Village of Canton trustees will state opposition to solar project
Oct. 23—CANTON — Village trustees intend to send a letter to the town planning board expressing opposition to a proposed solar installation on Route 310 just outside the village limits.
The project is proposed for a 71-acre parcel at 295 Route 310.
The property is bounded by United Helpers Rehabilitation and Senior Care, Partridge Run Golf Course and the Remington Recreation Trail, Canton Apples and Smile Associates.
The project is being developed by SolAmerica Energy, Atlanta, on property owned by Jim Curtis, of Canton.
Trustee Anna M. Sorensen said she went to the comprehensive plan for guidance in considering the project.
"Two of the guiding principles seem to be really relevant here," Ms. Sorensen said. "One is economic growth and the other is resiliency and sustainability."
The recommendations to the town with respect to economic growth, Ms. Sorensen said, is that the town promote redevelopment of existing property and existing buildings to retain a compact development pattern and support downtown.
It is also recommended that the town provide a diversity of housing options, she said.
"Under resiliency and sustainability it is recommended that the town promote smart growth techniques, specifically preserving open space, farmland, natural beauty, etc. as well as taking advantage of compact design," Ms. Sorensen said.
This means using existing infrastructure rather than building new, she said.
"To my way of thinking putting a solar array on this property does not preserve open spaces and farmland," she said. "And it is right here, on our line, where we have sewer and water access already available should anyone want to develop the property or provide housing."
"It is an ideal housing spot," Trustee Klaus Proem said.
"The point the land owner has made is that it has sat empty and no one was looking to develop it," Deputy Mayor Carol S. Pynchon said. "But that doesn't mean that somebody won't come along and want to develop it."
Mayor Michael E. Dalton suggested that the village write a letter to the planning board stating that the board of trustees had studied the proposal and concurs with the county planning board that the land was better suited for commercial or housing development.
When the county planning board considered the project, county planner Matilda Larson said, "is this the highest and best use of this land? Because it is adjacent to the municipal line where you have water and sewer services as well as lighting services. This is right outside the footprint of the village boundary. If it can't be used for agricultural purposes, and it should, as the first, highest and best use, then some other use, either commercial development, institutional development, residential development may be a higher and better use."
