By Matt de Simone
The Botetourt County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved changes to the county’s regulations for solar energy facilities last Tuesday while giving the Planning Commission additional time to continue reviewing the county’s broader solar policies.
The action came after the Botetourt County Planning Commission unanimously voted Aug. 10 to deny the proposed text amendments in their current form and requested additional time to work on the regulations and related Comprehensive Plan changes.
Community Development Director Nicole Pendleton told supervisors that the Planning Commission had been authorized by the board in May to consider amendments to the county code governing solar energy facilities, including changes to accessory uses, definitions and the permissibility of different types of solar facilities in various zoning districts.
The proposed amendments were prompted in part by changes to Virginia law governing solar energy facilities and battery energy storage systems.
The state legislation limits the ability of local governments to regulate certain aspects of solar facilities while requiring localities to update their zoning ordinances to address matters including setbacks, fencing, screening, visual impacts, grading and decommissioning.
At Tuesday’s meeting, supervisors added two amendments specifically addressing agricultural soils.
The first requires applicants for ground-mounted minor or utility-scale solar facilities to identify cultivated lands and predominant soil types, including prime farmland and highly erodible or potentially highly erodible land.
The determination would have to be based either on a current technical determination from the U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service or a site-specific soil evaluation prepared by a Virginia-licensed professional soil scientist.
The second amendment adds soil-testing requirements to decommissioning plans for solar facilities in A-1 agricultural zoning districts.
The requirement calls for a preconstruction baseline report documenting soil conditions, including depth, density and quality. The testing would include at least eight boreholes per five megawatts of the proposed facility and would have to be conducted by an accredited laboratory.
Soil conditions would then be tested at the same locations every five years after commercial operation begins and again after equipment is removed during decommissioning.
Restoration activities would be required as necessary to return soil conditions to at least their baseline levels.
Pendleton noted that county staff had not received the proposed amendments before the meeting.
“I did not receive that. I haven’t seen it,” Pendleton said. “As the zoning administrator who enforces the ordinance, it’s really tough to be able to provide a response or reaction to that tonight.”
The board unanimously approved the amendments.
According to County Communications Manager Brent Watts, the additional soil-testing and baseline-reporting provisions came out of the board’s discussion during the public hearing and were not part of the materials county staff reviewed beforehand.
“We haven’t had a chance to fully evaluate any future potential impacts on permitting, costs, or timing yet,” Watts said.
The board then approved the broader ordinance as amended while giving the Planning Commission until Dec. 31 to continue working with county staff on changes to the Comprehensive Plan and zoning ordinance related to solar facilities and associated interconnection facilities.
The board’s stated intent is for the additional work to give particular consideration to preserving prime farmland, preventing erosion and damage to agricultural soils, protecting steep slopes and similar features, as well as establishing appropriate requirements for decommissioning solar facilities and returning sites to their pre-development condition.
Watts said county staff has not received additional direction regarding specific changes to the Comprehensive Plan or zoning ordinance beyond the discussion and motion at Tuesday’s meeting.
“County staff will need further direction and an opportunity to evaluate any proposed changes to the Comprehensive Plan,” Watts said. Questions about the board’s specific intent for the future review, including whether additional amendments are anticipated, would be best directed to individual board members, he said.
The Planning Commission requested additional time to consider how the county’s solar regulations should address agricultural land and other land-use concerns while complying with changes in state law. The commission is expected to continue its review through the end of the year.
