The Planning Board will hold a hearing to consider four amendments to the Protective Zoning By-Laws (ZBL) of the Town of Worthington on February 24, 2026 at 6:00 PM. The hearing will be immediately followed by a Special Town Meeting held as a result of a Citizens’ Petition received by the Selectboard on January 13, 2026.
For an amendment to the Zoning By-Laws to take affect, it must:
- be presented in a Public Hearing by the Planning Board, and
- pass a Town Meeting vote by a 2/3 “supermajority”, and
- pass review by the Attorney General’s Office.
The first proposed amendment would add a section titled “Temporary Moratorium on Large-Scale Ground-Mounted Solar Photovoltaic Installations and Battery Energy Storage Systems”. The effect of this amendment would be to prohibit “Large-Scale Ground-Mounted Solar Photovoltaic Installations” (as defined in ZBL section 8.5) in Worthington until June 30, 2027. This amendment was proposed by a group of citizens and submitted to the selectboard with sufficient signatures (258) to require the convening of a Special Town Meeting.
Citizens’ Petition Solar and BESS Moratorium
The Citizens’ Petition Solar Moratorium is a blanket prohibition of large scale solar development in Worthington. Over the last two years, no moratorium calling for a blanket prohibition of large scale solar development has passed review by the Attorney General’s Office. The reason is a Supreme Judicial Court decision titled Tracer Lane II Realty, LLC v. City of Waltham (2022) in which the court found Waltham’s “outright ban of large-scale solar energy systems in all but one to two percent of [Waltham’s] land area…is impermissible under [G.L. c. 40A, § 3, ¶ 9].” The Attorney General’s Office has consistently interpreted this decision to mean a complete prohibition is impermissible, whether temporary or not. Northfield provides an example. They proposed a moratorium on both large scale solar and battery energy systems. It did not pass Attorney General’s Office review.
To further complicate the large scale solar landscape, the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources (DOER) is the in the process of revising the regulations and guidelines around permitting, siting and incentive programs for large scale solar, and associated equipment like energy storage. Some of the changes have been made, but many are either in the public comment period, or in a review period after public comment. Their stated goal is to issue the new regulations in 2026.
The Planning Board made the decision to propose alternate moratoria for both large scale solar and energy storage systems. It is our opinion that the citizens’ petition moratorium is unlikely to pass review by the Attorney General’s Office. We are proposing these amendments in part because of the interest demonstrated by the citizens’ petition, but also because of the complexity caused by the DOER’s revising the permitting and siting process.
Our approach has been to look at bylaw amendments that have passed the Attorney General’s Office review, and have restricted the development of large scale solar and energy storage systems. Our primary example was Hadley, which amended its bylaw in 2024. They introduced a section (28.5.4) on energy storage systems which limited the size to under 5MW, required a 300′ setback from residential units, and excluded them from the town’s aquifer zones. The Attorney General’s decision is here, the bylaws are here.
There appears to be more of an appetite for restricting energy storage than the solar arrays themselves. However, the state itself has indicated a preference for solar to not be placed in sensitive environmental areas. Starting in 2001 various state departments have worked with The Nature Conservancy to develop a map of sensitive areas within the state called BioMap. The current version, BioMap3 released in 2022, identifies two classes: Core Habitat and Critical Natural Landscape. Under the previous solar incentive program (SMART 2.0, replaced by SMART 3.0 in 2025), arrays built in Core Habitat were ineligible for incentive payments. The incentive payments are significant and necessary for the financial viability of these projects. Additionally, under SMART 2.0, once 1600 MW of solar had been built, any additional projects built in Critical Natural Landscapes would not receive incentives. It is important to note that agrovoltaic projects were allowed on agricultural land within the Core Habitat or Critical Natural Landscape areas, but in practice agricultural land is rarely Core Habitat or Critical Natural Landscape due to the disturbance caused by agricultural use. SMART 3.0, the current incentive program, is much more complex. It appears to exclude solar development in Core Habitat, but solar installation on Critical Natural Landscape may be allowed under some scenarios.
The Planning Board, in developing the moratoria below, sought to build on the priorities that the state itself has adopted. In the case of solar, we are proposing a moratorium on development in all BioMap3 Core Habitat, as well as Outstanding Resource Water areas (the watershed for the Westfield River which is considered a Class A Surface Water and is the source of public water supply), Worthington’s Water Supply Protection District, and all Interim Wellhead Protection Areas around public water supplies (which includes some private wells).
In the case of energy storage systems, we increased the level of protection to include BioMap3 Critical Natural Landscapes, as well as adopting Hadley’s 300′ setback from all residential structures, and other structures where people congregate, and their limitation on the size of such systems to 5 MW.
We will present these moratoria as two separate warrant articles. Both are temporary, expiring in June 2027. This should provide enough time for the DOER’s process to complete, and the Planning Board to develop permanent solar and energy storage bylaws.
The second proposed amendment would add section 8.5.7, titled “LARGE-SCALE GROUND MOUNTED SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC INSTALLATIONS MORATORIUM IN LIMITED AREAS”
Large Scale Solar Moratorium in Limited Areas
A map illustrating the areas in which this moratorium would prohibit Large Scale Solar development until June 30, 2027
The third proposed amendment would add section 8.8, titled “LARGE CAPACITY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS MORATORIUM IN LIMITED AREAS”, as well as definitions of Energy Storage Systems, both large and small, in section 10 (Definitions).
Large Capacity Energy Storage Systems Moratorium in Limited Areas
We have developed two maps to illustrate the impact of this moratorium. The first simply looks at land characteristics, i.e. Water Supply and Wellhead protections, BioMap3 areas, Outstanding Resource Water areas. The second also includes the 300′ from all structures in town. Note that this map includes a setback around all structures, not just residential structures structures where people congregate. The map is meant to be illustrative, and is not meant to define the zoning.
The fourth proposed amendment would revise section 2.6.7., changing the procedure for Site Plan Review to better handle large projects. Most of the development that happens in Worthington is small and relatively simple, and allowed by right (e.g. Single Family Dwellings). Site Plan Review is typically required when a project exceeds some threshold such as being over 35′ tall or creating more than 10,000 ft2 of impervious area. It rarely applies, and the procedure outlined in section 2.6.7. has been sufficient in the past. Under the current procedures, once an application is “deemed complete”, the Planning Board has 65 days to issue a decision, and if they fail to do so, the project receives a “constructive approval” meaning it can move forward as proposed.
Section 8.5 allows Large Scale Ground Mounted Solar Installations By Right with Site Plan Review. These projects are significantly more complicated than past projects. Under the current procedure it is possible for an applicant to pressure the Planning Board to make a decision within 65 days, or face the prospect of a court case to force constructive approval. The proposed revision would remove the threat of constructive approval, and would make the process for reviewing an application occur in a Public Hearing, similar to the process for a Special Permit.
Revise Site Plan Review Procedure
A Public Hearing addressing these amendments will be held February 24 @ 6:00pm at R. H. Conwell School.