Solar project clears major hurdle

After long debate, council approves amendment that would allow use by right

By Daniel Kittredge
Posted 11/25/15

A planned large-scale solar power array in Western Cranston has cleared a significant hurdle with the City Council’s approval of a pair of zoning ordinance amendments on Monday.

The amendments …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

E-mail
Password
Log in

Solar project clears major hurdle

After long debate, council approves amendment that would allow use by right

Posted

A planned large-scale solar power array in Western Cranston has cleared a significant hurdle with the City Council’s approval of a pair of zoning ordinance amendments on Monday.

The amendments – which have been the subject of a great deal of discussion over the course of multiple meetings, including a special work session of the council’s Ordinance Committee last week – involved additions to zoning definitions and an associated update to the schedule of uses, which outlines the zones in which certain kinds of development may be located.

The definitions were approved on a 7-1 vote, while the changes to the schedule of uses were approved on a 5-3 vote following several amendments.

The ordinance committee earlier this month had voted against recommending both measures, but as zoning proposals, they still went before the full council.

The solar project became a central focus of the debate over the zoning changes. The updated schedule of uses makes solar power a use by right in A-80 residential zones, in which the Hope Road property falls. That allows the project to proceed through the review process without a special permit.

An amendment that would have required a special permit for solar failed when the council tied 4-4, with Council President John Lanni, Ward 1’s Steven Stycos, Ward 3’s Paul Archetto in favor and Ward 4’s Mario Aceto in favor and Council Vice President Richard Santamaria, Ward 2’s Donald Botts, Ward 5’s Chris Paplauskas and Ward 6’s Michael Favicchio opposed. Citywide Councilman Michael Farina was not present for Monday’s meeting. He has previously spoken favorably about the solar project.

RES Energy Development, a British company with an American division, plans to install a $10-million, 10-megawatt solar farm on nearly 80 acres of land at 840 Hope Road, and has obtained a lease agreement for the property. The life of the project is estimated at 20 to 25 years.

Critics – most vocally members of the West Bay Land Trust and city Conservation Commission, along with some council members – argued the site in question is not appropriate for a large-scale solar facility, given its potential for expanded agricultural use and status as a key piece of open space.

Members of the land trust also said they had been continuing to explore means of arranging for the property’s development rights to be purchased as a means of ensuring its preservation.

Critics expressed support for solar power and renewable energy, but asserted that the full impact of the project is not known. Calls were made for the establishment of a special permitting process to allow for a deeper review and ensure the community is protected. Some questioned the process through which the amended definitions and schedule of uses had been developed and presented.

Supporters, including the administration of Mayor Allan Fung, countered by saying the project will in fact protect the land, which was previously approved as the site of a 30-home subdivision, and could still be used for that purpose. They said it would generate increased tax revenue without placing a further burden on city services or negatively impacting the environment.

Director of Administration Robert Coupe said he lives a “stone’s throw away” from the site, and is excited at the prospect of the city being a “leader” in alternative energy.

“We supported these changes … [we] thought that these were the right approach, balancing the need to bring new business into Cranston with protecting wise planning,” Coupe said Tuesday of the zoning changes, which were recommended by Planning Department staff and approved by the Planning Commission.

RES has filed an application for the project with the city, and it is scheduled to go before the planning commission during its Dec. 1 meeting, which begins at 7 p.m. in City Hall’s Council Chambers. The process will also involve a review by planning staff and, given the presence of significant wetlands at the property, the involvement of the state Department of Environmental Management.

Representatives of RES and their attorney, John Bolton of the firm Hinckley Allen, were present during last week’s ordinance committee workshop and Monday’s council meeting.

Bolton, a Cranston resident, called the project a “great opportunity for the city.” Regarding calls to preserve the land, he said: “I have a client that will preserve it for you. And they won’t take it off the tax rolls.”

Mark Lyons, senior project development manager for RES Americas, said the Hope Road site is “excellent” for solar power because of its size and proximity to the electrical transmission system.

“The environmental impact of doing a project here would be very minimal … We’re not in the habit of choosing bad sites where there would be significant negative environmental impacts,” he said. “We think it’s kind of a win-win option for the city.”

Dan Boyd, senior director of development at RES Americas, said the company has built over 8,000 megawatts worth of projects since 1997 in the United States and Canada. He said the company has yet to discuss taxes with the city’s administration, but that a $50,000 figure is “our assumption about where things would go” based on a $5,000 per megawatt in taxes associated with other projects.

Planning Director Peter Lapolla said RES approached the city at a fortuitous time, as plans were being made for zoning updates to encourage alternative energy sources. He pushed back against the assertion that the project was being advanced in a secretive manner – “All of this has been in the public realm” – and said creating a special permit for solar uses in the zone in question would add “an extra layer of bureaucracy … for the sake of having that extra layer of bureaucracy.”

