ROCHESTER — The town Planning Board held an informal discussion with two companies on  five different solar projects of various sizes that are slated for Rochester in the near future to learn more about the projects and ask initial questions so that their applications will move faster in the future. 

The first company to present before the board on March 10 was Clean Energy Collective, a Colorado-based company that plans to lease land from Phil Souza for a 4.5 acre, 1 Mw solar array. 

Souza is the owner of 20 acres of land which includes a house and two hay fields. The array is planned for part of one of those two fields. 

The company’s representative, Greg Carey, said the project would be in a “more or less open field,” with “very little tree cutting.” in fact, it will leave some trees as a buffer around some of the panels. 

Planning Board members wanted to know if the fence had proper screening and that the project didn’t plan to construct too close to wetlands, but left satisfied that it did not.  

The other four projects were all presented by Beals & Thomas, a Southborough-based consultant for the projects’ developer, SunRaise Investments. The companies already went to a technical review for a project  planned for Braley Hill Road. Now they are seeking feedback before formally submitting plans.

For one project the company plans to put a 4.8 Mw array on Snipatuit Road near a large wetland.

“The [Snipatuit Road] project was bigger, but [we] removed all the panels based on the advice of Town Counsel,” Las said 

As a result, the array in that area also includes a smaller 1Mw array to the north, with the two divided to avoid the wetland. 

Las clarified that a horse trail in the area would be left untouched. 

Planning Board Chair Arnold Johnson asked about fire truck access on the site. 

Las said his company can look into it. 

Another board member, Gary Florindo, asked if Beals and Thomas will have to move material to level the land. Las responded that it seems more likely that planners would have to have to move material in as fill, which is allowed without a permit in the town.

An array on Featherbed Lane would provide 6.5 Mw on 110 acres, or what Las called a  “pretty big parcel.” 

He added that on this project, his company is still working to meet buffer zones requests from the project’s neighbors. 

The second Featherbed Lane  was one that Beals and Thomas called “Featherbed Lane South,” It is located practically next to the other parcel on that road, with one parcel in between owned by someone else. 

Las said this project has changed the most since the technical review. It is a 2.2 Mw array on 11 acres of a 59 acre lot, with a large vegtative buffer along the side. 

Florindo wanted to be sure the group didn’t plan to add extra utility poles. Las said Beals might work with Eversource to upgrade them where needed, but would not be adding another set of poles. 

The final project was on Cushman Road so close to Acushnet that planners had to pull it back to avoid crossing town lines. It would be 3.7 Mw on 57 acres. 

Johnson asked if this project had originally had a different access road. Company representatives said that it had, but that road covered too much wetlands to be worth it. 

“If we could permit [the projects] all at once we would,” Las said, “But we can’t, that would be overwhelming. There will be some staggering.” 

Johnson ended the session by saying that his board, “can’t hold you back on filing, but we are really really backed up,” due to an engineer backlog. 

Las responded that that was fine because of the staggering.