The Logan Township Planning Commission Tuesday postponed its decision on whether to support a change in the location for the primary entrance of a proposed solar farm in Greenwood until all the commissioners can look at the potential new entrance site off East Hamilton Lane in person.

Commissioner Jesse Moyer suggested the postponement after East Hamilton-area neighbors who are upset about the proposal for the new entrance scoffed at the three — of six — commissioners who hadn’t seen the site of the proposed new entrance themselves yet.

All the neighbors who spoke at the meeting that drew a total of about 20 are opposed to permitting the developers to use the township-owned right-of-way across from Duquesne Lane as the primary entrance to the proposed farm, despite assurances from developers representatives that the farm would be a silent “good neighbor” — following four to six months of construction.

Although there was talk that the subsequent presence of the farm would reduce property values, most of the objections centered on the construction period: that construction traffic would damage the lane; that trucks would be dangerous for children playing or riding bikes or scooters, especially given that there’s an uphill stretch in the approach to the right-of-way; and that a utility pole at the corner of East Hamilton and Greenwood Road is too tight for the construction vehicles.

Developers SR1 Capture Sage Holdco and Penn Renewables previously obtained land development approval for the project from the township with the intention of making its primary entrance off Burgmeier Lane — a short stretch of road next to the Sheetz on Old Sixth Avenue Road, at the foot of North Eighth Street, which connects across the Norfolk Southern mainline with Juniata.

The developers had to abandon that primary entrance plan after Penelec nixed it due to a company rule that doesn’t permit earth disturbances within 50 feet of power poles of the type located in the area, which is across Sixth Avenue from a Penelec substation, according to Penn Renewables President Gus Abalo.

The developers would have needed to come within about 20 feet of such poles, Abalo said.

“There was no wiggle room” with Penelec, said Emily Zapinski, project engineer from SWCA Environmental Consultants of Bridgeville.

The developers considered creating an entrance from another point off Old Sixth Avenue Road and also via Greenwood Park, but both of those routes would have been too steep to be practical, according to developers attorney Jay West.

The developers also tried to persuade the owner of the private Bennetti Drive, who had already agreed that the drive could serve as a secondary entrance to the solar farm from Greenwood Road, but the owner wasn’t amenable to making Bennetti Drive the primary entrance, Abalo said.

While construction of the farm would involve a succession of trucks carrying 20-foot containers with the racks, panels and other equipment, it would nevertheless not be “an intense, heavy construction period,” Abalo said.

More importantly, the post-construction period, which could last as long as 50 years, would require little or no more activity than quarterly visits by a maintenance crew in a couple of light trucks — as routine monitoring would occur remotely, according to West and Abalo.

The neighbors should consider having such a neighbor a blessing, given that the zoning designation of the property is industrial, which would permit many uses that would be far busier and probably more objectionable to them, the developers told the crowd.

That presumably scary alternative wasn’t plausible, according to one neighbor.

“We’re not going to get a factory,” she said, scornfully.

The expressions of opposition to the project seem to feed on one another, with anger stoking further anger.

Resident Donna Luciano pointed out inconsistency between the length of time predicted for construction between one developer representative and another — one saying three or four months, one saying four to six.

“I think you’re pulling the wool over our eyes,” Luciano said.

“I’m being conservative,” the second representative said.

Construction times can vary, the first one said.

“They’re going to tell you what you want to hear,” another resident said.

The new entrance off East Hamilton is being “forced on us,” Luciano said.

“The little people,” she said. “(It) isn’t fair.”

Resident Jess Davis asked if there would be a buffer zone between the solar panels of the farm and his property.

He also asked about property values and if developers plan to pave the right of way.

Another resident asked about dust that would be kicked up by construction vehicles if the right of way remained unpaved.

How wide would the right of way become, asked a resident whose house is next to it, implying that widening would impinge on her property.

“We’re bending over backwards to try to work with the community,” Abalo said.

“If you haven’t been up there, you shouldn’t make the decision,” one resident told the commissioners, after questioning revealed that three of them weren’t personally familiar with the proposed entrance site.

“I don’t think there should be a vote tonight,” that resident said.

Concrete trucks that come to the site during the construction period are likely to damage the road, one resident said.

The developers will pay to repair any damage, Abalo said.

“I think we need a guarantee,” one resident said. “This is bullcrap, what you’re doing.”

When a resident brought up the potential for danger to children playing, the developers offered to postpone starting until after school begins.

But kids play in the streets after they get home from school, someone said.

The developers ought to try to persuade the owner of Bennetti Drive to reconsider his refusal to allow that entrance to become the primary one — even if only during the construction period, suggested commissioner Wes Barnhart.

“I think you’d be a great neighbor once you get in (after the construction period),” Barnhart told the developers representatives.

They’ve been trying to persuade the Bennetti Drive owner, but “we’re not there yet,” Abalo said.

The next meeting is Oct. 7.

The Planning Commission can recommend a decision on the primary entrance to the township supervisors, who have the power of final approval.

Mirror Staff Writer William Kibler is at 814-949-7038.