Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Northampton conservation panel continues hearing on proposed solar canopy over salvage yard on Mount Tom Road

July 07, 2025 | Northampton City, Hampshire County, Massachusetts


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Northampton conservation panel continues hearing on proposed solar canopy over salvage yard on Mount Tom Road
Northampton Conservation Commission members on June 26 continued a hearing on a notice of intent for construction of a solar-panel canopy and associated site work at a salvage yard on Mount Tom Road, scheduling the matter for further review on Aug. 14 and a site visit in the interim.

Commissioners said the application, as submitted, did not yet meet the commission's requirement that the entire site meet current riverfront and stormwater performance standards. The applicant submitted a June 16 letter and revised plans and committed to removal of “6 storage trailers,” provided revised compensatory storage calculations, and offered to consider operational limits, including reducing the number of vehicles stored on the site.

Commissioners said removal of trailers is a positive step but not sufficient to demonstrate improvement under the Wetlands Protection Act and the city wetlands ordinance. Commissioner Kevin (chair) said the commission cannot consider only the solar installation without an application that addresses “the entire site” and the ongoing management of drainage, catchment basins and petroleum separation. Commissioner Downey repeatedly urged pulling active operations back from the 50-foot protected riverfront zone and asked whether structures and the bioretention area could be relocated outside the 50-foot zone.

Michael Monod, speaking on behalf of the applicant, said the revised materials and trailer removal were intended to satisfy local and state requirements and asked commissioners to identify any remaining specific items to approve the notice of intent. Roxanne Akerson, who identified herself as the owner/operator of the salvage-yard business, said she bought the site six years ago and offered to meet commissioners on-site and to limit cars and modify operations to address environmental concerns. “We could be on the same page of how you're interpreting the way things look,” Akerson said.

Commissioners and consultants discussed technical measures the commission expects when work affects riverfront and buffer-zone resources: a larger permanent berm or bioswale sized to capture the first flush of runoff; biotreatment/biofiltration; measures to keep petroleum and sediment from entering wetlands; and clear compensatory-storage recalculations if new berms or earthworks are proposed. A wetland consultant noted a mitigation planting plan and removal of invasive species and auto-related debris downslope would “greatly improve” the area if carried out and maintained, but commissioners stressed that permanent operational changes and physical structures are needed to provide lasting protection.

Several commissioners suggested incorporating an operations plan by reference in the order of conditions — a document the commission has used on other sites to require snow-storage plans, maintenance regimes, and ongoing operational constraints. Commissioner Gary (discussion participant) and others recommended a site visit with applicant representatives and staff, and development of a clear punch list staff can provide to the applicant to drive revisions.

The hearing was continued to Aug. 14 at 5:30 p.m.; the motion was moved and seconded and approved by roll call. The commission asked the applicant to review commission staff reports and DEP comments and to coordinate with staff and consultants to submit a revised application that: addresses full-site operations (not only the solar canopy); demonstrates how stormwater and pollutant-first-flush will be handled; shows any pullback from the 50-foot riverfront-protected zone or redesign of arrays/piers to avoid encroachment; and provides an operations plan that can be incorporated by reference into any approval.

The commission did not render a final approval or denial. The continuation preserves the commission's prior stance that the full property must be brought into compliance before a positive ruling on the solar installation can be made.

Looking ahead, the applicant and staff agreed to set up a mutually convenient site-visit date and for the applicant to take staff feedback into a revised submission ahead of the Aug. 14 meeting.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Massachusetts articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI