Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press Eversource on Falmouth Tap substation plan; utility defends site choice
Summary
Eversource told the Select Board that moving its proposed Falmouth Tap substation off its property would add years, extra tree clearing and large costs. Neighbors urged the utility to reduce tree loss and provide concrete mitigation; the board asked for clearer cost and mitigation proposals.
Eversource representatives told the Falmouth Select Board on June 29 that shifting a proposed 2.6-acre Falmouth Tap substation off the company—s existing parcel would materially raise costs, require additional tree clearing and delay the project by years.
Renique Goldstein, Eversource—s community-relations manager, and transmission project director Liz Petrono presented the company—s engineering rationale and alternatives analysis. The utility says the proposed rebuild converts a switching station into a transmission-and-distribution substation to meet growing local load and improve resiliency. The company said the preferred design uses existing company-owned land to avoid creating new corridors and to limit environmental disturbance.
"We must demonstrate a clear system need, balance cost to customers, and address community and environmental impacts," Goldstein told the board, summarizing the three elements regulators expect in project petitions.
Neighbors pressed for alternatives that would spare roadside trees along Sam Turner Road. Petrono said that shifting the station roughly 100 feet toward the golf course would require extensive earthwork, a roughly 600-foot retaining wall and temporary undergrounding of an existing transmission line, and would not reduce the vegetation cleared along the roadway because transmission bypass clearances would still be required.
A second alternative on town-owned land near Route 151 was examined; Eversource told the board that building there would likely triple tree-clearing acreage, require new rights-of-way for transmission lines, and trigger additional siting and environmental approvals that could delay the project by roughly three to four years. The company said those schedule impacts would in turn raise costs for customers and could require interim reliability measures.
Board members and residents asked Eversource for more concrete cost figures and for stronger mitigation offers. Select Board members said they want to see specific planting and screening plans, clear commitments on recorded video retention and camera recording, and explicit proposals for funding off-site landscaping or purchase of alternate town property.
Eversource said it will propose on-site and off-site visual mitigation options and continue outreach. The utility also noted it is in an energy corridor with regulatory clearing standards for high-voltage transmission lines; that standard typically requires wider vegetation management than for lower-voltage street lines.
"We—e been through this careful engineering and environmental review to reach our proposed layout," Petrono said. "Moving the station to locations we studied would increase cost, clearing and schedule impact without reducing the need to clear certain transmission corridors."
What—s next: Eversource will return with more detailed visual mitigation options and will respond to board requests for cost estimates and any feasible measures to reduce roadside tree clearing. The Sitings Board process is ongoing; town counsel said the proceedings will provide additional technical review of alternatives.
Speakers quoted (first reference): Renique Goldstein (SEG 4673), Liz Petrono (SEG 4741), John Icko (SEG 4872), Steven Udac (SEG 5290).
