Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

SUNPIN ENERGY SERVICES, LLC, & Another v. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF PETERSHAM (2025)

Citation
SUNPIN ENERGY SERVICES, LLC, & Another v. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF PETERSHAM (2025)
Parent Document
SUNPIN ENERGY SERVICES, LLC, & Another v. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF PETERSHAM (2025)
Jurisdiction
Massachusetts (state)
Effective Date
2025-07-09

Other Sections in This Document (43)

Full Text

1,532 chars
We note at the outset that "standalone, large-scale [solar energy] systems, not ancillary to any residential or commercial use, are key to promoting solar energy in the Commonwealth."  Tracer Lane II Realty, LLC v. Waltham, 489 Mass. 775, 781 (2022) (Tracer Lane).  The Legislature has protected solar energy installations from local regulation by G. L. c. 40A, § 3, ninth par., which provides that "[n]o zoning ordinance or by-law shall prohibit or unreasonably regulate the installation of solar energy systems or the building of structures that facilitate the collection of solar energy, except where necessary to protect the public health, safety or welfare."  Tracer Lane, supra at 779.  "When interpreting this paragraph, we keep in mind that it was enacted to help promote solar energy generation throughout the Commonwealth."  Id.  Indeed, the Supreme Judicial Court has applied G. L. c. 40A, § 3, ninth par., to invalidate a local zoning provision that prohibited large-scale solar energy systems in all but one to two percent of land area in the municipality, where the prohibition was not reasonably grounded in public health, safety, or welfare.  See Tracer Lane, supra at 781-782.  While it is true that "municipalities have more flexibility in restricting solar energy systems than they do, for instance, in the context of education, religion, or child care," "stringent limitation" not "necessary to protect the public health, safety or welfare," "violates the solar energy provision" (citation omitted).  Id. at 781.