HomeMy WebLinkAboutMemo to Yarmouth ZBA (CCH & Winterberry Solar).PDFAm
rA7! L IT tmwl
MEMORANDUM
TO: Yarmouth Zoning Board of Appeals
FROM: Eliza Cox 1? • W
Jean L. R. Kampas
Eliza Cox
Jean L. R. Kampas
Direct Line: 508-790-543 l
Fax: 617-310-9191
E-mail: ecox@nutter.com
May 19, 2022
121639-2
RE: Cape Cod Hospital and Winterberry Solar LLC / Application No. 4945
This memorandum is submitted on behalf of Cape Cod Hospital and Winterberry Solar
LLC (collectively, the "Applicants"), who are seeking to install canopy -mounted solar panels
over an existing Cape Cod Hospital employee parking lot, along with three ground mounted
equipment pads and utility poles (the "Solar Project") at the properties located at 4, 30, 34 and 40
Bayview Street (the "Property"), owned by Cape Cod Hospital. The Property is located
primarily in the B1 zoning district, with the southerly portion located within the R-25 zoning
district. The northerly part of the site is also located within the Aquifer Protection Overlay
District ("APD").
The Applicants have a pending application before the Yarmouth Zoning Board of
Appeals (the "Board"), in which it seeks to modify Conditions 1 and 3 set forth in Special Permit
No. 4715 dated November 27, 2017 and recorded with the Barnstable County Registry of Deeds
in Book 30991, Page 58. At the initial public hearing on March 24, 2022, board members had
questions and concerns regarding the proposed solar use and whether the use is allowed under
the Yarmouth Zoning Bylaw (the "Bylaw"). With this memorandum, we seek to provide
additional details regarding the proposed Solar Project, respond to the questions and concerns
raised by board members related to the proposed solar use, and clarify the application and scope
of the Dover Amendment, G.L. c. 40A, § 3 in these circumstances.l
1. The Property and the Proposed Project
As set forth in the application materials submitted by the Applicants, the Property
consists of four parcels and is currently used as an employee parking lot in connection with Cape
Cod Hospital. The current configuration of the parking lot was authorized by Special Permit
Decision 4715, which classifies the existing uses on the Property as Hospital use (see Bylaw, §
I Separately, the Applicants have been working closely with the 1-lealth Department and Fire Department to address
their safety concerns in connection with the Solar Project. This letter, however, is focused solely on the zoning
status of the proposed solar use and structures.
Nutter McCtennen & Fish LLP / 1471 lyannough Rd, P.D. Box 1630 / Hyannis, MA 02801 / T: 508-790.5400 / nuttencom
AruUPjr
202.5(P4) and Accessory Parking use (see Bylaw, § 202.5(Q2). See Decision 4715, a copy of
which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, With the Solar Project, the Applicants seek to install
canopy -mounted solar panels over portions of the existing parking lot, along with three ground
mounted equipment pads and utility poles. All battery storage will be located outside the APD.
Importantly, all components of the Solar Project fully satisfy the dimensional
requirements under the Bylaw. Additionally, although some existing in -lot trees have been
relocated to accommodate the canopies, the proposal satisfies the in -lot tree requirements set
forth in Section 301.4.6 of the Bylaw. The Solar Project was also approved by the Yarmouth
Conservation Commission, the Design Review Committee, and the Site Plan Review Committee.
II. The Dover Amendment and the Bylaw
The State Legislature has codified solar energy as a protected use in the Zoning Act,
General Laws Chapter 40A, § 3, commonly referred to as the Dover Amendment.' In particular,
Section 3 provides zonijig protections to solar energy systems and the building of solar structures
as follows..
No zoning... bylaw shall prohibit or unreasonably regulate the installation of solar
energy systems or the building of structures that facilitate the collection of solar
energy, except where necessary to protect the public health, safety or welfare.
Thus, the exemptive provisions of G.L. c. 40A, § 3 preclude municipalities from
"prohibiting" solar uses and structures or subjecting them to "unreasonable" regulation.
"Unreasonable" regulation has generally been determined to be regulation that as a practical
matter amounts to a prohibition of otherwise unduly restricts the protected use. 1 racer Lane 11
Really LLC v. Cily c#'Walthanz, 2021 WL 861 157 (Mass. Land Ct. Mar, 5, 2021) (HPS), citing
Trustees of Tufts College v. Medford, 415 Mass. 753, 759-760 (1993). There are several ways in
which an applicant may demonstrate "unreasonableness." For example, a zoning requirement is
unreasonable if it detracts from usefulness of a structure, imposes excessive costs on the
applicant, or impairs the character of a proposed structure. Id. Further, "proof of compliance is
only one way" to show unreasonableness, and courts must consider other aspects such as use or
character of property. Tracer Lane H Really LLC, supra, quoting Rogers v. Norfalk 432 Mass.
374, 385 (2000). Even dimensional regulations that do not strictly prohibit a protected use may
impair it to an impermissible degree. Id. In short, the protective provisions of the Dover
Amendment prevent municipalities from prohibiting solar energy systems except in "that narrow
z Solar energy uses, like other uses protected under the Zoning Act, are so important to the public good that it was
necessary "to take away" some measure of municipalities' "power to limit the use of land" within their borders.
,41lorneyGen eral v. Dover, 327 Mass. 601, 604 (1950). Thus, "neighborhood hostility" or contrary local
"preferences" should not dictate whether solar energy systems are constructed in sufficient quantity to meet the
public need, Newbury Junirir Coll. v. Brookline, 19 Mass. App. Ct. 197, 205, 207-08 (1985).
2
Aruttet
ambit" where a denial is necessary protect public health, safety and welfare. PLH LLC v. Ware,
2019 WL 7201712 (Mass. Land Ct. Dec. 24, 2019) (GHP).
Unlike the Dover Amendment, the Bylaw is silent as to the regulation of solar use — it
neither allows nor prohibits solar use in gny of the Town's zoning districts. The Bylaw does
allow by right, as an accessory use, "other accessory uses if customarily incidental to any of the
above permitted uses and not detrimental to the neighborhood."' The Bylaw prohibits uses
which are not expressly allowed, except upon an appeal.' See Bylaw, § 202.L
III. The Solar Proiect is Authorized Under the Dover Amendment
As explained in detail below, we take the position that the solar use and structures do not
independently require zoning; relief because both are protected under the Dover Amendment and
the solar structures fully comply with all applicable dimensional requirements. Accordingly, the
need to appear before the Board arises solely from the need to modify conditions of an earlier
Special Permit Decision for this Property.
A. The Proposed Solar Use is Authorized by Right on the Property
Where, as here, the Bylaw contains no provisions regulating solar use in any of the
Town's zoning districts, case law is established that the solar use is allowed under the Dover
Amendment. The Massachusetts Land Court has clearly stated that the provisions of the Dover
Amendment "expressly address this situation" and allow the solar use. See Waller v.
Algaraghuli, 2017 WL 3380387 (Mass. Land Ct. Aug. 4, 2017 (KPS) (holding that the Dover
Amendment exemption authorizes solar uses where local bylaws do not regulate solar uses and
prohibit uses not expressly allowed).
In Waller, the City of Newton Zoning Board of Appeal upheld the issuance of a building
permit issued to a solar developer for the installation of a solar canopy on a parking garage
servicing Newton -Wellesley Hospital, located in a residential district. An abutter appealed the
board's decision, arguing that the board incorrectly applied the Dover Amendment, G.L. c. 40A,
§ 3 to the proposed solar use. Specifically, the abutter claimed the board "exceeded its authority
in concluding [the Dover Amendment] allows solar energy systems in all Newton zoning;
districts." The abutter based her argument on the fact that the local ordinance did not regulate
solar energy systems, and the ordinance further prohibits uses which are not expressly allowed.
Id at *4. According to the abutter, therefore, the solar canopy would not be allowed in the
residential zoning district it was located in (or any zoning district for that matter). The Court
firmly rejected the abutter's argument, finding that it "ignores the provisions of G.L. c. 40A, § 3,
' The definition of"Accessory Use" mirrors this language. The Bylaw defines it as "a use customarily incidental to
and secondary to the allowed use and not detrimental to the neighborhood.
4 The Bylaw also regulates both primary and accessory structures, requiring them to conform with all applicable
dimensional requirements.
3
ArLML..
which expressly address this situation, in which a solar use is completely prohibited by virtue of
its omission from a local zoning ordinance." Id. The Court concluded that the decision was
"fully consonant with the provisions and purposes ❑f G.L. c. 40A, § 3." Id.; .see also PLI1 LLC,
supra at *3 (in reviewing a proposed solar use, the board cannot, within their discretion,
determine "whether the protected use can take place in that district, because to do so would be at
odds with the penumbral protections that are provided under § 3").
During the initial hearing, a question arose whether the Land Court's decision in Briggs
v. Zoning Bd. ofAppeals of Marion, 2014 WL 471951 (Mass. Land Ct. Feb. 6, 2014) (AHS)
applied to prohibit the portion of the Solar Project located within the R-25 zoning district. In
Briggs, the local bylaw expressly prohibited commercial solar farms in residential zoning
districts, but allowed them in various other commercial zoning districts. In accordance with the
Bylaw's provisions, the local board denied a special permit application for a commercial solar
farm in a residential district. The reviewing Land Court judge found that the local bylaw in
Marion was not an unreasonable restriction on solar under the Dover Amendment because the
bylaw expressly authorized commercial solar farms in multiple commercial zoning districts.
Unlike the local bylaw at issue in Briggs, the Yarmouth Zoning Bylaw does not allow solar in
commercial zoning districts and prohibit solar in residential districts. Rather, the Bylaw contains
no provisions regulating the use of solar in gny zoning district. Accordingly, the holding in
Waller, not Briggs, applies to authorize the use.'
Based on the foregoing analysis, the proposed solar use is authorized by right on the
Property under the Dover Amendment.
B. The Proposed Solar Canopy Structures Are Similarly Allowed
During the initial hearing, a board member posited that the proposed canopy structures,
by their nature, are "accessory structures," yet appear to be the only proposed structures on the
Property. As such, a question arose whether the canopy structures are authorized under the
Bylaw, which defines an "accessory structure" as "a structure customarily incidental to and
located on the same lot with the principle structure, or on contiguous lots held under the same
ownership."
As stated at the initial hearing, there is a "primary" structure located in the northwest
corner of the lot. It is a building used by Cape Cod Healthcare for dementia and Alzheimer's
5 Note that more recent decisions of the [..and Court have rejected the argument that absolute prohibition of solar
energy systems within certain zoning districts is allowed under the Dover Amendment. See, e.g., Northbridge
McQuade, LLC v. Northbridge Zoning Bd. ofAppeals, Mass. Land Ct. No. 18 Misc. 000519 at *2 (June 17, 2019)
("The court sees nothing in the statutory language or purpose that would countenance carving out large areas of land
by district in the town and making them immune from the remedial indulgent protections of § 3 with respect to this
solar use."). Again, this issue is irrelevant here:, where the Yarmouth Zoning Bylaw does not contain any provisions
regulating solar use in any zoning district.
4
Arutter
caregiver support and for physician recruitment. As such, the proposed solar canopies may be
considered "accessory structures" to that building. That said, we don't believe the solar canopies
mart qualify as "accessory structures" under the Bylaw for them to be an allowed use, given the
broad protections afforded under the Dover Amendment. As set forth above, the Dover
Amendment protects not only the proposed solar use, but also "the building ref :structures that
,facilitate the collection ofsolar energ_." Thus, with respect to solar, the Dover Amendment
does not distinguish between the use and the structure. Instead, it makes it unlawful for the
Town to apply any provision of its Bylaw in a way that would "prohibit or unreasonably
re ulate" the "building of ,solar canopyl structures." On this site, the collection of solar energy
would be impossible without the proposed solar canopies. As a result, whether the proposed
solar canopies are considered "principal structures" or "accessory structures" is irrelevant. The
proposed solar canopy structures -- like the solar use itself — are authorized under the Zoning Act.
Otherwise, as the Board correctly pointed out, a ground -mounted solar energy system would be
allowed on this site whereas a canopy -mounted solar energy system would not. Such an
interpretation of the Bylaw --- allowing one form of a solar energy system but not another of the
same size — would disregard common sense and constitute an "unreasonable" restriction under
the Dover Amendment. &e Tracer Lane 11 Realty LLC v. City of Waltham, supra (a zoning
requirement is unreasonable if it detracts from usefulness of a structure, impairs the character of
a proposed structure, or does not account for the use or character of property).
The Proposed Solar Canopies Are Not Carports
During the initial hearing, there was also a question raised as to whether the proposed
solar canopies are "carports" proposed independent of any solar use, in which case the Dover
Amendment would arguably not apply. As stated above, the canopy structures are proposed
solely to accommodate the proposed solar use within the existing parking lot. Accordingly,
regardless of whether they are referred to as solar "carports" or solar "canopies," the proposed
structures unquestionably "facilitate the collection of solar energy" under the Dover Amendment,
G.L. c. 40A, § 3, and cannot be "prohibit[ed] or unreasonably regulate[d]" by the Bylaw.
IV. The Solar Project Poses No Public Safety, Health, or Welfare Concerns
The fundamental purpose of G.L. c. 40A, § 3 is to "facilitate the provision of public
requirements" that may be locally disfavored. Cnty. Comm is of Bristol v. Conservation
Cornm'n of Dartmouth, 380 Mass. 706, 713 (1980); see also Northbridge McQuade, LLC, supra
("The purpose of the solar energy facility protections of G.L. c. 40A, § 3 is `to require some
`standing down' by municipalities to encourage and protect solar facilities — a use that might be
seen as unwelcome in municipalities at a local level — by abutters, neighbors, and by town
government."). Thus, the Town must weigh the burdens that a municipal regulation imposes on
solar uses against justifications for the regulation based on legitimate municipal objectives
grounded in the protection of health, safety or welfare. Id.
Aruttet,
It is now common knowledge that "solar energy facilities generate no noise, no odor, and
virtually no additional traffic, and cast no long shadows." Summit Farm Solar, LLC v. Planning
Rd q (Town of New Braintree, 2022 WL 522438 (Mass, Land Ct. Feb, 18, 2022) (HPS).
Moreover, the Applicants have been working closely with both the Health Department and the
Fire Department to address their prior concerns with the proposed Solar Project and have met
with both departments onsite. At these departments' request, we have revised the site plan (filed
herewith) to include protective bollards surrounding the equipment areas, a new fire hydrant and
dry standpipe on the Property, and a new fire main from Bayview Street. And, it goes without
saying that the Solar Project cannot be constructed unless and until all necessary approvals are
obtained from both departments.
V. 11arkin14 Lots .tire Preferable Sites for Solazr EnerZy Systems
It is also worth noting that unlike some solar energy facilities that take up significant
portions of land that might otherwise be devoted to farming or open space, this Solar Project is
proposed to be constructed exclusively over an existing impervious parking lot. `Phis is ex_ aetly
the type of solar project that is encouraged by the Massachusetts Department of Energy
Resources ("DOER") and the Cape Cod Commission.
