Bluff planning commission refines renewable-energy ordinance, plans conditional-use rules and Oct. 28 public hearing

Amanda Podmore, chair of the Town of Bluff Planning and Zoning Commission, opened the work session saying, “Hello, everybody, and welcome to the town of Bluff Planning and Zoning Commission work session. Today is Thursday, 09/18/2025.” The commissioners then spent more than an hour reviewing a draft renewable-energy ordinance and related conditional-use language the commission will use to evaluate larger projects.

Commissioners and staff said the draft is close to finished but flagged several items that need clarification before the ordinance goes to public hearing. The commission asked staff to (1) provide a clear definition for “agrivoltaics,” (2) distinguish large, industrial battery-energy-storage systems from residential-scale batteries, and (3) confirm whether the ordinance’s sizing table should treat roof-mounted and ground-mounted systems separately.

Commissioners emphasized that the ordinance should not size projects by electricity output but by site footprint. They discussed a three-tier level system (level 0 through 3) that distinguishes small residential installations from larger commercial projects and said SolSmart reviewers had not recommended changing those levels. Commissioners also asked staff to confirm whether the current chart language meets SolSmart’s guidance.

On agrivoltaics, commissioners agreed to refine the definition so it covers agricultural uses under any renewable-energy project, not just solar. The group asked Brian Whitney and Marcia Eatonfield to draft definition language to bring back to the commission.

Battery storage drew repeated questions. Commissioners and staff said the draft should not unintentionally ban residential, wall-mounted batteries (for example, Tesla Powerwall–style systems) while still addressing safety and siting rules for large, containerized storage systems. The commission asked staff to explicitly exempt residential-scale batteries from a prohibition aimed at industrial systems or to define the size threshold that differentiates the two.

Visual impacts and related submittal requirements were also discussed. The commission debated how narrowly to list additional studies and graphics, agreeing to a middle ground: require that “additional information may be required as determined by the planning and zoning commission or building department” for site-specific challenges such as proximity to an airport, washes, or other sensitive areas. Commissioners cautioned that required mitigation cannot unreasonably prevent a solar installation from functioning (for example, screening that blocks sunlight).

Decommissioning, blade-painting references and impervious-surface allowances were reviewed; commissioners removed duplicated language on blade color and discussed language that would exclude ground-mounted array area from an impervious-surface calculation.

A major policy conversation focused on how the town will handle conditional-use permits for larger projects. Commission members said conditional-use approval should be site- and project-specific and include enforceable conditions attached to permits. Possible conditions cited for discussion included flood-mitigation measures, geologic-hazard studies, glare/strobe/glare mitigation, setbacks for safety, and decommissioning assurances. Commissioners agreed the town will need a written process for timeliness and enforcement (for example, deadlines for decision-making and remedies if conditions are unmet) and asked staff to consult Town staff or legal counsel for required timelines and enforcement language.

The commission confirmed that conditional-use permits would require a public hearing. Staff indicated the commission should plan to have the ordinance posted and available for public review by Oct. 15 and that notice to the local paper (San Juan Record) would run Oct. 10; the commission and staff discussed scheduling the public hearing for Oct. 28 as a combined hearing (renewable-energy ordinance and general plan update).

Next steps the commission set: refine the agrivoltaics definition and conditional-use wording (assignments to Whitney and Eatonfield), ask staff to clarify battery-storage size thresholds and SolSmart comments, and request guidance from town legal/administrative staff on conditional-use process timing and enforcement. The commission plans to return the polished draft for posting ahead of the Oct. 28 hearing.