I.                    CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL:

Chair Chris Palmer called the special meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.

II.                  PUBLIC COMMENT:

None

III.                OLD BUSINESS:

A.    Review, discussion and/or possible action on draft decision: Preliminary Plan-Major Land Development - Exeter Renewables 1, LLC (Morris Farm Solar) property located at 85 Ten Rod Road, Exeter, RI; Zoned RU-4 and further designated as AP 26, Block 1, Lot 1 for a proposed Solar Project.

Chair Chris Palmer introduced the above item for discussion and review.

Planner Sweet stated that she had sent the Board a draft decision based on conversation from our last meeting.  She put in conditions of approval that were discussed (shared the draft decision on the screen) and stated that it’s up to all of you as to what changes you want to make to the draft decision.  Planner Sweet also mentioned that she spoke to Attorney Craven prior to the meeting and needs to note a discrepancy with the fourth condition on page 3 as follows:

The applicant will provide for ground cover under and around the solar panels of a native pollinator species.

This was something we had talked about at the last meeting. However, Attorney Craven referenced the letter from Sue Hawksley, the Fire Marshal in Exeter, as one of her points in the letter states that everything under the solar panels should be cut regularly. 

Scott Millar shared that there has been a lot of discussion about this at the State level regarding what you can and cannot grow.  At the State level, they have stated that pollinator species can still be used and be mowed after the growing season.  A possible compromise.

Bill Haas questioned what the Fire Marshal suggested?

Chair Chris Palmer added that he does not believe a pollinator species should present an issue because they would be flowering in June or July and have cutting done after they’re done flowering. 

Scott Millar stated that pollinators need to have something flowering all during the growing season so you would not cut during hay time and thinks we can all agree that green vegetation does not burn.  He stated that the best management practice is to cut after the growing season, late October/early November – around the first heavy frost would be the appropriate time.

Frank Epps agreed with Scott Millar and feels if the Board would like us to have a pollinator that is fine with us, if this meets the requirements of the Fire Marshal in Town. Frank Epps also added that a maintenance program would therefore be applicable to ensuring that we are meeting those requirements, as Attorney Craven made it clear that the Fire Marshal wants it mowed.  As long as we can come to an agreement with you both, EDP has no problem with this.

Planner Sweet suggested that we could amend the condition based on input from a landscape architect and fire marshal.  The condition could be modified to read:  The applicant will provide for ground cover under and around the solar panels of a native pollinator species, with a mowing schedule to be approved by a landscape architect and fire marshal.

Chris Shea shared that they consulted with a landscape architect. Knowing the fire marshal’s concerns, the alternative offered was put pollinators around the perimeter and not under the panels. Chris agrees that mowing the pollinators defeats the purpose.

Scott Millar suggested making one additional amendment to the above-mentioned bullet by making it clear that using a pollinator mix approved by USDA and Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) for RI and comply with the best practice of planting and maintaining.  NRCS has guidance and feels it to your (EDP’s) advantage and will probably save money in the long run.

                        Frank Epps thanked Scott Millar and says that’s fine with him.

Bill Haas thinks if we add “as approved or modified by the fire marshal” that should cover it.

Planner Sweet stated that was the only comment that she had to be reviewed.  Asked if anyone has any other questions or comments.

Chair Chris Palmer has read it and does not see any problem with it.

Planner Sweet added that she has contacted four different peer review firms that are on the Town of Exeter approved list and on State’s MPA list so that covers us in both respects – they’re on a MPA list so technically don’t have to go out to bid because your covered under the MPA contract, but also the four firms contacted were pre-approved from the Town’s consulting list.  Planner Sweet will continue to coordinate until she secures someone to do the review.

Donna DiDonato stated that she had a couple of minor technical changes to make before we proceed.

1.      Page 2 – move the sixth bullet up to go underneath the third bullet (now making it the fourth bullet)

2.      Page 2 – the eighth bullet, second sentence should read “the applicant’s attorney responded.”

Scott Millar stated that he thinks it’s a very well written and clear decision, especially with this being a very unique application.  He asked to look at page 2, the third bullet which reads:

The remaining percentage of the site will remain in active agricultural production or undeveloped space 71.5%.

Scott Millar stated that we hope this is case but unless there is an easement on the land, he suggested we say “the remaining percentage of the site is currently proposed for active agricultural production…”

Bill Haas disagrees with Scott Millar’s revision.

Scott Millar added that unless the applicant is willing to put an easement on the land, there is no guarantee it will remain active agricultural.

Frank Epps stated that EDP does not have any rights to the remaining land under the lease agreement.  The remaining land is under the rights of the Morris Trust.

Further discussion ensued with the entire Board.

Frank Epps suggested that we wait until Attorney Craven is present so he may have input on this issue and requested to table this portion of the discussion.