In a 2015 presentation by DOER titled "Solar Canopies at State and Municipal Facilities
in MA," DOER outlined the numerous benefits of solar canopies, which include preferential
treatment from DOER, the ability to "keep green spaces open for public enjoyment," and various
secondary benefits. See portions of DOER PowerPoint presentation, attached hereto as Exhibit
B.' Similarly, the Cape Cod Commission has noted that "parking lots" are a "preferable site" for
large-scale solar projects because they are "previously developed sites." See "Siting Large -Scale
Solar Photovoltaic Projects on Cape Cod" dated December 2020 prepared by the Cape Cod
Commission, p. 13, attached hereto as Exhibit C.
VI. Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, the proposed solar use is authorized under the Dover
Amendment and the Bylaw and the requested relief is warranted. As such, we would request the
Board approve the requested modifications to Conditions 1 and 3 of Special Permit Decision No.
4715.
We will be in attendance at the continued May 26'h hearing to answer any questions the
Board may have. Thank you for your time and consideration.
5552004. l
G Due: to the length of the PowerPoint presentation (69 pages), we have only included the cited portions. The entire
presentation can be found at { €[. �5 1'«�v« _in_ Ess g y:'doc Sala.€'=c allo,pie,s,-slides,`dca��;nload
P 1...
1361
Exhibit A
FILED WITH TOWN CLERK:
PETITION NO:
HEARING DATES:
PETITIONER:
SUBJECT PROPERTY:
TOWN OF YARMOUTH
BOARD OF APPEALS
DECISION
November 21, 2017
#4715
October 26, 2017 and November 9, 2017
Cape Cod Hospital
4, 30, 34, 40, 44, 50, 56, 62 and 66 Bayview Street
Map 36, Parcels: 3, 8, 9,10,11,12,13,14, and 93
(hereafter, collectively, the "'Subject Property")
TITLE REFERENCES (BOOKIPAGE): 33801199, 36441207; 212791263; 40941148;
1423/831; 1549/226; 1423/830; 2115/15; and
15030/135
MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING: Steven DeYoung, Chairman, Sean Igoe, Vice
Chairman, Dick Martin, Tom Nickinello, Susan Brits, and nonvoting Alternate, Tom
Baron.
Notice of the hearing has been given by sending notice thereof to the Petitioner and all those
owners of property as required by law, and to the public by notice of the hearings and publishing
in The Register, the hearing opened on October 26, 2017, testimony was taken, and the matter
was continued to November 9, 2017, at which time the Board of Appeals (the "Board") closed
the public hearing and voted on the petition.
The Petitioner seeks to expand its employee/staff parking lot located on the easterly side of
Bayview Street in West Yannouth. Specifically, the Petitioner proposes the addition of 35 new
parking spaces, however 7 existing parking spaces will be eliminated to construct new interior
landscape islands such that the project results in a net increase of 28 parking spaces, The new
parking spaces are disbursed throughout the Subject Property (as defined above) and are either
located on existing paved areas or result in new pavement that is aligned with existing edges of
pavement. New drainage is also proposed for the new parking areas. At its closest point, the new
parking is located approximately 86 feet away froze the edge of wetland.
As part of the project, the Petitioner proposes additional landscape improvements, both on and off
the Subject Property. The Subject Property landscape improvements include additional buffer
plantings on the north and west sides of the Subject Property and converting 7 existing parking
spaces to interior landscape islands. In addition, a new block planter wall with minimum 6 foot
high Leyland Cypress trees are proposed to help screen views of the parking lot from East Main
Street. This planted screening feature is partially located on the Subject Property and partially
6
Bk 30991 Pg59 #66089
located on two adjoining lots (5 Murray Road and 9 East Main Street, hereafter, collectively, the
"Off -Site Parcels"), both of which are also owned by the Petitioner. Finally, the Petitioner also
proposes planting 7 additional trees on the Off -Site Parcels. All of the proposed improvements,
including those proposed on the Subject Property and on the Off -Site Parcels, are shown on the
plans submitted which are referenced below and made a condition hereof
On October 12, 2017, the Yarmouth Conservation Commission issued a Determination of
Applicability for the project confirming that no Notice of Intent was required. On September 26,
2017, the Petitioner completed Formal Site Plan Review with the Site Plan Review Committee.
The Subject Property consists of approximately 13.8 acres of land and is located within several
different zoning districts including the B1, the R25, and the northerly portion is within the APD.
The Petitioner requested both special permit and variance relief for the proposed project, as
follows:
• Modify prior Special Permit No. 4354, dated August 5, 2011, as recorded with the
Barnstable County Registry of Deeds in Book 25666, Page 232 to permit the proposed site
changes;
• Special permit relief pursuant to § 102.2 and § 103.2 of the Yarmouth Zoning Bylaw to
permit Hospital uses/accessory parking in the R25 and B 1 zones and to allow commercial
parking, though restricted to Cape Cod Hospital staff/employees, in the APD portions of
the site;
■ Variance from §301.4.8 (accessible parking spaces) of the Yarmouth Zoning Bylaw;
* Variance from §301.4.4 (buffer requirements) of the Yarmouth Zoning Bylaw along the
easterly property lines;
• And, if needed, as alternative relief, a Special Pen -nit pursuant to § 104.3.2,4 (expanded
non -conforming uses) and/or a Use Variance for a §202.5(L)(7) (Medical Services
Appurtenant Parking use).
Received at the hearings were three exhibits: Exhibit 1 w A copy of the Yarmouth Conservation
Commission's October 12, 2017 Determination of Applicability; Exhibit 2 -- A copy of Cape
Cod Healthcare's Administrative Policy and Procedure Statement on Employee Parking, dated
February 22, 2017; and Exhibit 3 — A summary of the zoning relief being sought which was
prepared by Petitioners' Counsel, Attorney Eliza Cox of Nutter McClennen & Fish, LLP.
The Board opened the hearing on this matter at its October 26, 2017 hearing. The Petitioner,
through its counsel, Attorney Eliza Cox of Nutter McCiennen & Fish, LLP, and its civil engineer,
Dan Ojala of Down Cape Engineering, Inc., described the Subject Property and proposed
improvements. The Petitioner's representatives explained that Cape Cod Hospital was reinforcing
its policy of requiring staff/employees to use designated lots rather than the visitor/patient parking
areas thereby creating a need to maximize the number of stafflemployee spaces, that no changes
were proposed to the access/egress points of the parking lot, and that additional trees were
proposed along the Bayview Street buffer areas and within the interior of the parking lot. Public
testimony was also taken including questions from Cynthia Laflash (713 Virginia Street) regarding
lighting and location of the proposed new parking spaces and from Michael Hayes, Esq. (23 E.
Main Street). Mr. Hayes expressed concerns with trash, the cutting of trees on 5 Murray Road, and
2
Bk 30991 Pg60 #66089
inadequate screening of the Subject Property from his property and from East Main Street. At the
October 20 hearing, the Board requested that the Petitioner consider additional landscaping both
within the Subject Property and along its borders and that it evaluate ways to improve the
appearance of the northerly portion of the Subject Property. At the Petitioner's request, the Board
voted to continue the public hearing to November 9, 2017.
The Board reopened the matter at its November 9, 2017 hearing at which time the Petitioner,
through Ms. Cox and Mr. Ojai a, presented revised project plans that included additional landscape
improvements on the Subject Property as well as the landscape improvements described herein
above on the Off -Site Parcels. Mr. Michael Bachstein of Cape Cod Healthcare was also present at
the continued hearing and explained Cape Cod Healthcare's employee parking policy and parking
enforcement efforts. The Petitioner also indicated that the discarded trash had been removed and
how the trailers on the Subject Property were used, The Board commented positively on the
revisions to the project plans. In response to Board questions, the Petitioner also indicated that no
hazardous materials were kept in any of the trailers. Public comment was requested and Mr. Hayes
spoke in support of the revised plans indicating that he had met with the Petitioner's representatives
following the first hearing and that he was pleased with the revised plans.
