Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Renewable Energy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commission asks staff to draft scalable solar CUP standards, including setbacks and noise protections

Lincoln County Planning Commission · May 18, 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

After public comment urging scaled setbacks, lighting, noise and notification protections, the Planning Commission asked staff to draft a revised conditional-use path for non-accessory solar systems that includes options for scaled setbacks (feet per acre), signage/lighting/noise language, and return the draft for public review next month.

The Planning Commission continued deliberations May 12 on a draft ordinance to treat non-accessory solar energy systems in A-1 as a conditional use. Staff’s initial draft included a 750-foot hard setback, screening and decommissioning requirements, buried interior lines, a decommissioning escrow in the landowner’s name and a density cap (no other system within 2,500 feet).

Public commenters urged a broader suite of protections and recommended the commission model elements on the county’s wind and kAFO (large animal) ordinances. Requests included downward lighting, sign standards, an enforceable noise limit (public commenters suggested 45 dB at the property line), measures addressing electromagnetic interference, and neighborhood notification (one commenter asked for notification within 3 miles for utility-scale projects). Several speakers proposed scaling setbacks by project size — for example, a feet-per-acre approach so larger projects would require larger separations.

Commissioners debated a fixed 750-foot hard setback versus a waiverable or scaled setback tied to project acreage. Several commissioners said a waiver process or negotiated mitigation preserves negotiation between applicants and nearby residents while a purely hard setback could be overly restrictive for smaller projects. The commission directed staff to draft a revised CUP template that includes optional protections (lighting, signage, noise, EM interference language) and to explore a scaled setback approach (feet per acre) to present next month; the public will have another opportunity to review the draft before further action.