Des Moines County work session probes setbacks, wildlife safeguards and testing rules for large solar and battery projects

Des Moines County officials opened an extended work session Aug. 19 to review proposed siting and design standards for commercial-scale solar, battery storage and wind projects, focusing on setbacks, wildlife protections, soil testing and noise limits.

Zack James of the Southeast Regional Planning Commission and county staff led the session and said the draft ordinance applies requirements “only to CCS at the time of construction” and includes waiver language allowing property owners to grant shorter setback distances (Zack James). Jared Trent and planning staff walked the board and the public through the setback table and related definitions, noting some items were added after outside reviews and Lee County work sessions.

The core dispute at the meeting was where to measure protective setbacks: from a structure that is occupied today (a house or civic building) or from a property line. Public commenters including Rose Fisher and Charles Tominson urged property-line setbacks to preserve future uses and property rights; Tominson called a property line “the only sensible way to go” given the county’s large acreage availability. In contrast, Kenny Olsen, director of the De Mo County Energy District, urged measuring to occupied buildings, saying setbacks “are meant to protect people where they live and work today, not hypothetical structures that might never be built.”

Cemeteries, conservation areas and wetlands drew special attention. Jared Trent said conservation-area setbacks are intended to address wildlife mitigation and monitoring and that a blanket property-line approach could leave some sensitive sites underprotected. Commissioners and residents debated reducing cemetery setbacks from 300 feet to 150 feet in some circumstances and whether to adopt a single tidy rule (e.g., 300 feet from nonparticipating property lines) or keep a table of varied setbacks tied to specific features.

Environmental protections and long-term risk also surfaced. County staff and commenters discussed routine and event-triggered soil testing for contaminants (participants raised cadmium concerns), and whether baseline testing, periodic spot checks and decommissioning testing should be required. As one participant noted, “Cadmium…has leaked” in other contexts, prompting calls for earlier detection and third-party testing. Planners said the draft currently ties some testing cadence to bond/insurance renewal cycles but agreed to consult environmental engineering specialists about optimal frequency and spot-testing protocols.

Noise and nuisance standards drew debate. The draft uses a weighted dBA threshold (55 dBA) measured at occupied dwellings; several residents pushed for a lower cap (45–50 dBA) citing “annoyance” and quality-of-life concerns, while planners warned that 40–45 dBA would be unusually restrictive for commercial-scale projects. The board asked staff to compare other Iowa counties’ noise provisions (Henry County was suggested) and to provide more detailed day/night and low-frequency guidance.

Other technical and design topics included: a proposed maximum vertical tilt/height rule (current draft allows height increases tied to setback distances; participants urged a clear absolute cap, with several citing 15–30 ft options for agrivoltaic uses), screening requirements to limit glare at nearby dwellings (with discussion of hedgerows and planting plans), access/fencing details to minimize snow drifting on roadways, required insurance and emergency-response language, and decommissioning requirements to restore soils and document CSR/soil characteristics.

Board members and staff repeatedly said the draft needed more work. Chair noted a willingness to continue the conversation and staff suggested a 30-day extension to the work session schedule. No formal ordinance was adopted at the meeting; planners expect to return with revised language addressing screening, precise definitions of “previously tested” equipment, clearer soil-testing intervals and a refined noise section before a future vote.

"We want to set distances from homes that are different and that essentially preclude any accident or catastrophe from reaching that home," a supervisor said during the discussion, summarizing the county's safety focus. The work session concluded with staff agreeing to gather comparative ordinances and technical guidance and to bring revised draft language back to the board for further consideration.