At the November 9, 2017 continued hearing, the Board found that granting the requested relief
would not be more detrimental to the neighborhood, and would not cause any undue nuisance,
hazard or congestion. The Board found that the landscape improvements were substantial,
particularly the proposed improvements on the Off -Site Parcels which would greatly improve the
streetscape along East Main Street. The Board also determined that special circumstances exist
relative to the Subject Property, including its shape and soil conditions adjacent to the wetland,
such that there was a hardship in having to plant additional buffer trees along the easterly side of
the Subject Property as it would involve additional disturbance within the buffer to a resource area,
and that there was no substantial detriment. Similarly, the Board determined that it would be an
undue hardship for the Petitioner to construct handicap accessible parking spaces on this lot given
the fact that there is ample, more accessible, parking spaces provided on the main Hospital campus.
Therefore, a Motion was made by Mr. Igoe and seconded by Mr. Martin, to grant the following
relief
• Amend prior Special Permit No. 4354, dated August 5, 2011, as recorded with the
Barnstable County Registry of Deeds in Book 25666, Page 232 to permit the proposed
project site changes as shown on the revised plans; and
■ To grant a Special Permit pursuant to § 102.2 and § 103.2 of the Yarmouth Zoning Bylaw
to permit Hospital uses/accessory parking in the R-25 and B 1 zones and to allow
commercial parking, though restricted to Cape Cod Hospital stafflemployees, in the APD
portions of the site; and
• To Grant a Variance from §301.4.8 (accessible parking spaces) of the Yarmouth Zoning
Bylaw; and
• To Grant a Variance from §301.4.4 (buffer requirements) of the Yarmouth Zoning Bylaw
along the easterly property lines.
Bk 30991 Pgg61 #66089
With the following conditions of approval:
1.) The project shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the revised project plans
entitled "Overview Site Plan of Land in Yarmouth, MA #30 Bay View Street Parking Lot
Additions" dated September 15, 2017, last revised on November 3, 2017, prepared by Down Cape
Engineering Inc., consisting of four sheets, including the "Overview" cover sheet and three
detailed area plans (hereafter, the "Approved Plans").
2.) All new landscaping shown on the Approved flans shall be actively and regularly cared for
until the new plantings are. established and mature.
3.) There shall be no hazardous materials stored on the Subject Property, including within any of
the temporary trailers which may be located on the Subject Property.
The Board members voted unanimously to approve this Motion and grant the requested relief.
A second Motion was also made by Mr. Igoe, seconded by Mr. Nickinello, to allow the Petitioner's
request to withdraw, without prejudice, the Special Permit relief requested pursuant to § 104,3.2.4
and the use Variance request (§202,5(L)(7)). The Board voted unanimously in favor of this Motion.
No permit shall issue until 20 days from the filing of this decision with the Town Clerk. Appeals
from this decision shall be made pursuant to MGL c.40A section 17 and must be filed within 20
days after filing of this noticeldecision with the Town Clerk. Unless otherwise provided herein,
the Special Permit shall lapse if a substantial use thereof has not begun within 24 months. (See
bylaw § 103.2.5, MGL c.40A §9). Unless otherwise provided herein, a Variance shall lapse if the
rights authorized herein are not excised witlun 12 months (see MGL c.40A § 10).
St n DeYoung, W irnian
4
Bk 30991 Pg62 #66089
•YA
Appeal 94715
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
TOWN OF YARMOUTH
BOARD OF APPEALS
Date: December 18, 2017
Certificate of Grantine of a Special Permit and Variance
(General Laws Chapter 40A, section 11)
The Board of Appeals of the Town of Yarmouth Massachusetts hereby certifies that a
Special Permit and Variance has been granted to:
PETITIONER:
OWNER:
SUBJECT PROPERTY:
Cape Cod Hospital, 27 Park Street, Hyannis, MA
Same as Petitioner
4, 30, 34, 40, 44, 50, 56, 62 and 66 Bayview Street
Map 36, Parcels: 3, 8, 9,10, 1.1,12,13,14, and 93
(hereafter, collectively, the "Subject Property)
TITLE REFERENCES (BOOK/PAGE): 3380/199, 3644/207; 21279/263; 4094/148;
1423/831; 1549/226; 14231830; 2115/15; and
15030/135
Affecting the rights of the owner with respect to land or buildings at: 4, 30, 34, 40, 44, 50, 56, 62
and 66 Bayview Street; Map 36, Parcels: 3, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13,14, and 93 Zoning District:
B-1, R-25 and APD; Registry of Deeds Book/Page: 3380/199, 3644/207; 21279/263;
40941148;14231831; 1549/226; 1423/830; 2115/15; and 15030/135; and the said Board of
Appeals further certifies that the decision attached hereto is a true and correct copy of its
decision granting said Special Permit and Variance, and that copies of said decision, avid of all
plans referred to in the decision, have been filed.
The Board of Appeals also calls to the attention of the owner or applicant that General
Laws, Chapter 40A, Section 11 (last paragraph) and Section 13, provides that no Special Permit,
or Variance or any extension, modification or renewal thereof, shall take effect until a copy of
the decision bearing the certification of the Town Clerk that twenty (20) days have elapsed after
the decision has been filed in the office of the Town Clerk and no appeal has been filed or that, if
such appeal has bccn filed, that it has been dismissed or denied, is recorded in the Registry of
Deeds for the county and district in which the land is located and indexed in the grantor index
under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's certificate of title.
The fee for such recording or registering shall be paid by the owner or applicant.
Steven DeYoung, 15hdirman
Bk 30991 Pg63 #66089
TOWN OF YARMOUTH
1146 ROUTE 28, SOUTI-I YARMOUTH, MASSACHUSI~TTS 02664-4451
Telephone (508) 398-2231 Ext. t285, Fax (508) 398-0836
CERTIFICATION OF TOWN CLERK
Town
Clerk
1, Philip B. Gaudet, III, Town Clerk, Town of Yarmouth, do hereby certify that 20 days have
elapsed since the filing with me of the above Board of Appeals Decision 44715 that no notice of
appeal of said decision has been filed with me, or, if such appeal has been filed it has been
dismissed or denied. All appeals have been exhausted.
BARNSTABLE REGISTRY OF DEEDS
John F. Meade, Register
Exhibit B
Creating A Cleaner Energy Future For the Commonwealth
Solar Canopies at State and
Municipal Facilitiesin MA
Leading by Example Team — Dept. of Energy Resources
Taylor Leyden & Francois Attal —Business Development,
Sala i re Generation
Brian Tracey, Program Development, Poweroptions
Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name,
trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its
endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the Commonwealth or DOER.
Why Solar Canopies in MA?
• Many of the best roof/ground sites
have been exhausted
In general, 40% of pavement is parking lots
Greater potential for large scale systems
• Substantial potential for canopies
across portfolio of government -
owned parking lots
State lots: 4 M W installed at handful of sites
Municipal lots: minimal installations
Rough estimates suggest > 50 MW possible
• Keep green spaces open for public
enjoyment
• Additional Benefits
Creating A Cleaner Energy Future For the
Pros of Solar Carports
1.Receive preferential treatment from MA DOER SREC program
2.Transform unused assets into productive power plants
3-Are close to point of consumption versus solar farms which require high
interconnection upgrade costs
4.Provide an ideal alternative when roof installations are not feasible due
to roof age and load limitations
S.Usually size up to ideal production of buildings nearby — 40 to 50% of
electricity consumption
Creating R Cleaner Energy Future For the Commonwealth
Pros of Solar Carports cont'd
6. Provide secondary benefits
R Reduce heat island effect
Protect individuals from the elements — rain, snow, sun
• Reduce vehicle consumption during summer time
• Capture water for gray water reuse (optional)
Replace lights with LED fixtures with lower electricity consumption
and substantially less light pollution
Creating A Cleaner Energy Future For the Commonwealth
Exhibit C
If
^f�
Siting Large -Scale Solar
Photovoltaic Projects
on Cape Cod
Prepared by Cape Cod Commission Staff.
