Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Renewable Energy Solar topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning commission lists ordinance options as part of Solar Facility Study

Lunenburg County Planning Commission · March 1, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Lunenburg County Planning Commission discussed a Solar Facility Study on Dec. 7, listing items for possible ordinance or policy language including acreage benchmarks, a five-year clear-cut restriction, buffers, farmland protection, tree-cutting concerns, project-area definition, preferred siting, contiguous project preference, a Pollinator Smart program and battery-storage policy.

On Dec. 7, 2023 the Lunenburg County Planning Commission discussed a Solar Facility Study and compiled a list of specific issues it wants staff to consider when drafting ordinance language or guidance. Chairman James Tharpe noted the study currently has no timeline.

Commissioners identified the following topics for study and possible ordinance language: acreage benchmarks used by other Virginia localities (Rockingham and Stafford); whether to prohibit solar projects on parcels clear-cut or replanted within the previous five years; required buffers between arrays and neighboring properties or roads; protections for agriculture and prime farmland; rules or limits on tree cutting and related air‑quality concerns; definition of the project area (whether measured as area inside fencing or total acreage under control); preferred siting criteria (out of sight, off the road, not in heavily populated areas); a preference for contiguous parcels rather than scattered arrays; participation in a Pollinator Smart program; clarification on how to measure distance between existing/permitted/constructed projects; and whether to create an ordinance addressing battery storage (the minutes record that currently no project is permitted to include battery storage).

The discussion produced policy questions rather than decisions: commissioners did not adopt an ordinance or set numeric thresholds at the meeting. The minutes record no formal vote on the study; the item remains at discussion stage pending further staff work and potential ordinance drafting.