Region: 500 solar panels may replace disputed Stonington dog park

Stonington town officials may have two options for the land at the borough’s sewer treatment plant

Stonington — A controversial dog park that has prompted a lawsuit by neighbors, or 500 six-foot-tall solar panels that would save the town a minimum of $334,037 in electricity costs over the next 20 years.

Those appear to be the two options town officials now have for the land at the sewer treatment plant in the borough that is used as an informal dog park.

On Tuesday, a representative of Middletown-based Greenskies presented the Water Pollution Control Authority with a plan to install solar panels on land at both the Pawcatuck and borough treatment plants.

The town would not have to invest any money, as Greenskies would pay all the costs to install the $1.5 million in panels. The town would then save an estimated $535,758 in electricity costs at the Pawcatuck plant, which, combined with the borough savings, would generate almost $870,000 in estimated savings over 20 years.

And because Greenskies has made conservative estimates about the price of electricity during that time, WPCA officials say the savings could rise to $1.4 million or more.

Greenskies, meanwhile, earns its money by obtaining and selling clean energy tax credits and selling electricity.

WPCA member Lynn Young said that with the proposed benefits, “it would be irresponsible for us not to pursue this.”

“It’s a no-risk proposition for us. It’s like finding money on the sidewalk,” she said.

While constructing the solar panels effectively would end the dispute over the dog park and make the lawsuit moot, it could prompt an appeal or lawsuit over approval of the solar panels, which would need a zoning permit from the borough Planning and Zoning Commission.

First Selectman Rob Simmons’ plans to install a fence on the borough property and make other improvements to formally create a dog park have been stymied by the lawsuit and permitting issues. He said that if the WPCA feels it has excess space it will not need, the project will help keep its costs down and make environmental sense, and is an appropriate use of the property, then the Board of Selectmen would discuss the property at an upcoming meeting.

“I always rely on the good work of our various boards and commissions,” Simmons said.

But he added he did not want to prejudge the outcome of the WPCA deliberations by offering an opinion on the project.

“I’m a big fan of renewable ener-

gy,” he said. “Maybe it’s time to look at something else (for the property). Something that can contribute to the WPCA,” Simmons said.

The authority is expected to discuss the plan again at its May meeting and possibly decide whether to support it.

Ryan Linares, the business development project manager for Greenskies, outlined the plan and explained the process that has to be followed to the authority on Tuesday night.

The solar panels “are a great neighbor to have. They make no noise and they don’t move,” he said, adding they also do not create any sun glare. He added that his firm understands that neighbors may not to want to look at the panels, so a buffer of trees would be planted to screen them from view.

The installation of the 500 panels at the borough plant would encompass almost all of the enclosed grassy area that surrounds the plant and now serves as the informal dog park. The 900 panels planned for the Pawcatuck plant on Mary Hall Road would not infringe on the portion of the site that the Pawcatuck Little League uses for team practices. Linares said a fence might be erected to prevent baseballs from damaging the panels.

Greenskies will need an indication from the town that it is interested in proceeding with the project so the company can apply to the state for energy credits. The support is nonbinding but is needed so Greenskies can file the application before the June deadline. The company would hold public forums this summer to answer questions and then seek to obtain zoning permits from the borough and the town planning and zoning commissions. Greenskies then would have 18 months to install the panels.

“We hear the borough might be a challenge but we’re up for it,” Linares told the WPCA members, adding the town also could just proceed with the Pawcatuck project.

Young warned Linares that, like the dog park, the solar panels may not be popular with some neighbors who enjoy views of Stonington Harbor.

“But we have to approach this in terms of what’s good for us,” she said.

The authority, meanwhile, likely would have to renegotiate its contract with Suez, the firm that runs the treatment plants for the town, to ensure the electricity savings go to the town.

Laura Ann Gabrysch and Frank Mastrapasqua, who own a home at 13 Front St. that borders the park, have sued the town over the dog park and that suit is pending in Superior Court.

In the suit, the couple alleges the town has been operating an “illegal dog park,” that it has not received any permits or zoning approvals for the park, that it poses a danger to the public and is a nuisance. Other neighbors have complained about incessant barking and shouting, feces strewn about and harassment by dog park users.

Last year the town formed a committee that developed a report to address problems with the park and neighbors’ complaints. It then recommended the town make improvements to formally create the park. The town then obtained approval from the borough Planning and Zoning Commission to install a threefoot, 11-inch-tall fence to provide a buffer between dogs and the neighbors.

That has not occurred yet, as the town also needs to gain approval for two fences installed by former First Selectman Ed Haberek without approval. A hearing has been slated on the application for the fences this winter but was postponed as attorneys for the various parties continue talks to try to resolve the disputes.