. ; '
Siting Large -Scale Solar Photovoltaic
Projects on Cape Cod
CONTENTS
Introduction........................................................................................................................................
3
RegionalPlanning..............................................................................................................................3
AboutSolar Energy............................................................................................................................
3
Market Trends and Incentives........................................................................................................4
SolarPV on Cape Cod. ... ............................................................
..................................................... 5
SolarScreening Tool.........................................................................................................................
5
Solar Screening Tool Criteria..........................................................................................................
6
SolarScreening Methods.. ...............................................................................................
_ ... ....... 12
Other Solar PV Considerations.....................................................................................................13
Resources..........................................................................................................................................15
CAPE COD COMMISSION
3225 Main Street • P.O. Box 226 • Barnstable, MA 02630
508-362-3828 • Fax: 508-362-3136 • Email: frontdesk@capecodcommission.org
www. ca p ecod com m i ssion.o rg
SITING LARGE-SCALE SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC PROJECTS ON CAPE COD
CAPE Cep
COMMISSION
JIMt■T11L�.� �■]l
Climate change is a key challenge facing Cape Cod. It contributes to sea level rise, increased frequency
and intensity of storms, and longer periods of warmer weather. Greenhouse gases (GHGs) contribute
to climate change by trapping heat in the atmosphere and causing global temperatures to rise.
Massachusetts has a goal to reduce GHG emissions from all sectors by at least 80% below a 1990
emissions baseline by 2050.
One way to reduce GHG emissions and slow the effects of climate change in the energy sector is
to support the replacement of GHG-intensive fossil fuels with cleaner, renewable forms of
energy. Solar energy is a form of renewable energy that can help governments, businesses, and
individuals meet climate goals.
■ ► : * WHEI1L[M
In 2019, updates to the Cape Cod Regional Policy Plan (RPP), Comprehensive Economic Development
Strategy (CEDs), and Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) were adopted. All three of these regional
plans recognize the importance of addressing climate change in the region. Renewable energy can be
an effective tool when working to mitigate the impacts of climate change.
Recognizing the need to plan for context -sensitive renewable energy development, the RPP includes
a planning action for the Cape Cod Commission (Commission) to conduct an analysis to identify
appropriate sites for large-scale solar photovoltaic (PV) systems with an emphasis on existing
developed or disturbed sites.
The primary technology by which solar energy is harnessed for electricity is solar PV, Solar
PV cells, generally made from silicon, convert sunlight directly into electricity. Multiple cells are
connected in a solar panel or module, encasing the cells in protective glass, metal, and/or plastic.
Panels can be used individually or connected to form an array.
In addition to the solar panel or array, a PV system also includes mounting structures, an inverter to
convert the direct current (DC) electricity generated into alternating current (AC) electricity used for
local transmission of electricity, a meter, other electrical accessories, and wiring to connect system
components.
Solar PV systems are generally considered distributed energy resources - small or medium-sized
power sources that are mainly connected to the lower voltage levels of the distribution power grid
near end users.
Solar PV is considered an intermittent or variable energy source because the amount of
sunlight available to generate energy varies depending on location, time of day, season of the year,
Page 3
SITING LARGE-SCALE SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC PROJECTS ON CAPE COD
CAPE coo
COMMISSION
and weather conditions. To compensate for this variability, solar PV systems may also include battery
storage systems to store energy generated so it can be used later.
Due to their modularity, solar PV systems can vary greatly in size. In our region, small-scale solar
PV systems tend to be less than or equal to 25 kilowatts (kW) and mid -scale systems
are less than 500 kW. These systems are generally installed on rooftops, parking lots,
or adjacent fields to serve the associated residence, business, or municipal facility.
Large-scale solar PV systems are those 500 kilowatts (kW) or larger. A 500-kW rooftop array requires
approximately 50,000 square feet of suitable roof space, whereas a ground -mounted 500-kW
array requires approximately 2.5 acres of land. Large solar PV systems generally provide electricity
directly to the utility and are also referred to as utility -scale.
Solar PV systems also vary in who they serve. In general, small-scale systems serve an
individual home, business, or municipal facility, whereas large-scale systems provide electricity to the
utility. However, there are business models for multiple entities to share the benefits of solar
through onsite or offsite shared solar and microgrids.
Not everyone can install or afford their own solar PV system. Shared solar PV systems allow these
individuals to procure their electricity from a clean energy source located in their region. Participants
typically benefit by owning or leasing a portion of a system or by purchasing kW -hour blocks of
renewable energy generation.
A microgrid is a local energy grid with control capability, which means it can disconnect, or island, from
the traditional grid and operate autonomously. In the event of a power outage, a
microgrid continues to provide electricity to its customers. Microgrids may be designed to serve a
public purpose such as providing power for critical services (e.g. hospitals, shelters, water treatment
plants) in a storm. Or, microgrids may be designed to serve a neighborhood or campus.
Advantages of solar energy include reducing fossil fuel dependence, lowering GHG emissions, and
improving air quality, provided overall energy demands remain constant. Disadvantages include its
intermittency, the use of some potentially hazardous materials in system components, and
the significant amount of land required for a large-scale, ground -mounted solar PV project.
MARKET TRENDS AND INCENTIVES
As of 2020, aver 650 gigawatts (GW) of solar capacity were installed globally. In the United States, there
are almost 2.5 million solar energy systems installed with the capacity to generate over 80 GW of
energy. Massachusetts has aver 100,000 solar PV systems installed with the capacity to generate over
2,850 megawatts (MW) of solar energy, Regional, national, and global energy projections forecast
exponential solar PV growth.
Page 4
SITING LARGE-SCALE SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC PROJECTS ON CAPE COD
CAPE COD
COMMISSION
The local solar PV market has been shaped by federal and state legislation and incentives such as the
federal Clean Air Act and solar Investment Tax Credit and the state's Global Warming Solutions Act
and renewable energy programs.
The Solar Massachusetts Renewable Target (SMART) Program is the Massachusetts Department
of Energy Resource's current incentive program established to support the development of solar in
Massachusetts. As of 2020, it will support 3,200 MW of solar generating capacity in the state.
The SMART Program incorporates land use, siting criteria, and performance standards into the design
of the program. To be eligible to participate in SMART, solar PV projects must take into
account multiple aspects of the site, including, but not limited to: zoning; existing land use and
development; site characteristics such as natural resources; and project size and design.
The SMART Program also incorporates special provisions for solar PV projects serving public entities,
low-income customers, and community shared solar; projects with energy storage; dual -use projects
on agricultural lands; floating projects on man-made waterbodies; and canopy projects over parking
lots and other surfaces.
Solar PV systems have been appearing on Cape homes, businesses, and municipal facilities for many
years. According to Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (MassCEC) data, as of 2019, there were 6,700
solar projects with a median size of 6.2 kW in Barnstable County participating in state solar energy
programs - these do not include projects that do not report to MassCEC's Production Tracking System
or projects participating in the SMART Program. The Cape and Vineyard Electric Cooperative has
facilitated the installation of an additional 32 MW of solar with Cape towns and school districts.
There have been several large-scale solar PV developments on Cape Cod, including installations on
municipal and private lands, Commission data show approximately 100 acres of ground -mounted
solar installed on Cape Cod as of 2014. Most of these installations are on previously disturbed
sites such as capped landfills. However, there have been several greenfield developments with
potential natural and water resources impacts. Large, ground -mounted arrays, if improperly sited,
have the most potential to impact the Cape's unique values.
