Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Renewable Energy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission hears Goshen Valley solar‑facility text amendment; developer seeks conditional‑use path and possible TIF
Summary
Staff and applicants described a proposed text amendment to allow interim solar generation facilities in a defined portion of the Goshen Valley PC zone; Ag Reserves and Long Road Energy said access to transmission makes the site attractive and Long Road said it may seek tax‑increment financing to remain competitive.
Get email alerts on the Renewable Energy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A work‑session item addressed a proposed land‑use text amendment to allow interim, conditional‑use solar generation facilities within a specified portion of the Goshen Valley planned‑community (PC) zone. Bryce Armstrong, Community Development, said the amendment would add solar energy facilities as allowed interim uses subject to conditional‑use review in a limited area of the PC zone (staff cited a roughly 5,000–5,600 acre area defined in the draft text).
Wes Quintin of Ag Reserves (managing church‑owned property in the area) and Brian Harris of Long Road Energy described the site’s attributes: multiple high‑voltage transmission lines cross the area and the land is primarily grazing with limited production agriculture in the amendment area. Quintin said Ag Reserves intends to lease land for a utility‑scale solar project and retain ownership of the parcels and improvements. Harris said Long Road has developed multiple large renewable projects in Utah and sees the location as favorable because of transmission access and proximity to load. He told commissioners that competitiveness for utility‑scale projects often requires incentives and that Long Road would likely seek tax‑increment financing to make the project viable against out‑of‑state competition.
Commissioners asked about potential economic benefits, tax incentives, and whether a change limited to the PC zone was preferable to a broader zoning change. Staff confirmed the planning commission recommended approval and found the text consistent with the general plan; subsequent conditional‑use and permitting reviews would be required for any specific project. Commissioners signaled support for referring action items to the agenda for later decision‑making but expressed caution about incentives such as tax‑increment financing and asked for scrutiny if such requests follow.
