Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solar Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
NextGrid solar modification continued to allow engineering review; hearing set for Oct. 7
Summary
The Planning Board continued the public hearing on amendments to the NextGrid solar installation at 1073 Main Street to allow the town consultant (Beta/GCG) to complete its review; the applicant had submitted revised footing and stormwater details and agreed to screening and fencing changes.
The Planning Board continued, to Oct. 7, the public hearing on a modification to the large‑scale ground‑mounted and carport‑mounted solar installation at 1073 Main Street (NextGrid/AC Millis LLC). The applicant presented revised footing locations and a proposed relocation of a stormwater drain after field conditions were encountered during construction.
Michael Patterson, representing NextGrid / Millis Solar LLC, described changes the contractor made after a footing encountered a 12‑inch concrete storm pipe. Patterson said the plan was updated to reroute and reconnect the drain to clear the footing locations, to provide inverts and manhole elevations, and to move some foundations to preserve the 20‑foot access route required in the site plan. "So we just moved them up ... 5 to 8 feet," Patterson said, describing how spread footings were shifted to avoid the access path.
Beta (GCG) raised additional review points; the board agreed to continue the public hearing to allow the town’s consulting engineer to complete the review. The applicant also confirmed removal of obsolete lighting, clarified that no parking is currently planned on the site, and agreed to screening arrangements the cemetery commissioner requested. Fencing will be black with brown slats per a follow‑up on material choices and a request to upgrade screening details.
The board set the continued hearing for Oct. 7 at 7:30 p.m. and instructed staff to request Beta’s comments prior to the continued meeting. The applicant may update plans further in response to the consultant review; the board said it preferred to issue a final decision only after receiving the consulting‑engineer report.
