Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves zoning changes to add solar definitions and tweak multifamily, kennel standards
Summary
Roanoke County approved amendments to Articles 2, 3 and 4 of the zoning ordinance adding definitions and standards for community‑scale (≤5 MW) and utility‑scale (>5 MW) solar energy systems, clarifying multifamily/project‑site rules, and adding flexibility for commercial kennel setbacks via special‑use or administrator determinations.
The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors voted May 26 to amend three articles of the county zoning ordinance to add definitions and standards for solar energy systems and to clarify several land‑use rules.
Philip Thompson, director of planning, told the board the ordinance changes update a code that dates to 1992 and are intended to correct efficiencies, clarify definitions and add standards. The amendments add definitions for community‑scale solar energy systems (5 megawatts or less) and utility‑scale systems (greater than 5 megawatts), and then add those uses to five zoning districts, allowed only by special‑use permit. New standards address lot size, setbacks, buffers, height, security, soil and vegetation management, visual impact, third‑party consultants and decommissioning; application requirements for solar were also added.
Thompson said Article 4 clarifies multifamily dwelling standards by treating a project as a project site (which may include multiple parcels) and adjusted activity‑center percentages from 75% to 80% to allow more housing. The cluster subdivision option receives exemptions for maximum building coverage (while maximum lot coverage remains) and the commercial kennel section allows the zone administrator or planning commission, depending on district, to reduce the 100‑foot buffer around outdoor runs based on topography or site conditions.
Planning Commission held a public hearing May 5 and recommended approval; the county’s first reading was approved May 12 and no changes were made since the first reading, Thompson said. The board opened the public hearing; there were no citizens signed up to speak. After brief questions about timing and how the amendments might apply to a pending commercial kennel application, a supervisor moved to approve the ordinance amendments; the motion passed on roll call.
Staff said the amendments are intended to be part of a broader comprehensive rewrite of the zoning ordinance at a later date, and that some findings from real‑world applications may lead to future tweaks.