Lapolla also said the Hope Road site, unless otherwise utilized, would almost certainly at some point be used for a residential development. Solar, he said, is a use that is “less harmful, less permanent and less environmentally damaging.”

“The impacts from solar are controllable, they’re knowable, and they’re minimal,” he added.

Annemarie Bruun, vice president of the land trust, questioned the assertion that the solar project would not have a negative impact on the land. She also noted that at present, there are no plans to build homes at the site.

Douglas Doe, chairman of the conservation commission, was highly critical of the proposal. He pointed to issues with such projects, and higher regulatory hurdles, in places such as Massachusetts and Ontario, and urged the establishment of a special permit process along with further steps to prepare and protect the community.

“Why do you want to open the door before you have the controls? This doesn’t make sense,” he said.

Doe also strongly objected to a process he contended has hidden the planned solar development from public view.

“You’ve got to look forward, down the road … This is being rushed through,” he said.

Stycos said he too felt the project was being fast-tracked without appropriate transparency. The debate took so long, he said, because it has been “so difficult to unscramble this proposal.”

“The administration knew, long before the council or the public, this was going on. It was not volunteered to us … we had to drag it out,” he said. “It was only after very detailed questioning that the solar project came out.”

Stycos on Monday introduced a proposed ordinance amendment that would establish performance standards for solar projects, governing matters such as site preparation, noise, lighting, and their eventual decommissioning. While that measure has yet to be considered, Bolton said RES is prepared to comply with its terms regardless of whether it ultimately passes.

Stycos also voiced support for making the solar project subject to a special permit.

“We know a little bit about the impacts … but other ones are possible,” he said. “The special use permit provides a layer of review for these projects.”

Archetto had some of the strongest words for the administration regarding the development and presentation of the zoning changes, suggesting that “there’s something up the sleeve of this administration” and an attempt to “circumvent established bodies” such as the Zoning Board of Review.

“Not hearing from the people, I think, is a dangerous road to travel,” he said.

Archetto also took issue with the Hope Road site being used for the solar project.

“I’m not opposed to solar power, but it’s just being put in the wrong place,” he said. “I really think we’re going to lose much more than we’re going to gain.”

Aceto spoke in favor of establishing a special permit process involving the zoning board, the ordinance committee and the council to allow for more checks on projects like the solar farm. Doing so, he said, would help avoid making poor zoning and development decisions.

“I tend to agree with what a lot of the people spoke about, in that it’s got to be a longer process,” he said. “By adding the special permit, it’s adding transparency to a project … We’ve never done solar before, so we don’t know … I can’t see into the future.”

Other council members were supportive of the project. Favicchio pointed to the looming possibility of residential development at the site.

“I think we have to put progress ahead of politics,” he said.

Botts said he was “a little incredulous to hear that this has been done in secrecy,” pointing to the amount of time and attention it has received in recent weeks and months.

“In this end, I think this is something that would be beneficial to Cranston,” he said. “This is one project that’s not on the backs of taxpayers.”

Paplauskas also referenced the possibility of houses being built as a significant factor.

“I think the solar panels are better than 30 homes,” he said.

Santamaria became animated while discussing the repeated opposition of some to any project in the western part of the city.

“I’m getting rather tired of it,” he said.

Santamaria also said it had not been definitively demonstrated to him that the solar project would be environmentally detrimental.

Lanni said he, too, saw little downside, but did appear supportive of some further measure such as the performance standards.

“I don’t see many negatives here,” he said. “However, I think we have to be careful … what we create. We can’t create something that gets out of control.”

Lanni also said: “We’ve always lost money every time we’ve built a house … The city would make money off solar paneling.”

The debate over the zoning changes focused on other issues and projects as well.

The updated schedule of uses will allow, without a special permit, a metal-plating operation owned by DiFruscia Industries at the former Cranston Print Works site at Cranston Street and Dyer Avenue.

Plans have been on hold since the Zoning Board of Review denied a special permit. An amendment proposed by Stycos on Monday to keep such a use subject to a special permit failed on a 6-2 vote.

Frank DiFruscia, the company’s president, said the metal-plating operation will comprise approximately 10 percent of the overall business, and operations were set to continue regardless. He said 50 jobs have been created at the site, with plans for another 50.

Stycos said his proposed amendment was rooted in a desire to protect the city from unintended impacts through a more robust review process.

“I don’t know enough about this to know whether metal plating has truly changed to a safe process,” he said.

Other councilmen said they had visited the site, and came away with a positive impression of the company and the operation.

“Honestly, I was impressed,” Lanni said.

“I’m impressed with the amount of investment DeFruscia wants to make in Cranston,” Paplauskas said.

Stycos proposed several amendments to the zoning schedule of uses on Monday. Among those that passed were the elimination of animal day care facilities as an allowed use in some residential and commercial zones, and the elimination of other renewable energy projects as allowed by special permit in the A-80 residential zone.

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here