Use this search box to find articles that have run in our newspapers over the last several years.
Date: 1/18/2022
AMHERST – The Amherst Community Resources Committee (CRC) met on Jan. 10 for a public hearing on the proposed moratorium of developing large-scale, ground-mounted solar projects that generate at least 250 kilowatts of power.
While many of the 60 or more people in virtual attendance spoke in favor of a moratorium to give the town more time to develop a universal bylaw for these projects, the CRC ultimately decided they will wait to make a recommendation to the Town Council. The CRC will meet again on Jan. 26, one night before they make their recommendation to the Town Council at its Jan. 27 meeting.
District 2 Councilors Lynn Griesemer and Pat DeAngelis as well as newly elected District 4 Councilor Ana Devlin Gauthier were the sponsors of the proposed adoption of a moratorium. Griesemer expressed throughout the meeting her feeling that town officials needed the time to develop a solar siting bylaw that is consistent with the town’s values.
DeAngelis said this was an important task for the town with the level of care the town has in bringing in solar and fighting climate change. She added that a bylaw would set the conditions for the appropriate placement of these projects and how they will be removed properly.
If a moratorium were to go into effect, it would not prohibit large-scale solar projects that are already underway, including the project being developed at the former Hickory Ridge Golf Course on West Pomeroy Lane, and the project on the former landfill on Belchertown Road. Developers could still begin the permitting process for large-scale projects as well.
In a presentation to the CRC, Devlin Gauthier broke down facts on a moratorium and information on what a moratorium would allow the town to accomplish. One goal of a moratorium in developing a new bylaw is conducting a solar siting study bylaw that shows a clear understanding of where solar could potentially go in Amherst and utilize those results in the crafting of a solar bylaw.
Devlin Gauthier, a former member of the Conservation Commission, also mentioned that even though solar projects are typically reviewed by town boards, either through site plans or special permits, those methods don’t offer protection of a bylaw.
Janet Keller of Pulpit Hill Road asked the CRC about potential impacts on water resources from these projects. Devlin Gauthier responded by saying that is one of the reasons a moratorium is being sought, as well as finding out all the possibilities that could come out of these projects.
“One of the reasons why we would like to see a moratorium happen is to learn everything we don’t know,” Devlin Gauthier said.
Resident Meg Gage said she was strongly in favor of a moratorium and that she has been impressed with the town’s management on this topic. She added that the need to de-carbonize is critical.
“Sometimes Amherst is guilty of a ready-fire-aim approach and we need to aim first,” Gage said on the importance of developing the bylaw.
Charlotte Mullen spoke on behalf of her elderly father who lives in Amherst and who she says started using solar himself to heat water in the late 1970s and added that this town has morals that should be reflected in the writing of any bylaw.
“Putting bylaws in place to ensure wonderful open spaces and forested areas is important to preserve and make sure moving forward with solar is done in a thoughtful way and done to protect the integrity of the town,” Mullen said.
This moratorium was originally brought up in response to a 11-megawatt project on about 100 acres of wooded land owned by W.D. Cowls Inc. off of Shutesbury Road, but that proposal has since been withdrawn.
“Given all that is said I can’t imagine anyone would disagree. I can’t understand why would anybody oppose a moratorium in order to get this right,” said Phil Rich of Shutesbury Road.
Steve Roof of South East Street spoke directly against a moratorium. Roof feels it is urgent to stop burning fossil fuels, and that while he is in support of a solar bylaw being developed, he feels a moratorium would cause a complete stoppage in an initiative to make environmentally conscious efforts as soon as possible.
“It will just put us farther behind on our global goals,” Roof said.
Elisa Campbell said she was more conflicted than against a moratorium as she felt the time to create a bylaw had long passed with the climate emergency.
“I think a bylaw would have been great if we adopted it ten years ago,” Campbell said. “My concern really is we are in a global crisis, and I unfortunately think Amherst is contributing to not solving the problem.”