Southampton Planning Board Continues Solar Hearing, Orders Peer Review of Agrivoltaic Project
Planning and Zoning · Meeting of July 20, 2026
CT EAST HAMPTON — Southampton Planning Board continues agrivoltaic solar hearing over Barnes Aquifer fire and groundwater concerns. The board voted unanimously to extend its peer reviewer search and to continue the public hearing on a 5.4-megawatt DC agrivoltaic solar and battery energy storage application from Manhan River, LLC to September 2 at 7 p.m., after an hours-long first session at 43 and 53 Pleasant Street on July 20. Blue Wave project director Michael Zee confirmed the proposed Sol Bank 3.0 lithium iron phosphate battery containers will not be equipped with fire suppression systems, telling the board that best practice under National Fire Protection Association code is to allow burning cells to burn out.
Board of Health members Caitlin Rooks and Kate Savarese said Southampton lacks an updated comprehensive emergency management plan and could not afford to extend public water to residents if the Barnes Aquifer were contaminated, with Savarese calling it "highly unlikely" that Blue Wave's insurance would cover neighboring property owners. Board consultant Richard Harris, a retired South Hadley town planner, reported that three of five solicited peer review firms declined; the board directed Harris to solicit additional firms with expanded scope covering noise, fire safety, and hazard mitigation review. Firm selection is set for the August 5 meeting.
In the full story:
- The complete report — 981 words
Source: the Planning and Zoning meeting of July 20, 2026, reported from the official video recording and transcript.
EAST HAMPTON — July 20, 2026 — The Southampton Planning Board voted to continue a public hearing on a 5.4-megawatt agrivoltaic solar and battery energy storage project at 43 and 53 Pleasant Street, ordering an expanded peer review of the application before the proceeding resumes September 2.
The board also voted to broaden its search for an independent peer reviewer after a solicitation of five firms yielded only two proposals, and after residents and Board of Health members raised extensive questions about groundwater protection, fire safety, and noise over the Barnes Aquifer.
The Full Story
Applicant Manhan River, LLC, represented by Blue Wave project director Michael Zee and civil engineers from Weston and Sampson, presented plans for a roughly 40-acre solar array on two parcels totaling 129 acres at 43 and 53 Pleasant Street. The proposed system includes approximately 5.5 megawatts DC of single-axis tracking solar panels elevated to a minimum 10 feet, four lithium iron phosphate battery energy storage system containers on two concrete equipment pads, and roughly 22 acres of active solar array. Landowners Ron and Steven Baschista, who farm the property, said agrivoltaic design would allow them to continue hay and silage operations beneath the panels.
Board consultant Richard Harris, a retired town planner for the Town of South Hadley, explained that the board is bound by the zoning bylaw and stormwater bylaw as they existed on the date of application and cannot apply regulations enacted afterward. Harris noted that noise, glare, screening, and indemnification all fall within the board's site plan review criteria, and he flagged that the question of maintenance of access and the town's indemnification from liability remain open.
Board member Paul Ferdahl pressed the applicants on drainage calculations, questioning why curve numbers, times of concentration, and total areas showed virtually no change between pre- and post-construction conditions. Weston and Sampson civil engineer Cam Gozine said agrivoltaic design preserves ground cover beneath panels, limiting impervious area changes to the new access road, two equipment pads, and driven steel posts.
"The areas that the proposed solar development is going in being existing hay fields, the solar goes in on top of that, and the meadow cover condition underneath remains the same." [No timestamp index provided] — Cam Gozine, civil engineer, Weston and Sampson
Questions about fire response dominated the hearing. Board members and residents pressed Blue Wave on whether battery units would have suppression systems. Zee confirmed that the proposed Sol Bank 3.0 cabinets would not be equipped with fire suppression, citing the units' exterior-door-access design as placing them outside the room-and-building requirement of National Fire Protection Association code 855. Zee said recommended protocol is to allow a burning cell to burn out rather than apply water.
"Typical and best firefighting response procedures do not require or recommend offensive firefighting tactics to manually suppress the best fire." [No timestamp index provided] — Michael Zee, project director, Blue Wave, reading from hazard mitigation analysis page 28
Board of Health members Caitlin Rooks and Kate Savarese both spoke during the public comment period. Rooks called for safety data sheets on all chemicals stored in the battery units, a completed and site-specific emergency response plan developed with the Southampton Fire Department, a pre- and post-construction noise study conducted day and night, and clarification on the 52-decibel ambient baseline used in the noise analysis. Savarese noted that Southampton does not currently have an updated comprehensive emergency management plan and said the town could not afford to extend public water service to affected residents if wells were contaminated.
"I find it highly unlikely for any company to be covering additional residents outside of the individual that they are coming into agreement with." [No timestamp index provided] — Kate Savarese, Board of Health member
Resident Cassandra Adams of 40 Pleasant Street read a formal statement asking the board to deny the application or require relocation of the battery storage systems away from the Barnes Aquifer. Retired Westfield firefighter Richard Adams questioned why the fire chief was not present. Westfield City Councilor Kristen Mello, attending in a personal capacity, submitted 26 written questions to the board referencing specific page numbers in the application and raised concerns about per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known as PFAS, in battery components.
Harris told the board he had solicited five firms for peer review — Tye and Bond, Rural Planning Associates, Berkeley Group, VHB, and Fuss and O'Neil. Three declined or passed. Two proposals were received from Rural Planning Associates and Berkeley Group. Harris said he would solicit additional firms and ask all respondents to confirm capacity to review noise, fire safety, and the hazard mitigation analysis, in addition to civil engineering and stormwater. He added that the Conservation Commission had obtained a stormwater peer review from Levesque Associates, and said the board should obtain that report before deciding whether to commission its own separate stormwater review.
Why It Matters
The Barnes Aquifer underlies the project site and supplies drinking water to thousands of residents across Southampton, Westfield, East Hampton, and Holyoke. Multiple speakers noted that nearly all properties on Pleasant Street, Gunn Road, and East Street rely on private wells. The board's peer reviewer selection, scheduled for the August 5 meeting, will determine which firm evaluates the stormwater, noise, fire safety, and hazard mitigation components of the application. The outcome of that review will shape conditions — or a denial — when the hearing resumes September 2 at 7 p.m. in the same location.
Key Motions & Votes
- Vote: Continue search for peer reviewer firm and expand solicitation to additional firms Tally: Approved unanimously
- Vote: Continue public hearing to September 2, 2026, at 7 p.m. Tally: Approved unanimously
- Vote: Address change for Matthew Gabrilov from 87 East Street to 3 Pleasant Street Tally: Approved unanimously
- Vote: Adjourn Tally: Approved unanimously
Source
East Hampton's community access TV: Planning and Zoning meeting, July 20, 2026