Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Flatiron Energy trims Uxbridge site plan, boards asks for new noise study and abutter notice
Summary
Flatiron Energy and engineering consultant VHB told the planning board they have reduced the development footprint by roughly 1.7 acres, propose a temporary rail crossing for transformer delivery, and removed planned sound walls pending a revised noise study; the board requested peer review and abutter notification or a public hearing before approval.
Annie Gorman, site civil project manager with VHB, told the Town of Uxbridge Planning Board that Flatiron Energy has revised its site plans to reduce the project limit of work by about 1.7 acres and to reconfigure internal layouts to make the site footprint smaller.
Gorman said the project team is proposing a temporary right‑of‑entry rail crossing and minimal gravel work to deliver an oversized transformer; the crossing would be permitted through the rail company and removed after delivery. She told the board the changed equipment vendor uses quieter technology and that the team has removed the sound walls from the current plan set while they complete a revised noise study: "The new technology is quieter," Gorman said.
Board members emphasized the town must verify the applicant's technical claims. Staff and the board requested that Flatiron submit the revised noise study, allow the town's peer reviewer to evaluate it, and be prepared to add mitigation if the peer reviewer or the town consultant finds noise levels in exceedance of MassDEP standards. The board's counsel and staff noted the original approval condition requires applicants to return for reapproval if equipment changes.
Several members said they were concerned about communicating changes to neighbors who participated in earlier hearings when sound walls were part of the mitigation package. One board member described the existing Medway wall as an example of an unattractive mitigation measure and urged the applicant and town to be transparent with abutters. The board discussed options to alert residents: either hold a new public hearing under Chapter 40A procedures or send direct mail notices to abutters (regular mail is the standard; certified mail is not required by the statute).
Flatiron said it will coordinate with the town's noise consultant and the peer reviewer and aim to have the study and a response ready for the board's June 25 meeting; the applicant also noted the project web page and a public-question form are available for abutter questions. If the noise peer review and town consultant both conclude mitigation is not required, the board indicated it would consider a brief update meeting rather than a full repeat public hearing.
The board did not vote on the site-plan modification during the presentation; it asked staff to schedule the revised noise report and peer review for the board's next meetings and to ensure abutters receive notice of the change in mitigation strategy.