SOLAR SCREENING TOOL
Anticipating the continued development of large-scale solar PV on Cape Cod, the
Commission created an online screening tool to identify areas in Barnstable County that may be
appropriate for their development. The solar screening tool is a web -application available on the
Commission's website.
Page 5
SITING LARGE-SCALE SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC PROJECTS ON CAPE COD
The tool includes built and natural features, considers relationships between these features, and
provides additional context, all for use in helping to inform the siting of large-scale solar PV projects
on Cape Cod. The analysis is specific to solar PV development and considers built features that may
support and natural features that may be impacted by this type of development.
The solar screening tool has been developed for planning purposes, The tool considers Cape Cod's
unique values and identifies areas where solar PV development is less likely to encounter conflicts
with these values. Planners, developers, utilities, and others seeking to site or review solar PV projects
on Cape Cod may use the tool to make an informed decision as to whether a site may be appropriate
for such development. It is not intended to replace consultation with solar siting engineers and
state/local authorities. Ultimately, every solar PV project will need to be assessed on a case -by -case
basis.
SOLAR SCREENING TOOL CRITERIA
The solar screening tool visualizes the relationship between features of the built and natural
environments at the parcel scale. These features come from various data sources including MassGIS
and the Commission's 2014 planimetrics data. Planimetrics data are points, lines, and polygons
representing features on the ground and is derived through 3d interpretation of aerial photography,
We identified five (5) built features and ten (10) natural features to include in our analysis.
Built Features (5 in total):
The following five built environment features were chosen for inclusion in our analysis due to their
presence on Cape Cod and their potential for hosting large-scale solar PV systems. Parcels with these
built features would likely be considered Category 1 Non -Agricultural Land Uses in the SMART
Program and may be eligible for location -based, and, depending on the community served (i.e.
community shared solar, low income customers, or public entity), other incentives through that
Program.
1. Industrial Activity Centers
a. As identified in the Commission's 2018 RPP, these are lands containing
industrial uses that are suitable for future industrial activity as well as emerging
industries.
b. These are lands without significant resource constraints and are of an adequate
size to support industrial uses and therefore may be suitable for solar PV
development.
2. Commercial and Industrial Structures over 10,000 square feet
a. Structures were identified from the 2014 planimetrics data.
b. Area was calculated and only structures with an area greater than 10,000
square feet were included in our analysis.
CAPE COD
COMMISSION
Page 6
SITING LARGE-SCALE SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC PROJECTS ON CAPE COD
CAPE COD
CbMMISSION
3. Parking Lots aver 10,000 square feet
a. Parking lots were identified from the 2014 planimetrics data.
b. Area was calculated and only parking lots with an area greater than 10,000
square feet were included in our analysis.
4. Transfer Stations
a. Using a combination of Massachusetts assessors land use codes and
the 2014 planimetrics feature class "Transfer Stations", parcels were identified as
Transfer Stations.
b, Entire parcels may be identified as Transfer Stations; however, disturbed lands
associated with transfer station operations may only exist on portions of these
parcels.
5. Sand and Gravel
a. Using a combination of Massachusetts assessors land use codes compiled
by MassGIS, the 2014 planimetrics feature class "Borrow Pits", a review of
satellite data, and conversations with the towns, parcels were identified as Sand
and Gravel.
b. Entire parcels may be identified as Sand and Gravel; however, disturbed lands
associated with sand and gravel extraction operations may only exist on portions
of these parcels.
Natural Features (10 in total):
The following ten natural environment features were chosen for inclusion in our analysis due to their
presence on Cape Cod, the potential environmental constraints they present to solar PV development,
and the potential impacts, including the loss of carbon sequestration potential, that large-scale solar
PV development may have on the region's natural resources. Parcels with these natural features may
be ineligible for SMART Program location -based incentives and may be subject to a greenfield
disincentive or, may be ineligible to participate in the SMART Program.
1. Undeveloped Unprotected Forest and Shrubland
a. This feature includes the following land cover categories from the MassGIS 2016
Land Cover Land Use layer: Evergreen forest, ❑edduous forest, Scrub/shrub,
Estuarine forest/wetland, Estuarine scrub/shrub wetland, Palustrine forest, and
Palustrine scrub/shrub wetland.
b. The undeveloped unprotected layer combines above categories and
removes any Protected Open Space (all levels of protection), leaving only
undeveloped and unprotected areas.
c. Given their unprotected status, these undeveloped areas may be sought after for
development, solar or otherwise; however, these vegetated areas may provide
valuable ecosystem services such as carbon storage and sequestration, and
filtering and cleaning air and water and, therefore, should be carefully
investigated prior to any development.
Page 7
SITING LARGE-SCALE SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC PROJECTS ON CAPE COD
CAPE COD
COMMISSION
2. Wellhead Protection Area
a. Wellhead Protection Areas are important for protecting the recharge area
around public water supply groundwater sources.
b. Undisturbed trees and soils in these areas filter and clean our drinking water; a
priority for these areas is protection from disturbance and sources of potential
contamination.
3. BioMap2 Core Habitat
a. Core Habitat identifies key areas to ensure the long-term persistence of species
of conservation concern, exemplary natural communities, and intact ecosystems
across the Commonwealth.
b. SMART Program note - solar projects sited on land designated as Core Habitat or
on a parcel with 50% or more of its area designated as Priority Habitat and/or
Core Habitat that do not meet the criteria of Category 1 Land Use are ineligible to
participate in the SMART Program.
4. BioMap2 Critical Natural Landscape
a. Critical Natural Landscape identifies larger landscape areas that are better able
to support ecological processes, disturbances, and wide-ranging species,
5. Open Space
a. The protected and recreational open space datalayer contains the boundaries of
conservation lands and outdoor recreational facilities.
b. Newly protected open space changes continually and this data layer is therefore
considered to be under development. Users should check with local agencies
and land trusts regarding any open space not shown in the MassGIS data.
c. The open space layer includes five categories of protection; in perpetuity
(including land protected under Article 97 of the Massachusetts Constitution),
limited, temporary, none, and unknown. For our analysis, we included open
space with levels of protection of in perpetuity, limited, and temporary. The
categories of unknown and none were not included in our analysis.
d. Land protected by Article 97 would require a 2/3 vote of town meeting
and the state Legislature before it could be converted to another use, The
Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA) has a
"no net loss" policy with regards to the disposition of any Article 97 protected
open space.
e. SMART Program note - Solar PV projects on open space protected under Article
97 are not eligible for SMART unless they meet that program's Category 1 Land
Use criteria.
6. Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Priority Habitat
Page 8
SITING LARGE-SCALE SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC PROJECTS ON CAPE COD
CAPE COD
COMMISSION
a. Priority Habitat maps are used for determining whether a proposed project must
be reviewed by the NHESP far Massachusetts Endangered Species Act
compliance.
b. Priority Habitat is based on the known geographical extent of habitat for all
state -listed rare species, loath plants and animals. Habitat alteration within
Priority Habitats may result in a take of a state -listed species and is subject to
regulatory review by NHESP.
c. SMART Program note - solar projects sited on land designated as Priority
Habitat or on a parcel with SO% or more of its area designated as Priority
Habitat and/or Core Habitat that do not meet the criteria of Category 1 Land
Use are ineligible to participate in the SMART Program.
7. MassIDEP Wetland and/or Vernal Pool
a. The 2019 MassDEP Wetlands layer provides a medium -scale representation of
wetland areas. The wetlands information is for planning purposes only. They
do not represent, and should not be used as, wetlands delineations under
the Wetlands Protection Act.
b. Vernal pools are temporary pools of water that provide habitat for distinctive
plants and animals that rely on this habitat for critical life cycle processes.
i. Certified vernal pools are those that have been certified by the
NHESP according to the Guidelines for the Certification of Vernal Pool
Habitat.
ii. Potential vernal pools are those that were visible to NHESP staff on
aerial photographs and interpreted to be vernal pools.
c. For our analysis, we merged the wetlands (including a 100-foot buffer to wetland
edge) and vernal pools (delineated as a 350-foot buffer to vernal pool
center point) layers. The 350-foot vernal pool buffer was chosen as it relates
to Commission wildlife and plant habitat goals and objectives.
d. MassDEP has a Wetlands Program Policy(17-1) describing how MassDEP reviews
solar PV projects that may impact wetland areas,
e. SMART Program note - solar projects sited in wetland Resource Areas may not
be eligible to participate in the SMART Program.
