Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solar Code Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission discusses solar code changes; members push for industrial rezone for large projects
Summary
Commissioners debated a proposed Honey Solar code amendment that would define solar facility sizes by acreage and shift permitting for large commercial arrays toward industrial rezoning rather than conditional use approvals.
The planning commission spent the bulk of its July 20 meeting on a proposed Honey Solar code amendment that would define three solar facility scales by acreage and alter where each scale may be permitted.
Planning staff presented a draft that uses acreage to classify projects — small scale (about 1–5 acres), a mid tier (roughly 5–20 acres) and larger concentrated commercial facilities above that range — and proposed permitting small systems as conditional uses in most zones while prohibiting concentrated commercial solar in certain residential/agricultural zones. The draft also limits “utility facility concentrated solar” to not be permitted in some zones and ties battery storage and community solar uses to specific zoning categories and the public‑infrastructure overlay.
Commissioners expressed repeated concern about large, utility‑scale arrays. One commissioner argued that “given the scale and the impact of these larger solar facilities, I think they should be in industrial,” saying large projects can have greater visual and land‑use impacts that warrant rezoning rather than a conditional use approval. Another commissioner urged removing conditional‑use (C) allowances for community or concentrated solar in RU‑2 and RU‑5 zones and proposed changing those cells in the use table to “N” (not permitted). Staff confirmed that a facility can be limited to a legal description for only the portion of a parcel used by the solar facility rather than rezoning an entire large parcel.
Commissioners and staff also discussed wildfire and fire‑risk mapping for solar sites, groundcover/vegetation management, end‑of‑life reclamation and bonding for decommissioning, and battery‑storage safety. Commissioners proposed requiring a reclamation or decommissioning bond, staged bonding tied to phased build‑out (for example, bond increments at start, 5, 10 and 15 years), and stricter standards on post‑life vegetation control so sites can be returned to agricultural use if desired.
The group reached several tentative drafting directions for the next meeting: remove conditional‑use allowances for community or concentrated solar from RU‑2 and RU‑5; allow small‑scale solar as conditional uses in appropriate zones; consider placing commercial/industrial‑scale solar in industrial zones or the public‑infrastructure overlay but develop clearer language about lifetime, reclamation and decommissioning requirements; and require bonding and incremental surety tied to build‑out and decommissioning. Staff said the changes will be carried forward to the next meeting and will form the commission’s recommendation to the county council.
No formal vote was taken; the discussion will be refined and returned to the commission for a recommendation to the county council.
