Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solar Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public speakers urge changes as Lunenburg Board defers vote on updated solar ordinance
Summary
At a May 8 meeting, residents gave mixed testimony on the Laurel Branch Solar project and a revised Solar Facilities Ordinance; the Board referred the draft to its Solar Facilities Committee and deferred a final vote to a future meeting.
Chairman Alvester L. Edmonds presided as the Board of Supervisors on May 8 heard public comment on a proposed update to the county’s Solar Facilities Ordinance and testimony both supporting and opposing the Laurel Branch Solar project.
County Attorney Frank Rennie and Assistant County Attorney Drew DiStanislao reviewed the proposed ordinance changes, saying any applications received after adoption would be subject to the revisions. Rennie told the Board the draft incorporates recommendations from a Solar Facilities Committee, the two towns and the recently approved Joint Comprehensive Plan.
Multiple residents and outside commenters spoke during the public hearing. Supporters and property owners including Mike Campbell and Robin Wrenn spoke in favor of solar development and the Laurel Branch project. Other commenters — including Kevin St. John, Dylan Taylor, James Long, Alan Fowlkes, Alex Gharbo and Robert Hawthorne — raised specific concerns and asked the Board to consider revisions to the draft ordinance. Requests included removing the indemnification requirement, reducing setbacks, changing the ordinance’s density calculation from a linear to a radius measure, applying the new rules only to future applications (not retroactively), shortening distances from town limits and revisiting the timing of substantial payments.
After the public comment period Rennie reiterated that applications submitted after adoption would need to meet the ordinance’s updated requirements. Supervisor T. Wayne Hoover recommended the draft be reviewed further by the Solar Facilities Committee, administration staff and the County Attorney. The Board unanimously voted to defer a final vote to a future meeting and to refer the draft for the recommended review.
The deferral preserves the Board’s current authority over pending applications and gives staff and the committee time to reconcile requested changes and legal language before a final vote.