Important Bird Areas
a. The National Audubon Society identifies Important Bird Areas.
b. Important Bird Areas are sites providing essential habitat to one or more species
of breeding, wintering, and/or migrating birds.
9. Area of Critical Environmental Concern
a. ACECs are places that receive special recognition, and may be subject to
increased regulatory requirements, because of the quality, uniqueness, and
significance of their natural and cultural resources,
Page 9
SITING LARGE-SCALE SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC PROJECTS ON CAPE COD
10. Flood Hazard and/or Sea, Lake and Overland Surges from Hurricanes
a. The National Flood Hazard data set represents the current effective flood risk
data for those parts of the country where maps have been modernized by the
Federal Emergency Management Agency. This layer is a compilation of effective
Flood Insurance Rate Map databases and any Letters of Map Revision that have
been issued against those databases since their publication date.
b. The SLOSH model is a computerized numerical model developed by the National
Weather Service to estimate storm surge heights resulting from historical,
hypothetical, or predicted hurricanes by considering the atmospheric pressure,
size, forward speed, and track data.
Contextua I Features:
The screening tool includes additional contextual features for visualization and consideration in the
solar siting process. These include:
1. Parcels
a. Two categories of parcels are delineated: those > 2.5 acres and those < 2.5
acres.
b. 2.5 acres was chosen because, in general, a large-scale solar PV system is at
minimum 500 kW and a 500 kW ground -mounted array requires approximately
2.5 acres of land.
2. Eversource Hosting Caoaci
a. "Hosting Capacity" refers to an estimated maximum amount of distributed
generation that can be accommodated on the distribution system at a given
location under existing grid conditions and operations, without adversely
impacting safety, power quality, reliability or other operational criteria, and
without requiring significant infrastructure upgrades.
b. This map layer provides some guidance on an approximate value of Hosting
Capacity measured in megawatts that may be accommodated onto a point on
the distribution system.
c. Hosting capacity is dynamic and therefore planning far preferred solar PV
development locations based on proximity to distribution is difficult because
locations with capacity on electrical lines, reasonable costs to interconnect, and
market demand change over time.
3. 3D Buildings
a. As identified in the 2014 planimetrics data, 3D buildings provide the user with an
indication of structure/rooftop form and elevation and may be used to help
determine whether a structure can accommodate a solar installation or potential
shading.
4. Street Trees
a. As identified in the 2014 planimetrics data, street trees provide the user with an
indication of shading or buffering.
CAPE COD
COMMISSION
Page 10
SITING LARGE-SCALE SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC PROJECTS ON CAPE COD
CAPE con
COMMISSION
5. Solar Arrays 2014
a. The 2014 planimetrics data identified ground -mounted solar arrays.
6. Town Industrial and Commercial Zoning
a. These may be appropriate areas for solar PV development; however, natural
features present within these zones must also be considered.
b. Users should check with the municipality regarding the siting and regulations of
solar PV systems in these zones and any solar overlays.
7. Community Activity Centers
a. As identified in the 2018 RPP, these are areas with a concentration of business
activity, community activity, and a compact built environment. These areas are
more densely developed and often contain concentrations of historic buildings.
8, Green Communities
a. Designated Green Communities are those municipalities that pledge to cut
municipal energy use by 20 percent over 5 years and meet other criteria
established in the Green Communities Act.
b. One criterion Is met by a municipality passing zoning In designated locations for
the as -of -right siting of renewable or alternative energy generating facilities,
research and development facilities, or manufacturing facilities.
C. Users should check with the municipality regarding any local
solar overlay zoning.
9. Agricultural Lands
a. Active Cranberry Bogs
i. Detailed active cranberry bogs were created using 2011 aerial
photography to inform a wide variety of Commission clean water
initiatives. This layer represents the actual site of the bog, not the
surrounding operations, and may capture greater detail than other
wetland layers.
ii. MassDEP has guidance regarding the installation of solar panels at
cranberry bogs in relation to the Wetlands Protection Act.
b, Cape Cod Farms
I. Using land use codes and local knowledge Commission staff
identified local farms for the RPP in 2009,
C. Prime Farmland Soils
This layer is comprised of three important farmland categories: Prime
Farmland, Farmland of Unique Importance, and Farmland of
Statewide Importance. Urban built-up land and water are excluded
from all three categories, but forested lands are included in all three
categories if they meet the appropriate criteria.
Page 11
SITING LARGE-SCALE SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC PROJECTS ON CAPE COD
CAPE COD
COMMISSION
ii. SMART Program note - solar projects on certain Land in Agricultural
Use or Important Farmland that allow for the continued use of the
land for agriculture and meet certain criteria may be considered
Category 1 Agricultural Land Use and may be eligible for certain
location -based incentives.
10. Massachusetts Historical Commission (MHQ information:
a. Historic Places
I. Denotes all properties where an historic resource has been
inventoried.
b. Historic Areas
I. Denotes the Old Kings Highway Regional Historic District and areas
where neighborhood -scale historic inventories have been
completed.
ii, Historic inventories may contain information and locations of local
scenic landscapes.
C. Historic Districts
i. Denotes both Local and National Register Historic Districts.
d. Solar PV projects in these areas may require additional regulatory
review by authorized regulatory bodies including, but not limited to, MHC
review for archaeological resources,
e. SMART Program note - solar projects that are located on properties that are on
the State Register of Historic Places are ineligible to participate in the SMART
Program, except as authorized by regulatory bodies.
11. NHESP Natural Communities
a. NHESP Natural Communities represents the extent of various natural
communities of biodiversity conservation interest in Massachusetts.
SOLAR SCREENING METHODS
The solar screening tool includes the above built and natural features and evaluates relationships
between these at the parcel scale. Information on parcel land uses, protections, and other
data are presented in the tool so the user can easily explore the potential opportunities and
constraints to developing large-scale solar PV at a location.
Each of the built and natural features present within a parcel were given a point then categorized as
high, moderate, low, or no presence in relation to one another on a Solar Screening scale. Where a
parcel falls on the scale demonstrates its relative built and natural features,
Page 12
SITING LARGE-SCALE SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC PROJECTS ❑N CAPE COD
CAPE Coll
COMMISSION
A parcel in the "More Appropriate" area of the scale has high built features and no or low natural
features present and may be more suitable for large-scale solar PV installations, especially on already
developed or disturbed portions of the parcel.
A parcel in the "Less Appropriate" area of the scale has no or low built features and high natural
features present and may not be suitable for large-scale, ground -mounted solar PV development.
A parcel in the middle area of the scale has a more complex mix of built and natural features. Already
developed or disturbed portions ❑f these parcels may be appropriate for large-scale solar
PV installations whereas, portions of these parcels containing sensitive natural features may not be
appropriate.
With the Solar Screening scale activated, clicking on a parcel opens a pop-up box containing parcel -
scale information on the built and natural features present and the relative categorization of these.
Pop-up boxes also include other useful parcel statistics including size, square footage of
structures, land use, presence of prime farmland soils, area of forest/shrub, and whether the parcel
is within an Historic District,
The Solar Screening scale is included for illustrative purposes and is not intended to replace
consultation with solar siting engineers and state/local authorities. Individual solar PV projects will
require more detailed site assessments and review.
