEQR environmental review.
A fourth potential impact – whether the plan is inconsistent with “community plans” – was briefly discussed. The board, however, said the issue was moot in part because the town’s solar law, passed in 2022, specifically allows for commercial solar installations. The board then considered the three remaining potential impacts:
- Consistency with the scale and character of the rural region’s buildings. Planning Board members and Fish agreed that Carson Power has pledged to surround the installation with vegetation and take other steps to help the array blend in with its surroundings. One board member noted that the solar farm would not be visible from Route 199 and would be based directly next to an existing industrial site, the Central Hudson substation. The board voted unanimously that the issue did not constitute significant impact.
- Animated discussion was heard over the possible impact on local habitat and plants and animals, particularly endangered species like bog turtles and two species of bats. Fish noted that both the state Department of Environmental Conservation and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had sent letters confirming “no impact” on endangered species. Concerns were raised that there had been no actual inventory of these or other species on the approximately 24 acres of trees slated to be cut for the project. At the same time, it was noted that Carson Power has agreed to install two bat boxes and plant 172 more trees, has altered its vegetation plan to address concerns about a lack of native pollinator plants, and, perhaps most importantly, will designate more than 70 additional forested acres on the entire Bean River Road site as permanently protected. On this point, the board agreed unanimously that there would be no significant impact.
- The last issue was visual impact. Fish said that presentations by Saratoga Associates, a consulting firm hired by Carson Power, indicated that “visual impacts were not as large as originally thought.” Carson Power, he added, has amended its original plan by offering to replant larger trees along the project’s periphery, which will greatly reduce the visibility of the project. The board voted unanimously that there would be no significant impact.
The board then voted to make a negative declaration on the need for a SEQR environmental review, and instructed Fish and BFJ to work on documentation to support the declaration. That documentation will then go to Town Attorney Warren Replansky, who will draft an agreement including all the mitigation efforts proposed by Carson Power. The Planning Board will review that during a meeting scheduled for August 9. Once formally approved, Carson Power can submit an application for a special use permit, site plan approval and a fencing variance by the Zoning Board of Appeals. These deliberations will include opportunities for public hearings. Carson Power’s goal is to begin work on the site in the fall of 2023. More information about the project is available on the Planning Board’s Google doc.
Other Business
In addition to the discussion on the Carson Power solar project, the Planning Board also approved minutes from previous meetings and took the following additional actions:
- Alchemy Pure LLC, a branding and distribution company for legal cannabis that includes JRRS Naturals and SKX LLC, was granted approval to operate an approximately 15,000-square-foot manufacturing plant in an existing building at 2775 West Church St. According to Wesley Chase, representing Alchemy Pure, legal cannabis will be transported to the site, where it will be trimmed and packaged into jars or other containers and branded Alchemy Pure. There will be no signage on the Church Street building, and any potential odors will be addressed by carbon scrubbers in the building. A security plan has been submitted. A public hearing was called but no one spoke. The project will still require two waivers – one to allow a variance from a 100-foot setback to accommodate the existing building, which is approximately 30 feet from the property line, and another to allow manufacturing on a site that is less than 5 acres (the site is approximately 3.4 acres).
Replansky recommended that the board require approval to be renewed on a regular basis based on state license renewal. The board reviewed potential impacts and declared a negative SEQR designation, and voted to approve the site plan, instructing Replansky to draw up a written plan incorporating stipulations proposed by Alchemy Pure. All board members voted to approve except Ethan DiMaria, who abstained on the basis that cannabis is still illegal on a federal level, although he added he did not wish to hold up the project. With the board’s approval, Alchemy Pure LLC is now free to begin operations. Documents related to this project can be found here.
- A domestic ground-mounted solar application at the Wu residence at 31 Schultz Hill Road was presented. Solar consultant Rhona Zeytoonian, representing the project, noted that it will be on a lower elevation on the property, so the visual impact for nearby properties would be minimal. The board requested photographs from roads that abut the property, such as Schultz Hill and Route 83, to be presented at or before a public hearing on the issue.
- Marcus Andrews, representing Stewart’s Shops, made another presentation to the board regarding plans for the convenience store’s expansion. Andrews incorporated earlier requests from the Planning Board, changing the shop’s proposed signage from a tall freestanding sign to a lower monument sign on a stone wall near the road, and reducing outdoor lighting to 3,000 degrees Kelvin (a measure of lighting warmth). Board members then further requested that the stone wall be similar to the existing stone wall on the property next door. Per the board’s request, Andrews also showed alternative plans that would allow the new Stewart’s building to have a smaller setback from the road, in accordance with local regulations, but would require gas pumps to be closed for a longer period and have other disadvantages for truck deliveries. George Schmitt, the town engineer, noted that he had just submitted a letter with a number of questions, which he characterized as relatively minor. The letter was read aloud. The board noted that further approvals would be necessary, but that that shouldn’t delay a public hearing on the issue. Document related to this project can be found here.
- The Stissing Center, represented by Doug Larson, of Larson Architecture Works, presented a matrix of changes requested by the board during its May meeting. The spreadsheet documented changes that were approved in earlier years but never completed due to funding issues, as well as new proposals. Larson noted that signage at ground level had been removed, as requested. A porch in the back of the building, which had been approved years ago but not completed due to funding issues, is now possible thanks to new donations, he explained. The board requested that The Stissing Center apply again with a full plan that includes all changes ahead of a public meeting. Planning Board members Steve Patterson and Kate Osofsky recused themselves from voting, due to their involvement with the Center. The Stissing Center aims to begin its substantial renovation work in October. Documents related to this project can be found here.
The meeting, which lasted more than 4.5 hours, adjourned shortly before 11 p.m. A public meeting was set for 6 p.m. on July 26 at the Town Hall to consider the Wu solar installation, the Stewart’s expansion, and The Stissing Center project. The Planning Board also canceled its regular July meeting and will meet on July 26 after the public hearings close. For more Planning Board information, click here.