Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Solar Rooftop topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Georgetown planning board tables rooftop solar application after ordinance issues

Planning Board of Georgetown, Maine · November 20, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The board on Nov. 20 tabled an application for 33 roof-mounted panels at 19 Promontory Way after staff and members flagged coverage far above the ordinance threshold and a missing plan showing the required ridge setback; the motion passed 4-0.

Chairman Bob Trabona said the Planning Board reviewed an application for roof-mounted solar at 19 Promontory Way at its Nov. 20 meeting. Sarah Clifford of Re-Vision Energy, speaking for applicant James Ellis, said the proposal would place 33 panels on a newly constructed home and that the top panel would sit 18 inches below the roof ridge. The application lists proposed roof coverage at 63.7 percent, which exceeds the Solar Energy Ordinance’s 33 percent coverage threshold, triggering a requirement in Section 8.3(d) for a 36-inch-wide path on both sides of the ridge.

Board members noted the application showed an 18-inch allowance at the ridge rather than the 36 inches required by the ordinance. Planning Board member Lisa Sabatine suggested the array could be widened to restore the 36-inch ridge path. The application also lacked a plan that clearly showed the required ridge setback; the board asked for a corrected plan that depicts distances from the ridge and other key roof dimensions. A Re-Vision Energy site-inspection letter included with the submission had no signature and, with the applicant’s permission, was removed from the file to avoid confusion; the application’s signed inspection entry remained. The lot size (.92 acres) and map-and-lot information were added to the application with the applicant’s approval.

With outstanding items unresolved, Sabatine moved to table the application; Pam Gunnell seconded and the motion passed 4-0. The board did not take a final vote on the merits and asked the applicant to return with a plot/roof plan that demonstrates compliance with the Solar Energy Ordinance and shows the required ridge clearances.

The board’s action was procedural: tabling the application pending receipt of a plan and clarification about ridge clearance and structural documentation. The applicant may reappear once the requested materials are submitted.