OTHER SOLAR PV CONSIDERATIONS
Markets and Permitting
Solar PV projects involve complex engineering, financial, and legal processes. Preferable sites for
large-scale projects such as landfills, brownfields, and commercial and industrial rooftops and parking
lots may be more expensive to develop than greenfields due to increased engineering, site
assessment, material, and labor costs, complicated contracts, and high lease rates. Government
programs and regulations that incentivize and streamline the financing, permitting, building, and
inspection of such projects need to be developed to make previously developed sites more attractive
to solar PV developers.
Communities Served
Access to solar energy may be challenging for low-income communities. While the SMART Program
includes set -asides and incentives far projects that serve low-income customers, shared solar models,
assistance programs, and policies need to be further developed and implemented to ensure access
to solar energy is equitably distributed and affordable for all electricity consumers.
Interconnection
Solar PV projects require a three-phase distribution line to interconnect to the grid and developers
must apply for and obtain an interconnection service agreement with the utility. Interconnection to
the grid can be complicated where there is limited hosting capacity, To help solar PV developers select
Page 13
SITING LARGE-SCALE SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC PROJECTS ON CAPE COD
CAPE COD
COMMISSION
locations for interconnections, Eversource has developed a Hosting Capacity Map and has answers to
frequently asked questions about hosting capacity on its website.
Places where the distribution grid has reached, or is likely to reach, its maximum interconnection
capacity may not have the abilityto accommodate additional solar PV projects without impact studies
and infrastructure upgrades. Therefore, project proponents should contact the utility early to review
the proposal and determine whether a study or upgrade may be required.
Energy Storage
Solar PV systems may produce more electricity than is needed during the day and do not produce
electricity at night. Energy storage is a potential solution to smooth the production and integration
of solar energy into the grid.
Energy storage systems co -located with solar PV systems are becoming more common. Indeed, the
SMART program includes requirements and incentives for solar PV systems co -located with energy
storage systems.
Sites identified as more appropriate for solar PV systems may also be appropriate for co -located or
stand-alone energy storage systems, provided siting, construction, operations and management, and
decommissioning best practices are followed.
Considerations specific to battery energy storage systems include potential noise impacts from
heating and cooling systems; hazardous materials transportation, use, and disposal; fire and
explosion risk; containment; and screening.
Best Management Practices
Solar PV projects on existing structures (e.g. rooftops and parking lots) should follow standard
construction best practices. In addition,these projects require additional structural analysesto ensure
the structure can safely accommodate the solar PV system. Other considerations for these types of
systems include fire prevention, preventing water penetration, stormwater management, weather -
related hazards (e.g. due to snow and wind loads), and safe access for maintenance personnel and
first responders in the event of an emergency.
A large-scale, ground -mounted solar PV project involves multiple activities, including, but not limited
to, the solar PV system, cleared buffers, access and maintenance roads, and utility interconnection.
All activities should be considered in project planning and review and these developments should
follow greenfield best management practices, Such practices include minimizing grading, protecting
and stabilizing soils, managing stormwater, raising fences to allow for wildlife movement, avoiding the
use of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides, retaining or planting vegetated buffers, removing invasive
plants, and seeding beneath the array with native and pollinator -friendly plant mixes.
The University of Massachusetts Clean Energy Extension has developed a useful set of solar PV Best
Management Practices associated with its pollinator -friendly solar certification program. Projects
Page 14
SITING LARGE-SCALE SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC PROJECTS ON CAPE COD
obtaining and maintaining at least a silver certification or equivalent may be eligible for a pollinator
incentive through the SMART Program.
Operations & Management
An operation and management (O&M) plan is a key component of a large-scale solar PV system as it
ensures that the system will operate at high levels of performance over the project's lifetime. The
O&M phase is the longest in the lifecycle of a PV project, as it typically lasts 2fl+ years.
An O&M plan should include provisions for on -going management of the system components,
the land or structure it is installed on, stormwater, and waste, including a plan to properly dispose of
damaged or mal-functioning panels and other system components. The plan should also include a
schedule for regular inspections of the system. Solar PV projects with storage should incorporate
remote monitoring of batteries and an emergency operations plan developed in coordination
with the local fire department.
Natural events can cause damage to panels; therefore, systems should be designed to withstand
these events and be inspected after high wind, fire, or storm events. A contingency plan
should also be included for other unforeseen issues.
Decommissioning
Solar panels have projected lifespans of 20+ years and solar PV projects have matching contract terms.
Although panels can be replaced and contracts extended, solar projects may be temporary fixtures
on the landscape, and it is expected that a solar PV system will be decommissioned at some future
date. Therefore, a decommissioning plan is another key component of a large-scale solar PV project
as it ensures the system will be removed and structure or land restored or put into another productive
use. A decommissioning plan should include financial assurances, stipulations to remove all system
components, and, at a minimum, a requirement to restore the structure or land to its previous
condition.
As the solar PV market increases, so will the need to manage the volume of decommissioned panels
and other PV system components. Circular economy principles should be applied, and components
reduced, reused, or recycled. Solar PV end -of -life industries will be needed to manage anticipated
solar PV waste.
Solar Energy information:
• National Renewable Energy Lab: Solar Energy Basics
• Department of Energy: Solar
• International Renewable Energy Agency: Solar Energy
• International Energy Agency: Solar
• Solar Energy Industries Association: Solar State By State
• Project Drawdown: Utii_ity-Scale Solar Photovoltaics
CAPE COD
COMMISSION
Page 15
SITING LARGE-SCALE SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC PROJECTS ON CAPE COD
• Project Drawdown: Distributed Solar Photov It ics
CAPE COD
COMMISSION
Federal and State legislation and Incentive Programs:
• Department of Energy; Residential and Commercial ITC Factsheets
• Solar Energy Industries Association: Soiar Investment Tax Credit (ITC)
• Massachusetts Climate Change Legislation: Global Warming Solutions Act
• Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources: SMART Program
• Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources: Renewable E n e rgy P rograms
• Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources: Green Communities Division
State and Regional Solar Energy Resources:
■ Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources: Renewable Energy Snapshot
■ Massachusetts Clean Energy Center: Solar Electricity
• University of Massachusetts Clean Energy Extension: Solar Resources for
Municipalities
• Massachusetts Audubon: Losing Ground 2020 Report
• ISO New England: Rgional Electricity Outlook
■ Eversource: Learn About Solar Energy
• Eversource: Hosting Capacity Map
• Cape and Vineyard Electric Compact: Photovoltaics [PV] Initiatives
• Cape Light Compact: Save -with Solar
• New York State Energy Research and Development Authority: Solar Guidebook
■ Scenic Hudson: A Guide to Siting Renewable Energy in the Hudson Valley
• New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection: Solar Siting Analysis
• Rhode Island Office of Energy Resources; Solar Guidance and Model Ordinance
Development
■ Rhode Island Office of Energy Resources: Solar Siting OpD rtunities for Rhode
Island
■ Maine Audubon: Thoughtfully Sited Solar
Solar Energy and Wetland, Agricultural, and Historical Resources:
• Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection: Wetlands Program Policy
17-1
• University of Massachusetts Clean Energy Extension: Solar PV and Agriculture
• University of Massachusetts Clean Energy Extension: Solar PV and Cranberry
Production
• Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection; u[dance on Agriculture
and Solar
■ American Farmland Trust: Smart Solar Siting for New England
• National Park Service: New Technology and Historic Properties
• Preservation League of New York State; olar Power and Historic Preservation
Page 16
CAPE COD COMMISSION
3225 MAIN STREET • P.O. BOX 226 ■ BARNSTABLE, MASSACHUSETTS 02630
(508) 362-3828 • Fax (508) 362-3136 ■ www.capecodcommission.org
A
'sssCHus