Florence holds public hearing on Boone County-led zoning text amendments for solar and battery storage

Florence officials heard about an hour of public comment Tuesday on proposed zoning text amendments forwarded from the Boone County Planning Commission that would regulate solar energy systems and battery energy storage systems (BESS) across the Boone County planning unit, including the city of Florence.

Mr. Morgan, the city presenter, said the draft language would add definitions to Article 40 and revise multiple zoning sections (including proposed provisions referenced in the Technical Design Review Committee report and rules found in section 31-17 and section 31-18). The draft mirrors Boone County’s tiered approach: ground-mounted solar is categorized by footprint (Tier 1: under 2,500 sq ft or ≤10% of principal roof area; Tier 2: 2,500 sq ft–5 acres; Tier 3: over 5 acres). For battery storage, the draft defines Tier 1 as systems with aggregate capacity ≤600 kilowatt-hours or a single-system technology (residential examples such as a Tesla Powerwall) and Tier 2 as larger or multi-technology installations typically sited at industrial properties.

Under the Florence draft, rooftop solar would be allowed in all zoning districts as an accessory use if it meets section 31-17 standards. Those standards call for conformity with height limits, visibility controls (many zones would prohibit rooftop panels visible from streets or adjoining properties), matte/nonreflective surfaces, concealed wiring or color-matched conduit, and equipment screened from public roadways. Ground-mounted Tier 1 systems would be permitted accessories in industrial and airport zones and allowed by conditional use in agricultural zones; Tier 2 and 3 systems are not allowed as-of-right and would require a plan-development or a planning commission recommendation. For Tier 2 battery facilities the draft includes a 200-foot setback from residential property lines, a 60-decibel maximum measured at the property line, buffer yards where adjacent to residential property, undergrounding of utilities where feasible, and a six-month decommissioning requirement for removal of equipment and underground wiring once a facility ceases operations.

Residents who spoke at the hearing generally supported wider access to solar but raised technical and practical concerns about the draft language. Brandon Ashcraft praised the draft but asked the city to allow more flexibility for residential enclosures and conduit placement, saying in some homes a visible conduit or a small enclosure is unavoidable and can be made to appear neat. Jonathan Andrews, who described installing a rooftop array in October 2021, said his system produced surplus energy that lowered his bills and urged the city to enable similar opportunities for other homeowners and pursue municipal installations that could offset city energy costs with favorable net-metering contracts.

Other speakers pressed for clearer rules and future-proofing. Zeb Gentry asked the council to clarify the difference between integrated and ground-mounted arrays (for example, whether a carport-mounted array would be treated as integrated or ground-mounted), warned that some visibility requirements may conflict with electrical-code needs for accessible emergency shutoffs, and questioned how the draft’s “single-technology” language for Tier 1 batteries would affect future upgrades or mixed-brand systems. Naomi Liebson urged the city to create a climate change committee and to pursue a climate action plan to decarbonize Florence by 2050; another speaker argued the draft appears to discourage solar on aesthetic grounds and urged the city to avoid overreach.

City officials acknowledged the written and oral input and said staff will continue reviewing the ordinance language. Councilmember Chambers thanked speakers for detailed comments and said the city will evaluate the draft further to produce rules residents and businesses can embrace. The public hearing was closed at 7:50 p.m.; the council will take a formal vote on the zoning text amendment at a later meeting.