The most contentious discussion centered around a proposed ground-mounted solar array by Whites Farm Incorporated on Middle Road, which would be constructed within the 100-foot buffer zone of bordering vegetated wetlands. Concerns were primarily about the project’s impact on existing water drainage problems. Local resident John Bennett voiced his anxiety over increased flooding, detailing how water historically flows onto his property from the development area. Bennett, who has lived in his home for 50 years, described a 12-inch pipe running through his yard leading to a catch basin, which he fears could become overwhelmed by additional water flow due to the solar project.

Sarah Stern, representing the applicant, outlined the project’s stormwater management plan, which includes a gravel ring road for public safety access and fencing. She emphasized efforts to maintain a 25-foot setback from the wetland and ensure compliance with local and state standards through a peer review. Despite these measures, residents remained skeptical. They questioned whether the detention basin and other stormwater features would adequately manage runoff and prevent exacerbated flooding on their properties.

Further tension arose when another resident, Sarah Barza, read a letter from Debbie Cassidy, who could not attend. Cassidy questioned the proximity of the solar panels to her property and expressed concerns about potential health risks associated with living near solar farms, including electromagnetic radiation. She also raised aesthetic concerns, lamenting the visual impact of solar panels near her home.

The commission reassured attendees that the project would adhere to the Wetland Protection Act and that stormwater management plans were under peer review. However, it acknowledged its limited authority, focusing solely on stormwater and wetland issues rather than zoning or land use, which are managed by the planning department.

In a related development, the commission discussed a proposed six-lot residential subdivision on Keen Road submitted by AMN Estate Holdings LLC, which also raised stormwater management concerns. Peer reviewer Bill Madden had requested detailed specifications on materials, dimensions, and overflows for the stormwater system. The commission decided to continue discussions to the next meeting, awaiting further input from Madden to ensure comprehensive evaluations.

Another topic involved a single-family home project on Lambert Street, which required careful consideration of its impact on bordering vegetated wetlands. The project proposed excavation and replication of wetlands, with extensive erosion controls planned to mitigate potential impacts. During the public comment period, neighbor Howard Allen raised concerns about exacerbated water runoff onto his property. Allen suggested that the project, as proposed, might further disrupt existing water flow patterns. The commission discussed potential solutions, including creating swales to direct water to uplands, but Allen remained skeptical about the project’s ability to address the current drainage challenges.

In addition, during the meeting, concerns were expressed about the maintenance of solar farms and their screening vegetation. It was noted that poor maintenance could lead to erosion and water management issues, with suggestions made to ensure that solar companies maintain their plantings effectively. The commission highlighted that the Planning Board oversees vegetation and screening, raising questions about whether the implications of vegetation loss are adequately considered during project approvals.