Vermont PUC Approves Controversial Shaftsbury Solar Project

The Vermont Public Utility Commission (PUC) has granted a Certificate of Public Good to the proposed Shaftsbury Solar Project. The decision, made on September 15, 2023, allows the development of a 20.0 MW solar electric generation facility to proceed. This project will be located off Holy Smoke Road in Shaftsbury, on approximately 80 acres across four separate parcels of land.

The PUC’s ruling comes after a meticulous review of the project’s implications and the concerns raised by local residents. The commission acknowledged the scale of the project, stating, “This will be a large facility — equal in scale to the largest solar generation project that we have previously approved.” The developer, VT Real Estate Holdings 1 LLC, operating as Shaftsbury Solar, is based in Stamford, Connecticut.

Community Reactions and Concerns

The approval has sparked mixed reactions within the community. Local residents have voiced numerous concerns regarding the project’s size, its impact on aesthetics, potential road safety issues, and the environmental consequences of clearing trees on the site. There are also apprehensions that the energy produced may not benefit Vermont, as it is expected to be transmitted to Connecticut.

In the PUC’s final order, the commission highlighted the complexity of the case, noting the extensive testimony provided by various stakeholders, including residents of Holy Smoke Road and nearby areas. “We recognize that it will have impacts, particularly on neighbors in the facility’s immediate vicinity in Shaftsbury,” the PUC stated. The certificate includes 55 conditions that the developer must adhere to, including a plan for large construction vehicles to utilize a temporary access road from U.S. Route 7 during construction.

Shaftsbury Select Board Chair Zoe Contros Kearl commented on the PUC’s decision, acknowledging the mixed feelings within the community. “The project has been a contentious one from the outset, facing criticism for reasons ranging from environmental to aesthetic, and garnering support for reasons ranging from economic to concern for the climate,” she noted. She also emphasized the benefits the town could gain from the project, including increased funding for the local elementary school, significant property tax contributions, and additional resources for the Fire Department.

Opposition Voices and Future Actions

Opponents of the project are contemplating their next steps, including the possibility of filing appeals against the PUC’s decision. Bob Hain, a resident of Holy Smoke Road and one of the intervenors in the case, expressed his disappointment, stating, “This project will be less than 300 feet from my front door… I believe the town has made a terrible decision.” Fellow resident and intervenor, Dr. Michael Algus, echoed similar sentiments, describing the project as an industrial-sized solar farm that could alter the character of the rural community.

Dr. Algus raised concerns about the potential increase in traffic along Holy Smoke Road, which he described as a dirt, gravel road. He highlighted specific hazards, including a hairpin turn that limits visibility. “There’s going to be more equipment coming up and down this road, in any case,” he remarked, emphasizing the risks posed by larger construction vehicles accessing the site.

Environmental advocate Annette Smith, executive director of Vermonters for a Clean Environment, criticized the project as an example of poor solar development practices. “Just throwing it up on a big grid, destroying an intact ecosystem, degrading the aesthetics of a beautiful area… Nothing about this project makes any sense,” she argued.

As the community grapples with the implications of this decision, the PUC has opened a period for appeals regarding the project. Interested parties are encouraged to utilize the PUC’s online portal to file their appeals as they see fit. The outcome of these appeals could further shape the future of solar energy development in Vermont.

The Shaftsbury Solar Project exemplifies the ongoing tension between renewable energy initiatives and local community concerns, highlighting the complexities that accompany large-scale energy projects.