Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Renewable Energy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission weighs draft rules for large solar projects; agrees to expand notice and lighting requirements
Summary
The commission discussed a draft ordinance to treat non‑accessory solar as a conditional use permit with setbacks, screening, noise and decommissioning standards; commissioners agreed to add a 3‑mile notification option, downward lighting requirements and a per‑acre setback formula to be drafted for next month’s meeting.
Lincoln County’s Planning Commission continued a months‑long discussion on proposed rules for non‑accessory solar‑energy systems, advancing several policy choices and asking staff to draft precise wording for a future public hearing.
Toby Brown, the county’s planning staffer, said the draft would treat grid‑connected (non‑accessory) solar as a conditional use requiring setbacks, screening, signage, buried electrical equipment and decommissioning provisions tied to the landowner. Brown said staff had added signage and noise provisions drawn from the county’s wind‑energy conditional‑use requirements.
Public commenters urged broader notice and larger setbacks. Sarah Steven, who identified herself from Lenox, cited a Virginia Tech study and said properties within a half‑mile of solar farms “the drop in your residence value is probably 7 to 8%,” and urged notice to owners within three miles. Bethany Eric urged downward‑directed lighting to avoid glare and also asked for larger setbacks and expanded neighbor notification.
Commissioners discussed a stepped approach to setbacks: a minimum of about 750 feet with an increasing setback of roughly 15 feet per acre was proposed as a starting point for drafting; commissioners also debated whether to limit the use to A‑1 agricultural zoning or allow solar in commercial and industrial districts. Several commissioners favored forwarding a redrafted ordinance to the County Commission so that county elected officials could review and hold a formal public hearing. Brown recommended staff draft the specific language and return next month so the commission can check the wording before sending it to the board.
No formal ordinance vote was taken; commissioners asked staff to return with a written draft that incorporates the agreed additions — notification distance, downward lighting, minimum/setback math and any clarifying definitions — for another review and a possible remand to the Board of County Commissioners.
