Rules Aim To Balance Often Competing Interests
A solar energy ordinance is now on the books, having become a part of Rockbridge County’s land use regulations.
A 27-month-long planning process to establish regulations governing the siting, development, operations and decommissioning of community and utility scale solar energy facilities was completed last Monday, Feb. 23, when the Board of Supervisors unanimously approved the solar energy ordinance.
Chris Slaydon, the county’s director of community development, recalled the supervisors giving the green light in November of 2023 to the formation of a committee to begin drafting such an ordinance. The action came in response to multiple special exception permit applications that had been received for utility-scale solar arrays on county farmland.
It was apparent then that there was a looming demand for these facilities but the county had little written guidance in its land use regulations on what criteria to base zoning decisions on when determining whether or not to grant SEPs for these facilities.
The Planning Commission, which makes recommendations on the requests, and the Board of Supervisors, which has the final say on SEP approval, came under pressure from diametrically opposed sides in rendering these zoning decisions.
One side advocated for protecting private property rights – that farmers should have the right to do what they want with their own land. It was argued that the revenue derived from leasing a portion of their land for solar facilities would allow landowners to be able to afford to farm the balance of their properties.
Others argued that the proliferation of solar arrays would continue a trend of development usurping farmland in the county, placing in jeopardy agricultural pursuits. Safeguarding scenic views has been another potent argument against allowing solar panels to crop up on farmland.
The solar ordinance enacted last week is an attempt to balance these competing interests by giving the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors guidance in making these difficult zoning decisions.
The solar committee met regularly throughout much of 2024 to research, along with county staff, zoning regulations elsewhere, to gather information from experts in the field and citizens who have opinions on the subject, and ultimately produced a draft ordinance. County staff, the planners and supervisors further refined the draft in subsequent months. The Commission recommended approval in January and the supervisors approved the ordinance last week.
At a public hearing prior to last week’s vote, Bob Biersack, a member of the committee representing Rockbridge Conservation, praised the process that produced the ordinance. “We went through that process seriously, considering each other’s positions and points of view, and the information that everybody brought to bear,” he said, “and it made the process richer and stronger and more fruitful, I think, in the end, than it would have been otherwise. It was community participation in its best sense.”
Bill Russell said, “The solar committee, the Planning Commission, the staff made a serious and good faith effort to gather public input and use a framework that reflects the concerns and values of this community. This has been a thoughtful process and I respect the work behind it.”
He called the resulting ordinance “a framework. It reflects a sincere attempt to balance competing concerns. But,” he cautioned, “adopting a framework is not the same as granting open consent to the scale of development that outside economic and policy forces may now bring to rural counties like ours.”
When considering solar energy facility proposals, the ordinance states, consideration should be given to “Minimiz(ing) adverse visual effects of solar energy facilities through careful siting and design; maintain(ing) the character of surrounding land uses and preserv[ing] historic, environmental and cultural resources of the county in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan; and avoid(ing) potential adverse impacts to persons and property through design, construction, maintenance and decommissioning standards.”
Factors to be considered in deciding whether to grant SEPs include proximity to residential districts, compatibility with surrounding land uses, the design of the facility to prevent visual obtrusiveness, retention of top soil, avoidance of deforestation and karst topography, minimizing land disturbance, encouraging pollinator and vegetative best practices to improve soils during the life of the project and consistency with the comprehensive plan.
The ordinance spells out the requirements for having a decommissioning plan for when the solar array is no longer being used to supply power, including putting up a bond to cover the costs of returning the land to its previous condition.
There’s a requirement for applicants to provide “color photo simulations of the site from relevant viewpoints, as determined by the Zoning Administrator, including a simulated photographic image of the proposed solar facility.”
On this point, Kerrs Creek Supervisor Steve Hart suggested going a step further – requiring a viewshed analysis from a service like Google Earth so as to make clear what can be seen from specific vantage points. The other supervisors resisted making a last-minute change to a draft that had been two-years-plus in the making.
Leslie Ayers made a motion to adopt the ordinance as presented. Jay Lewis seconded the motion, which passed 5-0.
