Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council continues Lovers Lane solar special‑permit hearing to Jan. 14 after extended public comment and legal concerns
Summary
After hours of presentations, expert testimony, and public comment about tree removal, visual impacts, decommissioning and tax PILOT terms, the council voted 8–3 to continue the Lovers Lane large‑scale solar special‑permit hearing to Jan. 14 to allow further legal review and negotiation of conditions related to the Dover Amendment and public‑safety requirements.
The Haverhill City Council continued a contested special‑permit hearing for a proposed large‑scale solar array off Lovers Lane to Jan. 14 after more than three hours of presentations, forester testimony, public comment and detailed council questions.
Applicant representatives — an attorney, engineer Chris Anderson (Hanigan Engineering) and forester Kevin Gano — presented updated slides and technical responses to 11 issues the council had previously raised. The applicant said the array footprint would clear roughly 20 acres of trees (about 25 acres including previously cleared area), with the full property totaling roughly 106–128 acres depending on assessor records; the applicant also proposed a decommissioning bond and replanting plan that it estimates could include about 10,890–11,000 bare‑root seedlings during decommissioning.
The peer review of stormwater was presented (third‑party CEI) and the applicant said the project has been revised to meet applicable stormwater standards, incorporate Atlas‑14 rainfall estimates, and include operation and maintenance plans for stormwater features. The applicant also cited a pilot (payment in lieu of taxes) analysis prepared by the applicant’s peer reviewer estimating about $2,280,680 in PILOT payments over 20 years and offered a voluntary $10,000 donation for local priorities.
Opponents emphasized scenic, ecological and hydrological concerns: residents described the site as an important community viewscape and urged a conservation restriction on the broader Gagnon holdings rather than temporary Chapter 61 reclassification; others raised erosion, well‑water and invasive‑species worries, and questioned whether beehive/pollinator proposals would be viable on the graded slopes. Forester testimony estimated about 2,470 trees would be removed in the 25‑ to 26‑acre clearing area and described invasive species and areas of dying trees.
Councilors questioned access for emergency vehicles, fire‑department protocols for solar and battery systems, the presence of PFAS in panel materials, and whether stormwater and maintenance plans meaningfully protect nearby wells. City Solicitor Jay Talerman advised that the Dover Amendment (M.G.L. ch. 40A § 3) broadly protects certain land uses, including solar, from prohibitive or unreasonable municipal regulation but that the city may impose reasonable public‑safety and site‑specific conditions; Talerman advised caution because courts ultimately decide whether conditions are “reasonable.”
Applicant counsel later told the council the panels are PFAS‑free, agreed to include a 90‑day brush/maintenance reporting schedule in the operation plan if the council wished, and said the owner intends to place roughly 78 acres into a forestry classification plan. After council debate, a motion to continue the hearing to Jan. 14 carried on a roll call of 8 yeas and 3 nays to allow additional legal guidance and negotiation of conditions.
