Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Energy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Chittenden County planning committee approves review letters for four GlobalFoundries solar projects
Summary
The CCRPC Executive Committee on Sept. 6 approved review letters for four proposed GlobalFoundries solar arrays in Essex Junction and Williston totaling about 12.75 MW, noting agricultural soils and environmental constraints and deferring mitigation recommendations to State agencies.
The Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission (CCRPC) Executive Committee on Sept. 6 unanimously approved four CCRPC review letters for proposed GlobalFoundries solar arrays in Essex Junction and Williston.
Taylor Newton, CCRPC planning manager, presented 45-day notice applications submitted by Encore Renewable Energy for four arrays on GlobalFoundries-owned parcels: Essex A-North Lot Solar (4.95 MW), Essex B1 Parking Lot Solar (2.80 MW), Williston E Chip Alley Solar (3.50 MW) and Williston F Mountain View Solar (1.50 MW). Newton said the arrays would supply a small share of GlobalFoundries’ needs but represent a step toward on-site generation.
The review letters identify site-specific constraints and recommended next steps. For the Essex parcels staff flagged agricultural soils as a state possible constraint and recommended the CCRPC defer mitigation guidance to the Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets. The Williston E project review listed multiple constraints including Class I and II wetlands, agricultural soils, deer wintering areas, and Vermont Conservation Design priority interior forest blocks, plus local watershed protection buffers and steep slopes. The Williston F review noted agricultural soils and local constraints including watershed protection buffers and primary scenic viewsheds outside the growth area.
Elaine Haney moved to approve all four letters as presented; Jacki Murphy seconded and the motion carried unanimously. The committee’s action is a CCRPC finding of suitability and constraints policy conformance conditioned on the applicant coordinating with appropriate State agencies and the affected municipalities to mitigate the listed impacts.
The committee did not set permit conditions itself; staff recommended, and members agreed, that detailed mitigation and any regulatory decisions be handled through the State agencies and municipal review processes referenced in the letters. The CCRPC packets included the applicants’ 45-day notices and staff analyses.
Next steps: The CCRPC will forward the review letters and the record to the appropriate State agencies and notify the municipalities; any formal Act 250 or municipal permitting follow-up will proceed through those agencies.
