Aug. 26, 2025 — The Huntersville Planning Board recommended approval Tuesday of a text amendment to the town's zoning ordinance that would let commercial properties install taller freestanding solar canopies over surface parking and pedestrian walkways and allow screened front-yard placement in some cases.
Staff told the board the amendment, requested by Burkert USA Corporation for potential solar at its Huntersville manufacturing facility, would change Article 9.54 '1 (solar energy facilities) to allow "minor" freestanding solar facilities up to 14 feet in height above a surface parking lot or pedestrian pathway when on commercial property and set behind an 80-foot buffer. The amendment would also revise the commercial section to allow front-yard placement visible from a public street so long as the facility is screened.
The change would relax the current 5-foot height limit for minor freestanding solar facilities. Staff said major solar energy facilities'defined in the ordinance as systems producing electricity primarily for off-site beneficiaries'would still require a special use permit (SUP).
"This text amendment is consistent with the 2040 plan policy EOS 9.1, which states to promote the use of energy efficient building design and neighborhood design," a planning staff member said during the presentation. Staff recommended the amendment as compliant with the plan and supportive of expanded opportunities for nonresidential properties to install solar.
Trevor Davis, a consultant with EQ hired by Burkert, told the board his firm worked with manufacturers and designers to select the proposed 14-foot height.
"We work with manufacturers and with the designers to come up with that height," Davis said.
Board members asked several technical and scope questions before the vote. Questions included whether the town or applicant had consulted an engineer on the 14-foot height, whether the 80-foot buffer could be reduced in some cases, and whether the amendment would limit the total area of ground-mounted panels. Staff replied that engineering review for mounting angles was not part of the text amendment, that a smaller buffer could be considered through future action or rezoning, and that if a facility sought to produce energy for other properties or sell power it would be classified as a major facility subject to an SUP.
Board members also asked whether on-site battery storage would be affected; staff said the amendment covers only the panel structures and does not change existing rules about batteries or storage systems.
A planning board member moved the recommendation of approval, citing consistency with EOS 9.1 and the town's 2040 plan; a second was recorded. The board voted to recommend approval.
The planning board recorded the recommendation as approved; the item will be forwarded to the town board for consideration.
The planning board's discussion and staff presentation did not set new technical engineering standards for panel angle or mounting; those specifics would be handled through site plan review or future ordinance updates, staff said.