Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Solar Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
James City County Supervisors weigh limits on utility-scale solar, debate discouraging forest clearing
Summary
Staff told supervisors the county has roughly 6,700 acres that meet draft criteria for utility-scale solar, but about 6,024 acres are forested. Board members debated adding a policy to discourage clearing forestland for solar to limit new development and avoid incentivizing pre-application timbering.
Chair convened discussion on a draft solar energy generating facilities policy that would set a cap on the amount of land eligible for large, utility-scale solar projects. Planning staff reported about 9,462 acres zoned A-1 agricultural countywide; after excluding subdivisions, water, and resource-protected areas, staff said roughly 6,700 acres meet basic site criteria and that about 6,024 of those acres are currently forested while roughly 700 acres are already cleared.
Planning staff (Thomas Weisson) told the board a special-use permit is currently under review for a proposed solar farm and that the draft policy would be used to evaluate future applications if adopted. Several supervisors said the simplest way to limit tree removal would be a clear policy statement that “strongly discourages” clearing forested land for solar. One board member said that approach would effectively limit new utility-scale solar to the roughly 700 already-cleared acres without outright banning landowner choices.
Other supervisors raised a potential loophole: a landowner could timber (harvest) trees before applying for a solar permit, creating cleared acreage that would appear to comply with a policy focused only on current forest cover. Staff noted existing land-disturbance permitting thresholds and other regulatory triggers could reduce that risk, but the board discussed whether additional language or permit conditions would be needed to prevent circumvention.
No formal policy was adopted at the meeting. Staff agreed to follow up with clarifying language and specifics about whether the proposed limit applies only to utility-scale facilities or to other categories of solar development as well. The board’s next steps include further refinement of the draft policy before any adoption vote.
The discussion combined environmental concerns about forest loss, property-owner rights, and the county’s limited supply of cleared land suitable for large solar installations.
Next steps: staff to return with recommended policy language clarifying scope (utility-scale vs. other) and addressing timbering/land-disturbance loopholes before the board considers adoption.
