Hopkinton planning board to renotice public hearing for 8.25 MW Main Street solar project

Hopkinton planning board members on May 7 agreed the applicant for an 8.25-megawatt AC ground-mounted solar project should renotice a public hearing after town staff flagged outstanding technical and record-keeping items.

The project, presented as a development plan review for parcels on Main Street and Gray/Gray Lane, would occupy roughly 29.04 acres with about 26 acres of disturbance and a roughly 21-acre fenced solar facility area, according to the applicant’s presentation.

The project matters because of its size, proximity to wetlands and cemeteries, and a pending Rhode Island Energy interconnection study that the applicant said will delay upgrades about a year and a half; the board and staff said they need a complete, reconciled record before a public hearing and final decision.

Joelle Rocha, attorney for the applicant, told the board the project was first presented in November 2020 and that the applicant has new materials and engineering available: "we're here, on development plan review for an approximately 8.25 megawatt solar project at the property." Jenna Shea, project manager at Dupree Engineering, summarized site conditions and the design: the site is zoned commercial, contains two on-site cemeteries and one adjacent cemetery that the applicant said would be excluded from disturbance, and the parcel has wetlands flagged by a consultant in February 2020.

Shea said the design calls for a perimeter security fence with a six-inch bottom gap, two access drives using existing curb cuts on Main Street and Gray Lane, two infiltration basins and a detention basin for stormwater mitigation, and underground utilities across most of the site. She said the team had coordinated with a landscape architect and included a small storage building for equipment.

Town staff asked the applicant to fix or clarify a number of record items before a full public hearing. Interim planner Ashley Sleep pointed to a staff memorandum summarizing outstanding items and recommended the applicant renotice because the original notice and record are several years old: "I would recommend given the time it's been and the uncertainty that there was a public hearing notice that we just have the applicant renotice." The staff memo items the board highlighted included: - A discrepancy between the environmental impact report and the site plan about the location of a historic cemetery; staff asked the applicant to reconcile the documents and provide a record note if the report is incorrect. - Inconsistent fence heights between plan sheets (one plan sheet lists an 8-foot perimeter fence while the landscape plan lists 6 feet) and a request to explicitly state the solar panel structure height limit (panel detail notes list a 12-foot max) in the dimensional table. - Clarification and legend symbology for overhead utility poles shown on the drawings and confirmation of where the above-ground poles transition to underground cable. - Evidence that an administrative subdivision will be completed before approval so panels are not sited across property lines. - Re-initiation of the peer review by Crossman Engineering and renewed outreach to the fire department for comment on access and emergency response.

Applicants and engineers acknowledged the items and said they will update plans. Dave Russo, identified as a professional engineer on the project, confirmed the poles shown on one plan sheet are above-ground and said the design will transition underground before reaching Frontier Road; he agreed to add the symbology to the plan legend.

Board members pressed for clarity about access and construction traffic; Shea said the construction laydown area is likely to be off Gray Lane and that the team will prepare a site utilization/mobilization plan before construction. Staff also flagged that a prior physical alteration permit window had lapsed and that the applicant had discussed renewing that permit with the permitting agency.

On cultural resources, one project principal said the applicant had met on-site with a representative of the Hopkinton Historical Society and walked cemetery locations to resolve concerns; the applicant pledged to reconcile the survey and environmental documents in writing.

The board did not vote on the project; members and staff agreed to have the applicant renotice a public hearing, supply the clarified and updated materials requested in the staff memo, and continue the peer review with Crossman Engineering. Planner Ashley Sleep told the board the renotice is "just the best course of action" given the elapsed time since earlier submittals.

A resident who said he had followed the project for years, Joseph Moreau of Old Depot Road, thanked the applicant and planning board for ongoing outreach: "People think that I'm against solar, and I'm really not... I appreciate that."

The board listed items to be returned with the renoticed hearing: reconciled cemetery locations, corrected plan legend and fence/panel heights, updated ownership and application sheets reflecting changes in ownership or counsel, a construction traffic and site access plan, verification that required state and federal approvals remain valid, and updated peer-review responses. The applicant and staff agreed to return with these items at the renoticed public hearing.