Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solar Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors press questions on visibility, decommissioning and glare as planning board continues Ancrum solar hearing
Summary
Residents urged the planning board to require more visual and noise analysis, a higher decommissioning bond and clearer financing details for a proposed nearly 10‑acre Ancrum PV solar array; developer Rick Energy asked the board to postpone action until the planner can join and to avoid risking an improperly noticed decision. Hearing continued to Aug. 7.
The Town of Ancrum Planning Board continued public comment on a proposed nearly 10‑acre solar array from Ancrum PV LLC after neighbors raised concerns about visual impacts, glare, decommissioning costs and the project's financing.
Andrea Bell Gashke, reading an emailed statement from neighbor Jeff Baker, said the project "is situated high up on the southwest facing hillside" and "will be clearly visible for several miles along the facing ridgeline," and called for a glare study and a third‑party review of the developer's decommissioning estimate. Neighbor Lawrence Goldberg asked for specifics about construction hours and post‑installation noise, saying the application has not provided the details he needs to understand how his daily life would be affected.
Sierra, a project developer with Rick Energy, told the board the applicant has submitted multiple revisions, that third‑party planners and an engineer reviewed the decommissioning plan, and that "the engineer did state in his comments that the estimate was in line with other projects that he had seen." Sierra also said the site was reduced from 9.93 to 9.04 acres of disturbance and that additional screening had been added after feedback.
Residents questioned the adequacy of the proposed decommissioning bond. The developer's plan estimates a bond of about $479,000; a neighbor's calculation using a different assumed inflation rate suggested a bond of over $700,000. The neighbor asked that an independent third party evaluate the estimate and that the board consider a higher assumed inflation rate when setting bond amounts.
Procedural issues shaped the board's decision to delay final action. The developer noted the town planner could not attend and that there was not a meeting notice posted for this continuation, warning that any action taken could be void under open‑meetings rules. The chair moved to continue the public hearing to Aug. 7 and the board voted in favor.
The planning board said it will ask the planner to attend the August meeting, consider additional visual and noise analyses and may include conditions such as a landscape maintenance bond and decommissioning bond before allowing construction permits to proceed.
