The Rhode Island Boy Scouts are planning a 20 year land lease to a solar developer, “Rehoboth Renewables,” which is registered as a “Foreign Limited  Liability Company,” who is seeking a special permit from the Rehoboth Planning Board to deforest Camp Buxton and install an industrial solar farm in the middle of a quiet  residential neighborhood. The project violates several town bylaws. The  planning board is planning on voting and allowing the special permit, despite  the violation of the bylaws. Help us protect our town from continued  inappropriate development! 

---

March 17, 2021

Rehoboth Town Planning Board

Dear Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, Members of the Board,

Thank you again for all the work that you do on the committee. We understand that you volunteer your time and expertise, and despite any differences that we may have you are doing your best to make decisions with the information that you have available and that you do this work with a love of Rehoboth and a commitment to the community.

With that being said, I am speaking on behalf of the neighborhood tonight after a community meeting was held on Monday, 3/15 for those who were able to join. Because there are so many concerns from a variety of sources, we wanted to show that we are speaking with one voice in our continued appeal to the Planning Board to deny the Rehoboth Renewable Special Permit Application as it currently stands.

Part of the travesty of an issue of this significance being discussed and decided upon in the time of the current Pandemic, is that the normal open public discourse has been circumvented. Yes – we are all here on zoom, but there are many in the neighborhood who may not be computer literate, who have not been able to participate in this dialogue in the same way that they would be able to if we were having in-person meetings. And even through this venue, when we speak, you do not see our faces. You see names on a screen, but without being able to make our appeals in person, you may not understand the gravity of our experience and the consensus that there is in the community against this project. And so, in an effort to bring voice to those who have not necessarily been able to speak, I am speaking for all of the members of the community right now when I make the following points, to show you that there is, in fact, consensus in the neighborhood against this project, rather than the grumblings of a few malcontents.

We, in the community, believe that the permit application as it stands, violates several existing bylaws of the Town of Rehoboth.

Firstly, we have established, and the Board agrees, that this project is in violation of Article 4.10.3.9.5, which requires the installation to not be visible from adjacent properties and the surrounding neighborhood. It is universally understood that the panels as currently planned will be seen from many adjacent and surrounding houses.

The neighborhood believes that when the Board asked the applicant to reassess the screening, the applicant acted in bad faith in presenting a solution, i.e. a 20 foot screen, that they knew would not be acceptable to either the board or the community, thereby trying to force the board’s hand in accepting the applicant’s preferred option, despite the fact that that option violates at least one bylaw right off the bat.

 

And in a previous meeting, members of the Board noted exactly that: they are concerned that if they don’t accept this “lesser of two evils” option, in the event of litigation down the road they may not be able to enforce additional requirements.

But what we say to that is no: the Board is the Town Body with the authority to require the applicant to either come up with an alternate screening option, or require them to change the configuration of the solar array in such a way that will make it not visible to the surrounding community, as also indicated in Article 4.10.3.9.5. 

Section 4.10.3.8.1 Indicates a minimum of 50 foot setback, not a maximum. Why not require the applicant to further set back this installation? When raised previously, the applicant noted that if that was the case, their project would not be fiscally viable.

With all due respect, that is not the Planning Board’s problem, nor should it be the problem of the community at large. Requiring the applicant to conform to the Town By-laws is NOT placing an undue burden on the applicant; it is requiring them to follow the municipal laws that the rest of us have to follow on a daily basis. So any argument down the road that the applicant could theoretically try to make that approval was unreasonably withheld would have no basis in reality or legal standing, because the Planning Board would only be enforcing the actual town bylaws as they stand, which is by my and my community’s account, a reasonable requirement. If the applicant can come up with a solution that meets all bylaw requirements, and is acceptable to the community, approval would not be withheld. It is that simple.

Secondly, this application violates Article 4.10.4.5, which states that

“No special permit shall be granted for a use which is, in the opinion of the Special Permit Granting Authority, injurious, noxious, offensive, detrimental or inappropriate to adjacent properties or to the neighborhood or for a use which does not substantially serve public health, safety, convenience, welfare or property values in the neighborhood.”

This principle is restated in article 8.2, General Requirements for Special Permit, which notes:

“Special permits may be issued only for uses, which are in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning by-law, and shall be subject to the provisions set forth therein. No special permit shall be granted for a use, which is not otherwise permitted in the zoning district in which the use is proposed. No special permit shall be granted hereunder for a use which is, in the opinion of the ZBA, injurious, noxious, offensive, detrimental or inappropriate to adjacent properties or to the neighborhood or for a use which does not substantially serve public health, safety, convenience, welfare and property values in the neighborhood.”

We have established that there will be Property Value Impacts. We have established that the community at large finds this installation to be “injurious, noxious, offensive, detrimental, and inappropriate to adjacent properties.” So this application could be rejected on this basis alone.

The By-laws relating to solar arrays were previously modified after issues arose with other solar installations in town, their unsightliness, and the community disapproval. And yet if this application is approved, despite the fact that these by-laws were created to prevent exactly the situation that we find ourselves in, the by-laws will be rendered effectively meaningless. What precedent does that set for other bylaws in the town?

Article 8.2 of the zoning bylaws goes on to read,

“Furthermore, no special permit shall be granted hereunder for a use, which derogates from the intent and purposes of this zoning by-law because: (amended 5/1//95) a) it appears that the intent of the performance standards or other requirements of this by-law cannot be or are unlikely to be met, or b) traffic generated or patterns of access and egress would cause congestion, hazard or substantial change in established neighborhood character, or c) the current or permitted use of adjacent property, as defined in the zoning bylaw would be adversely affected by the nature of the proposed use, or (amended 5/1/95) d) nuisance or hazard would be created.”

Based on this Article, approval of this application is definitively in violation of Article 8.2. based merely on the fact that it derogates from the intent and purpose of the law itself.

There are a myriad of other concerns that still have not been put to rest around this development.

It has not been established that the applicant’s plan as proposed will not have a direct effect on the groundwater because of the topographical changes to the property, and therefore how our wells and aquifers are going to be affected. The applicant plans to deforest this land, using heavy machinery, and poisonous herbicides, potentially creating new drainage patterns going directly into the Pond, into the Palmer River, into the Aquifer, into our wells, and into our homes.

It has not been established that the applicant’s plan as proposed will not have direct effects on the light and noise that is experienced in the neighborhood. But most importantly, it has not been established that there is any legal obligation on the part of the Board to approve this application, as has otherwise been previously suggested.

This neighborhood is comprised of modest, working families who between 40-hour weeks, juggling school schedules, childcare, job losses due to Covid, the pandemic at large, have tried to pool their resources in order to hire legal counsel and professional consultants to assist in making their case.

If there is real concern about following the letter of the law, Section 4.10.4.3 notes, that the Planning board can require:

“at the applicant’s cost, professional and technical consultants, including legal counsel, to assist the authority with its review of the application, in accordance with the requirements of section 53G of chapter 44 of the Massachusetts General Laws.”

Why is this not something for the Board to require? The Town to Hire an independent land-use lawyer and require reimbursement from the applicant for a just, impartial, review and assistance in navigating these waters? Because none of this to date feels impartial to the community.

It is a sad day in Rehoboth that relative to this issue, when it feels like justice is being decided by the depth of the applicant’s pockets.

In sum, the community feels that the Planning Board needs to assert their authority as arbiters of the Town Bylaws and as representatives of the constituents in their community at large. The only ethical, and legal action in this case, in the view of the People, is to deny the application for Special Permit.

Thank you.

Visit our website for more information https://www.saverehoboth.org/