Stanford Planning Board Meeting Summary - December 2, 2025
Stanford Planning Board Meeting Summary - December 2, 2025
The Stanford Planning Board convened on December 2, 2025, to address routine administrative matters and review supplemental capital project requests for solar energy initiatives. The meeting began with minor amendments to the November 18 minutes to correct the attribution of a denial opinion. Due to a lack of quorum caused by the absence of key members and technical issues with remote voting, the Board tabled the motion to approve the minutes. Subsequently, the Board unanimously approved supplemental appropriations for two major solar panel projects, the Strawberry Hill and Westover projects, following detailed presentations on their financial structures and technical scope.
Consent Calendar
- No specific consent calendar items were processed due to the tabled motion on minutes.
Public Comments & Testimony
- No public comments or testimony from community members were recorded during this session; all testimony was provided by city staff.
Discussion Items
-
Amendment to November 18 Minutes:
- Rabbi (Board Member) identified a factual error in the minutes regarding the "High Ridge property" zoning referral. The original text stated the Board's opinion recommended denial. Rabbi clarified that the opinion was that of Mr. Levin (an individual member), stating that board opinions are only formalized after a vote. A motion was made to amend the text to reflect "Mr. Levin recommended denial..." rather than "it is the opinion of the board."
-
Strawberry Hill Solar Panel Project (CP4000) & Westover Solar Panel Project (CP40056):
- Katherine Mobalbo (Director of School Construction) and Brandon Mark (Certified Energy Manager) presented the request for supplemental funding.
- Strawberry Hill: Seeking $150,000 for construction administration, contingency, and an alternate option for a "solar flower" (a standalone solar tracking system for educational engagement). The total bid price surpassed initial estimates, and new professional services (construction administration and ITCS tax credit counting) were required.
- Westover: Seeking $335,000 (with a portion attributed to the alternate solar flower option, which was previously included in the original budget request). The project involves a front-of-the-meter system.
- Technical Clarifications (Chet vs. Mobalbo):
- NRES Program Structure: Mobalbo clarified the project utilizes a "front of the meter" system where 100% of generated electricity is sold back to Eversource for a period of 20 years, rather than just the excess. This approach provides higher ROI predictability for municipal projects.
- Energy Cost Offset: When asked if the sale of all energy would cover 100% of building consumption costs, Mobalbo stated the project would cover a "sizable portion" (estimated at ~60% for Strawberry Hill) but not the entirety of consumption. She noted that future energy reductions will rely on building efficiency improvements rather than just generation.
- Capacity Constraints: Chet noted that Westover has no remaining conventional roof capacity for future solar, which Mobalbo generally agreed upon, though Strawberry Hill has minor potential for future expansion. Carports are being investigated as an alternative.
- Budget Escalation: Mobalbo explained that the increase for Strawberry Hill ($150,000) is due to higher public bid prices, the addition of professional services not in the original scope, and the inclusion of the "solar flower" alternate which was outside the original budget. The Westover request amount is higher than the original 2024 vision due to grant adjustments and scope evolution.
Key Outcomes
- Motion to Table Minutes: The motion to approve the November 18 minutes was tabled indefinitely until a quorum is achieved for voting, as members Jeremy and Bill were unable to participate effectively via chat or remote hand-raise.
- Strawberry Hill Project Approval: Unanimously approved to proceed with the $150,000 supplemental appropriation.
- Vote Tally: 3 in favor, 0 opposed, 0 abstain (Motion passed unanimously).
- Westover Project Approval: Unanimously approved to proceed with the $335,000 supplemental appropriation.
- Vote Tally: 3 in favor, 0 opposed, 0 abstain (Motion passed unanimously).
- Next Steps: Staff to return to the Building Committee and State of Connecticut for grant adjustments prior to construction commencement. Exact energy consumption offset percentages to be provided as a follow-up.
Other Agenda Items
- Citywide Technology Replacement and Upgrade: Introduced as the next item but not discussed or acted upon within the provided transcript excerpts.
Meeting Transcript
Okay. Good evening. This is the uh December 2nd meeting of the Stanford Planning Board. Um first on our agenda is the planning board minutes from uh November 18th regular meeting. Um there any um amendments or clarifications to the minutes of November 18th. Um and again present were um myself, uh Rabbi, um who's absent, uh Bill Levin and Chet. Yeah, um I just I just noticed one thing. Uh and I wanted to try to locate it again so I can point it out. Um I mean didn't it's with the one item on the agenda that was denied. Let me find it again. Forgive me for the delay. Oh, it's all right. Uh here it is, yes. Um with with regard to um zoning board referrals item number one, the uh the high ridge property in the final paragraph it says um Mr. Leckman, uh Mr. Levin recommended denial of ZB application um because it is the opinion of the board that this request is not in general harmony. At that point it was not the opinion of the board. So I I think that's actually misstated. Um it's not the opinion of the board until the board votes. Sure. All right. So motion is not is never an opinion of a board, it's an opinion of an individual. Right. So the amendment is just the uh and said Mr. Levin recommended denial um because this request is not in general harmony. So taking out the it is the opinion of the board that's correct. Okay. All right. Um any other amendments or clarifications. No. Um all right, so hearing none, um, can I have a motion for the minutes? Um chat move approval with the um amendment requested. Uh do I have a scent? Um and I guess Bill and Jeremy, you'll have to use your hand raise. So Jeremy was absent, so he can't vote on the right, correct. And I'm trying to figure out if Bill can do anything on his computer. Let me give me a let me give him a call. He may be able to chat to you. No, chat's turned off. Oh, gotcha. All right. Um as we troubleshoot, um, just wanted to make sure Chet, did you receive the um revised attachment for the um capital budget? Um you say the revised attachment. Um I received um one from you. Okay, I sent one this morning and then I resent it because you weren't sure if you had received it. Okay, I did not receive the first one, but I did receive the second one. Okay, great. Can we come back to this item, Jennifer? Yeah, I was I was gonna say we can um yeah. Uh so um chat, I guess if you want to table the minutes, because there's a motion.
openpublica.com