Planning Board advances draft solar bylaw amendments, aims to align rules with battery storage

The Town of Hampden Planning Board on May 13 reviewed a substantial draft of solar bylaw amendments intended to align the town’s solar regulations with recent battery energy storage provisions and to tighten construction and post‑construction oversight.

Gina, the board’s drafter on the issue, said the changes are meant to make the bylaw language consistent with the battery rules and to give the planning board clearer authority to require mitigation and monitoring. “I updated the purpose to mostly align with the battery and I wanted to use that language for the cover letter,” she told members.

The draft adds several new requirements. It would require that any damage to green mesh screening be promptly repaired or replaced and that screening planting plans be prepared by a registered landscape architect to increase the likelihood of surviving installation. The draft also calls for marking the limit of work with a land surveyor and for requiring an environmental monitor during construction and significant weather events, with those costs borne by the applicant, to protect stormwater controls and on‑site resources.

Gina also proposed strengthening financial assurance language to explicitly include project dismantling and site restoration and to allow peer review of decommissioning cost estimates. The draft would require proof of continued liability insurance when ownership of an array changes hands.

On public safety, Gina said she added a provision creating a separation between battery storage and photovoltaic arrays; she recommended a 100‑foot buffer for fire protection. Board members noted other towns have adopted wider setbacks—one example cited had 200‑foot setbacks—but several members said they were comfortable retaining the town’s current baseline setback at 100 feet for large installations while preserving flexibility for site‑specific conditions.

Members discussed signage and perimeter safety rules. Gina recommended requiring clear no‑trespassing and electrical hazard signage at the main gate (and at other clear access points), rather than specifying exact spacing intervals, because local examples vary and the goal is to provide constructive notice to anyone approaching an array.

The draft also tightens compliance by requiring annual reporting from array owners and makes failure to file those reports a potential basis for permit revocation. “I want to put it in so if you don’t do it, there’s a good chance you’re going to lose your permit,” Gina said, citing at least two arrays that have not submitted required reports.

Next steps: the board asked Gina to finish edits and prepare a one‑page cover letter summarizing the changes so the planning board can read that explanation at a future meeting. Staff (Joanne) will forward the draft to town counsel for review; because legal services are in transition, the town expects some variability in review timing. Once legal review is complete the board will schedule a public hearing (notices in the paper two consecutive weeks) and then aim for an endorsement vote ahead of fall town meeting. Board members discussed possible dates in June and summer meeting slots and said a public hearing could reasonably fall between late summer and early October depending on legal review cadence.

The planning board made no final regulatory change at the meeting; members supported most of the substantive edits and directed staff to pursue legal review and public outreach next.