Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Solar topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners resist making large solar projects an administrative permit; favor rooftop and targeted siting
Summary
Weber County planning staff proposed a code change to streamline approvals for some large ground-mounted solar installations; commissioners expressed concern and declined to remove public hearings for those projects at this time.
Weber County planning staff opened a brief discussion about proposed updates to the county’s solar-energy provisions in the land-use code, including an option to allow large ground-mounted solar arrays to be approved administratively when they meet specified standards.
Why it matters: Changing a large ground-mounted solar installation from a conditional use (public hearing) to an administrative approval would reduce public hearings and procedural scrutiny for utility-scale projects. Commissioners emphasized balancing renewable-energy goals with long-term land-use objectives.
What was discussed
- Staff proposal: Bill (planning staff) and other staff explained the draft change would shift some solar-farm approvals from a public conditional-use process to an administrative-level approval when code standards are met. Bill noted the underlying standards are “already on the books” and that the change would affect only the approval path rather than technical requirements.
- Commissioner concerns: Several commissioners pushed back. One commissioner argued the county should avoid converting agricultural and industrially suitable land west of the river into ground-mounted solar fields because that land might in future host manufacturing or other employers. Commissioners also recommended prioritizing rooftop solar on existing commercial and industrial buildings and using smaller-scale, less-visible sites over broad farmland conversion.
- Process and timing: Multiple commissioners urged staff not to rush a code rewrite; several said the county’s current conditional-use process, though tested by prior hearings, provides necessary public input. Staff said the state could change rules in future; commissioners said that made thoughtful local code work important.
Outcome
No formal code change was made. Commissioners signaled they prefer maintaining public review for large ground-mounted solar projects and encouraged staff to focus on siting choices that avoid using prime industrial and agricultural land and to promote rooftop and building-mounted solar where feasible.
Ending
Staff said they would take the commission’s direction back into code review work and would not proceed immediately to administrative permitting for ground-mounted solar without further commission review.