Attorney Bob Craven now being present, Frank Epps explained what the discussion had been in relation to Page 2, third bullet.  Further discussion ensued.

The group came to agree on revising the above-mentioned bullet by removing “will remain” with “is currently.”  This finding of fact will now read as follows:

The remaining percentage of the site is currently in active agricultural production or undeveloped space 71.5%.

Michael Viveiros continued to discuss his concern that is “to save the farm.”  His question is there a way to state that the site will remain as active agricultural production.

A further discussion ensued regarding Michael Viveiros’ concern stated above. Attorney Craven, Michael Viveiros, Planner Sweet, Chair Chris Palmer, Peter Ruggiero, Bill Haas all discussed at length.

Solicitor Ruggiero stated that the entire property is within the jurisdiction of the Board right now.  Mr. Morris signed an application submitting his entire property to the jurisdiction of the Board.  Accordingly, the Board’s ruling affects the entire property.  The site plan will get recorded and will show a project.  The project is a solar farm on a portion of the property, agricultural use on the remainder.  Any changes in the future will have to come back before the Planning Board, Zoning, or the Council because it is now a regulated property.

Planner Sweet asked Scott Millar if he had additional comments.

Scott Millar asked to look at the first condition of approval on page 2 and continue to page 3 which references the proposed buffer.  At the last meeting, we discussed that the buffer vegetation must be reviewed and approved by a licensed RI landscape architect and that the buffer vegetation must adequately screen the solar development year-round. 

Scott Millar asked to look at page 4, #3 and suggested adding a new sentence after the first to read: Moreover, there will be a significant change to the pre-existing hydrology of the site and the impacts of which are not known at this time.

Chris Shea stated that they submitted an application to the RI Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM), we also had to do an analysis that was satisfactory to the RI Department of Transportation (RIDOT) because the project is on a State highway.  There is a culvert that crosses under Ten Rod Road and we were required by RIDOT to provide a supplemental analysis that showed that the project would result in no impact to that culvert.

Further discussion ensued regarding stormwater runoff and changes to the pre-existing hydrology.

Planner Sweet suggested adding “there may be” to the above-mentioned sentence to be added to page 4, #3 which will now read: Moreover, there will be a significant change to the pre-existing hydrology of the site and there may be impacts of which are not known at this time.

Frank Epps and Attorney Craven agree with this revision.

Scott Millar asked to look at page 3, third bullet and suggested adding the distance of the “gap” in the second sentence.  Planner Sweet will add 6” before the word gap.

Chair Chris Palmer reviewed the DRAFT DECISION – (12) Findings of Fact, (12) Conditions of Approval and (8) Required Findings.

Bill Haas asked Chair Palmer to back up; #6 on page 3 was missed.

Solicitor Ruggiero asked Attorney Craven and Frank Epps if they plan on making any improvements on the property before final approval or will you wait until you obtain final?

Frank Epps stated that they do not intend on making any improvements prior to receiving final approval.

Planner Sweet revisited Condition of Approval #1 on page 2 and suggested moving this to page 3, #6 to keep it consistent.

Chair Chris Palmer agrees with Solicitor Ruggiero on adding “if any improvements to be made, they will notify the Town prior.”  Attorney Craven agreed and said okay to add.

Chair Palmer asked the Board for a motion.  Scott Millar will move to approve based on amendments as discussed; Bill Haas seconded.  Voted all in favor.  MOTION PASSED.

II.                  ADMINISTRATIVE: 

A.    Approval of Minutes:

January 14, 2020 -

Motion by Chair Chris Palmer to approve the minutes as submitted; seconded by William Haas. Voted all in favor. MOTION PASSED.

January 28, 2020 -

Motion by Chair Chris Palmer to approve the minutes as submitted; seconded by William Haas. Voted all in favor. MOTION PASSED.

February 11, 2020 -

Motion by Chair Chris Palmer to approve the minutes as submitted; seconded by William Haas. Voted all in favor. MOTION PASSED.

February 25, 2020 -

Motion by Chair Chris Palmer to approve the minutes as submitted; seconded by William Haas. Voted all in favor. MOTION PASSED.

March 10, 2020 -

Motion by Bill Haas to approve the minutes as submitted; seconded by Donna DiDonato.  Voted all in favor.  MOTION PASSED.

B.     Approval of Invoices: Invoice for Peter Ruggiero - $387.00; Motion by Bill Haas to approve the invoice; seconded by Scott Millar.  Voted all in favor.  MOTION PASSED.

C.    Draft Agenda: July 28, 2020 - Chair Chris Palmer will not be in attendance.  Planner Sweet will reach out to Michael DeFranceso.

III.                ADJOURNMENT:

Motion by Bill Haas to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Chair Palmer. Voted all in favor.  MOTION PASSED. Chairman Palmer adjourned the meeting at 7:45p.m.

Respectfully submitted,  

M. Dixie Foisy

Planning Board Clerk