The Tug Hill Commission (THC) in the Finger Lakes region recently hosted a webinar in which presenters discussed how the area is handling the influx of solar installations.
Matt Johnson, planning director for the THC, discussed steps municipalities can take to mitigate projects and deal with solar projects from a land use perspective. He explained that like many other states, including Pennsylvania, New York is a home rule state with local planning and zoning.
“We’re doing what we can to help communities deal with this new land use,” said Johnson. “None of us are experts on it; we’re learning as we go about what communities can do and are doing, land use moratoria, comprehensive plans and zoning laws and zoning reviews.”
Johnson described moratoria as local laws written by a community that prohibit development of a certain land use for a set period of time which allows time to update zoning or land use law to deal with solar.
“A common timeframe [for moratoria] is six months,” he said. “A lot of our communities found themselves caught off guard with large-scale solar development. Most have adopted moratoria.”
Municipalities in NYS are encouraged to adopt comprehensive plans. Such plans include maps, studies, resolutions, reports and other materials that create a shared vision for where the community wants to see itself in the future and provides rationale behind zoning or land use laws. Zoning is the essential tool that allows communities to regulate how and where solar developments can be established.
“In New York State, projects under 25 megawatts (MW) are reviewed by the local municipality,” said Johnson. “Projects greater than 25 MW are reviewed by the state Office of Renewable Energy Siting (ORES). It regulates the use of land, density of development and placement of structures on lots.”
County planning boards reviews projects based on geographical factors and provide recommendation for the local board to approve, approve with conditions or disapprove.
Johnson explained the dimensional and design standards for solar development, including maximum height for panels (typically 15 to 20 feet) and setbacks.
“We encourage municipalities to build flexibility into their laws to preserve ag land,” he said. “We don’t want unintended consequences where adding a large setback from a property line would force a project onto better agriculture soils. We don’t want land to be fragmented by setbacks that make farming the remainder of an agriculture property harder to farm.”
Other standards address the undergrounding of utility lines, impervious materials for access roads and paths, antireflective coatings on panels, lighting requirements, removal of existing trees, fencing type and height, locking gates and screening standards. Johnson noted that one important aspect is the minimum of one evergreen tree at least six feet high at the time of planting and two supplemental shrubs within 10 linear feet of the system.
Solar installations considerations should include protection of agricultural resources. “One is that the facility area for a solar project occupy no more than 50% of the area mineral soil group (MSG) 1 through 4,” said Johnson. “We want facilities sited so they aren’t completely covering the best agricultural soils. You can exceed 50% if the land is going to be used as a farm operation.”
Other requirements include a visual assessment for projects over 10 acres – what will the project look like from the ground while driving by or from a neighboring parcel? All projects require decommissioning plans – what will happen at the end of the lifecycle of the project, and if it isn’t going to continue, how will it be removed?
“Projects all require some type of financial security,” said Johnson. “Bonds, an escrow account – something that allows the community to recover funds to decommission a project if it’s no longer viable.”
In NYS, planning boards conduct a special use permit review for projects under 25 MW. Planning boards review site plans and consider all the aspects of “typical use,” design, whether it fits in the neighborhood and if it adversely affects the neighborhood for which it’s proposed.
One issue with planning boards is high turnover and new board members, and in some cases, no one is willing to serve. “It’s a constant struggle for planning boards to be trained to handle projects of this magnitude,” Johnson said. “That’s where we come in to offer anything we can do to help.”
The NYS Department of Ag & Markets also has a role in reviewing projects. “In New York State we don’t have county zoning,” said Johnson, “but we have the 239-m Review under the General Municipal Law of New York State that sets up county planning boards with the authority to review certain projects within geographical triggers. Triggers include proposed projects within 500 feet of a municipal boundary, a county or state park, the right-of-way of a state or county road, county-owned stream or drainage channel, county land with a public building or within 500 feet of a boundary of a farm operation located in a state agricultural district.”
Johnson listed some of the zoning waivers granted by ORES, including requiring a decommissioning bond with built-in annual inflation rates, noise limits, permeable access roads, prime farmland siting, large setbacks from wetlands and other property lines, maximum lot coverage and vegetation clearing. While many projects have requested waivers for required screening, ORES has been consistent in upholding those requirements.
Topics that come up at local meetings include a town’s “fair share,” considerations for preserving prime ag land, decommissioning, how bonds/securities work and concerns about the rapid turnover of project ownership.
“We see projects that have one owner for the permitting process,” said Johnson, “then a new owner comes in to play for the design process, then another new owner for the operation process, and whether to subtract the salvage value of the equipment in decommissioning costs.”
Citizens also have concerns about emergency vehicle access, toxicity of equipment and runoff and clear cutting of wooded property to prepare for solar projects.
Concerns from solar developers include excessive setbacks, screening requirements, required prime ag land conversion minimums, tree-cutting restrictions and requirements to build berms.
Neighboring property owners’ prime concerns center around the aesthetics of chain link fences, quickly maturing screening materials, screening that isn’t completed prior to construction or at all and large minimum setbacks.
Citizens should be aware of proposed solar developments in their region and should commit to attend meetings to ask questions and express concerns.
A list of permitted and pending solar projects in NYS is available on the ORES website, ores.ny.gov.
