Union County approves special exception for Florida Power solar and battery project on industrial parcel

The Union County Board of County Commissioners, sitting as the Board of Adjustments, voted unanimously on Feb. 17 to approve SE 26-01, a special-exception request from Florida Power and Light Company to place a solar farm and associated battery infrastructure on industrial-zoned parcels in the county.

The applicant, represented by Cale Gertzen, an associate project manager with Fort Picard, told the board the proposal would use roughly 20% of a 150-acre industrial parcel adjacent to existing solar infrastructure. Gertzen said the company expects construction in 2028, commercial operation in July 2029 and battery operation in April 2030. "We believe that these projects bring great benefits to the county," he said, citing jobs during construction and increased ad valorem tax revenue.

Why this matters: county officials and residents wrestled with a choice between local economic benefits and visual and environmental concerns. The applicant projected about $288,000 in ad valorem tax revenue from the existing facility in 2025 and estimated that four similar projects could yield roughly $1,000,000 per year for the county; the company also estimated roughly 200 construction jobs per project and 40–50 jobs associated with batteries.

Public commenters raised objections to the scale and look of solar fields and questioned panel and battery lifespans. One resident said, "They're ugly," and opposed the project, adding apprehension about where panels and batteries go after their useful life. Anya Griffiths asked about contamination and whether batteries would be added to the site: "Is are there batteries already out there, and is that that's your plan is to put more out there?" she asked.

Company response and safety claims: Gertzen said panels typically have a 30–35 year life and that the company maintains a decommissioning plan coordinated with the Florida Public Service Commission. He said "solar panels are recyclable 98% by weight" and that the projects are permitted through the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. On battery safety he cited testing and design standards (NFPA 855), dual testing protocols, sealed shipping-container–style battery enclosures, deflagration panels and 24/7 remote modular shutdown capability.

Board members acknowledged aesthetic concerns but noted legal and practical limits. Commissioner Jones said he wanted to "keep a good relationship with Florida Power" and warned of costly litigation if the county attempted to block a lawful use on agricultural land; commissioners observed that state statute allows solar by right on agricultural land in many cases, and that the county’s role in this industrial parcel review is constrained by the land development regulations and prior approvals.

Motion and next steps: Commissioner Jones moved to approve SE 26-01; Commissioner Jackson seconded the motion. The board voted "aye" and the motion passed unanimously. The resolution presented earlier (BASE26-01) and the conditions read into the record will govern the approval and any revocation process identified in the county’s land-development rules.

The Board of Adjustments meeting adjourned at 6:17 p.m.