HomeMy WebLinkAbout16 - CWM Letter to Town of Groton PB - 7.29.25(67532711.1)The Guaranty Building, 140 Pearl Street, Suite 100 | Buffalo, New York 14202-4040 | 716.856.4000 | HodgsonRuss.com
Albany Buffalo Greensboro Hackensack New York Palm Beach Rochester Saratoga Springs Toronto
Charles W. Malcomb
Partner
Direct Dial: 716.848.1261
Direct Facsimile: 716.819.4737
cmalcomb@hodgsonruss.com
July 29, 2025
Town of Groton
101 Conger Blvd.
PO Box 36
Groton, NY 13073
Re:NY Groton I and NY Groton II, LLC Site Plan/Special Use Permit Amendment
Dear Supervisor Scheffler and Members of the Board:
This firm represents NY Groton I, LLC and NY Groton II, LLC (collectively, the
“Applicant”)with respect to the development of solar energy facilities (collectively, the “Project”)
to be located on the North and South sides of South Main Street in Groton, New York (Tax Map
Parcel Nos 26-1-25.22 and 31-1-12.1)(the “Property”). On October 22, 2024, the Town Board
issued a negative declaration under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”).
Thereafter, on November 12, 2024, the Town Board approved the site plan and special use permit
for the Project. Pursuant to the amendment application submitted herewith, the Applicant proposes
minor modifications to the as-approved site plan to use a single-axis tracker system for the Project.
These modifications will result in a reduction of potential impacts, including a reduction in grading
volume and the movement of earth at the Property, reducing soil disturbance and allowing more
native vegetation to remain undisturbed. F urther, the change to a single-axis tracker system allows
for a reduction of the Project footprint trough a reduction of the number of modules for both the
North and South sites.
With the application materials, an updated environmental assessment form (“EAF”) part 1
has been provided to assist the Town Board in conducting its evaluation of the Project under
6 N.Y.C.R.R. § 617.7(e) and (f). Because a SEQRA negative declaration has already been issued
for the Project, the Town Board must evaluate the Project changes, any new information, or any
changes in circumstances that could warrant the amendment or rescission of the negative
declaration. No new SEQRA review is required here. See Leonard v. Planning Bd. of Town of
Union Vale, 136 A.D.3d 868 (2d Dep’t 2016) (“Here, as Supreme Court correctly concluded, the
Planning Board’s determination . . . that the application . . . constituted a new action, requiring de
novo SEQRA review, was arbitrary and capricious. . . . [A]lthough there were certain changes
made to the . . . project from when [it] . . . was first proposed in 1987, those changes did not
support the Planning Board’s conclusion that the [Project] . . . is now a new action under
SEQRA.”). The required analysis takes the SEQRA negative declaration as binding and the
baseline until the Project changes, new information, or changes in circumstances warrant
disturbing it, either through amendment or rescission. And rescission requires further process and
justification. It is respectfully submitted that no such circumstance exists here that would warrant
disturbing the prior SEQRA negative declaration; it thus controls and should be affirmed. This is
particularly the case where Project changes result in a reduction in impacts, like here.
Town of Groton
July 29, 2025
Page 2
We appreciate the Town Board’s time and attention on this Project and look forward to
answering any questions at the upcoming meeting.
Very truly yours,
Charles W. Malcomb
CWM
Enclosures
67532711v1