Lincoln County rejects 60‑acre Lennox solar PDD after heated hearing over drainage and farmland use

Lincoln County commissioners voted down a rezoning request for a 60‑acre planned‑development district proposed by US Solar, following more than three hours of presentations, technical testimony and public comment.

Tina Munson, the company's representative, said the 7‑megawatt array would tie into local distribution and generate both production and capacity taxes for local governments. "We're proposing to generate local power and deliver it to the local community," Munson said during the applicant's presentation, adding US Solar's proposal includes agrivoltaic practices — grazing sheep and possible small‑scale farming outside the fenced array — and commitments to repairs and vegetative screening. The company estimated a roughly $15 million capital investment and noted an estimated first‑year property‑tax increase in the mid‑$30,000 range.

Opponents — mostly nearby landowners and Perry Township residents — focused on drainage, road and property‑value risks. "Solar farms are not agriculture," Laurel Shaffer told the commission. "They are figuratively a wolf in sheep's clothing…this is a non‑ag enterprise on ag land." Neighbors pressed the commission on the absence of finalized drainage calculations and expressed concern that a five‑foot fence and site access could trap crop residue and increase ponding on adjacent fields.

Planning staff described the PDD standards that would apply — including a minimum 50‑foot setback from adjacent property lines, underground power lines inside the fenced array, and a requirement for a licensed South Dakota civil engineer to submit drainage and civil plans prior to building permits. Staff reported the planning commission had recommended denial; planning staff recommended approval with conditions. Brad Wilkening, a drainage expert retained by the applicant, testified that properly designed solar sites often reduce peak runoff, saying in general he has observed a "50% reduction in rate and a 30% reduction in volume" in comparable projects, and described construction pond sizing.

Commission discussion centered on two competing issues: (1) whether the application complied with the county's recently adopted comprehensive plan and thus should be permitted as a planned development, and (2) whether outstanding technical details — particularly definitive post‑development drainage calculations and binding road‑use/road‑repair agreements — were necessary before granting a zoning change. Commissioners who voted against approval cited unresolved drainage risk and potential harm to neighboring farmland; supporters stressed the project's alignment with the comprehensive plan and the local tax and educational benefits for Lenox.

The roll-call on the motion to approve the PDD recorded three votes against and two in favor, failing to adopt the ordinance. Commissioners recorded their votes on the motion to approve as: three no votes, two yes (motion fails). The board did not adopt the PD zoning change.

What happens next: the planning and zoning record remains available for applicants to revise the proposal and return to the county; the decision also preserves the planning commission's recommendation. The record shows staff required civil plans and an engineer's drainage analysis prior to permit issuance should a future application succeed.

Why it matters: the decision addresses competing priorities for Lincoln County — encouraging economic development and new revenue sources while protecting existing agricultural uses and adjacent landowners from drainage and infrastructure impacts. Given continuing interest in utility‑scale generation in the region, residents and officials said they expect the project — or similar proposals — to reappear in modified form.