Rogers planning commission amends zoning to allow community solar gardens with spacing, setback and decommissioning conditions

The Rogers Planning Commission voted to amend sections 125-102, 125-50 and 125-93 of the city zoning code to permit community solar gardens in R1 as an interim use, imposing conditions including a half-mile minimum distance between sites, a 250-foot setback from residential structures, limits on project footprint measured in acres and stronger decommissioning requirements.

Staff introduced the amendment as a necessary code change before any site-specific approvals, noting the draft language would add a definition for “community solar garden” and place standards in the city’s alternative energy section. Staff said the draft originally used a five-megawatt cap (roughly 20 acres depending on site) and included rules on height, glare mitigation, landscaping, stormwater compliance, emergency access and a required decommissioning plan and escrow at application.

Colin O’Neal, development manager for Sunshare, told commissioners the company was proposing a roughly 5 megawatt project west of Rogers and emphasized community benefits. "Community solar is a way for folks who can't afford or are unable to install solar on their own home or business to participate in the benefits of renewable energy," O'Neal said, adding that recent Department of Commerce program rules require a majority share of subscriptions to go to income-qualified residents and nonprofits.

Commissioners pressed for limits and local benefit protections during a lengthy deliberation. Several commissioners raised concerns that a program requirement to reserve a majority of subscriptions (discussed in the meeting as 55 percent) could result in many subscribers living outside Rogers and thus reduce direct local benefit. Staff and the applicant responded that the project will connect to the local grid, that developer-funded upgrades to substations and lines typically accompany interconnection, and that local subscribers can be prioritized in outreach and partnerships with housing authorities and nonprofits.

After debate over whether to limit projects by megawatts, acres, number of sites or proximity, the commission settled on a package of changes: measure project size by acreage (the commission discussed 20 acres as an upper project footprint example), require a half-mile spacing between community solar sites, set a 250-foot setback from residential structures, ensure the rooftop-integrated height allowance is not applied to freestanding arrays (height limits apply to freestanding panels), and strengthen decommissioning language (including escrow calculations that account for inflation). A motion to amend the three code sections with those additions was seconded and carried by voice vote; the transcript records a single opposition but does not include a roll-call tally.

Staff said each community solar garden would still be subject to an interim use permit process, including a public hearing and engineering review; the code changes do not bypass project-level review. Commissioners and staff also discussed allowing projects to cross property lines, options for vegetation management such as sheep grazing or native seed mixes, and the requirement that developers provide utility interconnection evidence before building permits are issued.

The commission’s approval enables the city to move forward with a regulatory framework for community solar while retaining discretion at the interim use permit stage and reserving the right to amend the code in the future if applications indicate a need for additional limits.

What happens next: the amended code will return to city council for consideration and any final adoption required by local process. Individual solar garden proposals would then apply for interim use permits and the standard site-level reviews described by staff.