By RICK MILLER
Olean Star
OLEAN — The Town of Olean Zoning Board of Appeals on Wednesday denied requests from Dugan Road Solar for variances to the town’s solar law.
The requests for variances from the company, a subsidiary of Delaware River Solar, included provisions in the local law that would require a noise study, protection from loss of property value and a decommissioning fund.
One of the tests for denying a request for a variance is whether it would change the character of the neighborhood. Another test was whether it would deny a reasonable rate of return on investment.
Dugan Road Solar asked for a variance of the local law’s requirement for a noise study.
Zoning Board of Appeals Chairman Ken Heitman said the solar farm would produce a hum. He was unsure of how many residents might hear it, but described a unique geologic feature of the area that carried sound over a great distance. The company would probably use a tree cover to help block any noise.
Heitman said that a noise study is required by the town’s solar law and there should be no variance.
The board also could not determine if the area was unique, because no wildlife or plant studies of the area have been conducted by Dugan Road Solar.
The board was adamant about the 40% guarantee for financing for decommissioning. That variance would weaken the town law, said board member Josh Anderson.
“These are all important to protect the neighbors,” Anderson said later of the need to reject the variance requests.
Another member, Pam Dominsk, said afterward that the law was written “to protect the community and homeowners,” which she supported.
Dugan Road Solar company officials filed the requests for variance in August 2025, after the Town of Olean Planning Board found their application was complete.
Attorney Joshua Lippes of Buffalo told the board that the company had not filed cost information to make a determination that any of the studies represented a hardship to the developer.
Heitman said the board could not determine whether the developer would receive a reasonable rate of return or not if any of the variances were to be denied.
“I kind of see where they are coming from, but people who have homes here need to be protected,” Dominsky said. “That’s what the (solar) law does. “People who built (homes) here did so because it was quiet.”
The company said in its application for one variance — protecting homeowners’ property values — was unlike any other municipal laws. The company wants to omit any study on property values.
Lippes said under the local solar law, homeowners would only collect money if they sold their home for a lower price than it was assessed at before the solar farm was installed.
Without any financial information from the company to support the variance requests, they were all denied by the Zoning Board of Appeals.
The company can agree to meet the provisions of the local law for which they were denied variances or challenge the Zoning Board of Appeals decisions in state Supreme Court.
