3. Discussion on request from US Solar to reconsider community solar garden ordinance
Staff Report
Date of Meeting: October 3, 2018
To: City Council
From: Neil Soltis, Administrator
Re: Community Solar Garden
Background: In September, 2017 the Council approved an ordinance that repealed the section of
the development code that regulated solar farms and community solar gardens. Below are the
findings from the ordinance:
Section 1. Findings. The City Council hereby makes the following findings for the repeal of
Section 4.34 of the Development code regulating Solar Farms and Community Solar Gardens. The
City has determined that current regulations and official controls may not adequately address:
1. Whether the continued expansion of the use will negatively impact the use and enjoyment
of other property in the immediate vicinity of the solar projects,
2. Whether the use may have negative impacts on the value of nearby properties which
impacts will not be known until there are sufficient real estate transactions completed after
the current Solar Farms and Community Solar Gardens are constructed to determine the
impacts,
3. Whether the use will negatively impact the normal and orderly development and
improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the applicable zoning districts,
and
4. Whether the impacts of the development of additional community solar farms and
community solar gardens will conflict with the vision expressed in the 2030
Comprehensive Plan that Scandia maintain its unique rural character, agricultural heritage,
historic charms and natural resources, based on the City’s experience with the difficulties
of screening this use from public roadways and surrounding properties.
Representative of US solar have approached the City seeking to have revised regulations approved
that would address the findings from the ordinance and would permit development of community
solar in Scandia.
There was an initial discussion with US Solar at the August Planning Commission meeting. A copy of
those minutes follows this report. Also following is information submitted by US Solar.
The impetus to repeal the solar ordinance came from the City Council. This is being brought
forward to the Council to assess whether the Council is willing to consider a new solar ordinance in
the future.
August 7, 2018
DISCUSSION ON REQUEST FROM U.S. SOLAR TO RECONSIDER SOLAR
ORDINANCE
Jane Qualey, a project development analyst of U.S. Solar, requested the Commission either
consider the reinstatement of a solar ordinance with a text amendment application that addresses
previous issue related to community solar, or a use permit application for a specific site. Buss
pointed out since the ordinance has been repealed, a solar farm or garden is not an allowed use
and a use permit could not be issued. The City would have to adopt a new ordinance with all the
performance standards. Soltis pointed out the Planning Commission would need to decide if it
would like to recommend to the Council they relook at solar gardens with different performance
standards. Qualey reviewed the citations from the ordinance supporting the repeal and noted that
study in Chisago County that showed property values were not affected by the North Star solar
garden which has no landscape screening. To address previous concerns U.S. Solar
recommended that the ordinance limit the maximum height to 10 feet and the number of
interconnect pole to one. The Commission biggest concern expressed about the ability to regulate
the facilities that are owned by Xcel Energy and not subject to a CUP or development agreement.
The Commission indicated they would be willing to consider a solar ordinance based on the
study of no impact to property values, strong landscape screening language, equipment height
restrictions and a requirement of oscillating panels, specify fencing, and if the number of poles
could be limited. Qualey will bring back information on the ability to permanently limit the
number of poles for further discussion at the next meeting.
1
Neil Soltis
From:Jane Qualey <jane.qualey@us-solar.com>
Sent:Thursday, August 30, 2018 1:58 PM
To:Neil Soltis
Subject:Re: 8/7 Planning Commission Mtg
Hi Neil,
We're still researching ordinances with the 1-pole language and so far none have come up. Scandia might be a
pioneer, here.
What we suggest is the below language. I think it would be wise to leave it open to the discretion of the
Planning Commission in case there are special circumstances that would require more than one interconnection
pole and it would not not negatively impact the visual character of the area. The same goes for the screening
language: every site will have different needs. Some example language is below along with a summary of my
answers from the Planning Commission meeting.
If reenacting the original development code, this would be for Chapter 2 Section 4.33 Part 3 on page 106.
Interconnection Pole Language
...the applicant will add a maximum of 1 interconnection utility poles inside the project premises. Any
additional above ground poles on the site premises will need to be approved at the discretion of the planning
commission.
Screening Language
...Solar Farms and Community Solar Gardens shall be screened from residential dwellings, right-of-ways and
other land uses as required by the Planning Commission.
Summary of some of my answers, below. Thanks for your time on this, Neil! Let me know what else you need.
-Jane
----
1. Whether the continued expansion of the use will negatively impact the use and enjoyment
of other property in the immediate vicinity of the solar project.
We are proud to be partnering with Prairie Restoration, a local landscaping firm, in the design and
implementation of our landscape screening and habitat. Unlike other developers, we enforce extensive
landscape screening throughout our projects that includes planting native trees such as the Techny Arborvitae
and Cardinal Dogwood. Planting these in rows outside of our array will effectively shield the array from
neighbors, as shown in our examples. We also will be planting pollinator-friendly habitat within the array. This
array will only contribute to the local native habitats and the rural character of Scandia. Other projects, with the
same landscape standards, can also successfully integrate with the area.
2. Whether the use will have negative impacts on the value of nearby properties which impacts
will not be known until there are sufficient real estate transactions completed after the current
Solar Farms and Community Solar Gardens are constructed to determine their impacts.
2
With the findings of Chair Squyres, as noted: A study done in Chisago County shows no impact on property
values to properties adjacent to community solar gardens. In addition to these findings, it is important to note
that the North Star Project, the garden used in the study, does not have landscape screening.
3. Whether the use will negatively impact the normal and orderly development and
improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the applicable zoning districts.
The construction period is approximately 5 months from mobilization to completion. Roughly 8 weeks of that
time will involve active construction traffic. The rest of the time is used for utility testing, construction
mapping, and other development needs that do not involve extensive mobilization. After the construction
period, there will be minimal traffic to the site, maintaining the natural traffic-flow of the surrounding area. The
development of this garden will entail a Stormwater Prevention Plan, along with Geotechnical Surveys that will
ensure the integrity of drainage patterns and neighboring habitats.
4. Whether the impacts of the development of additional community solar farms and
community solar gardens will conflict with the vision expressed in the 2030 Comprehensive
Plan that Scandia maintain its unique rural character, agricultural heritage, historic charms
and natural resources, based on the City’s experience with the difficulties of screening this
use from public roadways and surrounding properties.
One of the priorities and visions of the 2030 Comp Plan is to protect the natural resources of Scandia.
Encouraging locally-made clean energy that integrates with the landscape and also contributes to natural habitat
will support these values and help Scandia meet its goals.
On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 9:38 AM, Jane Qualey <jane.qualey@us-solar.com> wrote:
Hi Neil,
Hope you had a good weekend.
After some investigation, it looks like you can only limit the number of poles on the site property, not within
the Xcel Easement. We can work out language to limit the installation to just one pole on the site (which is a
big improvement), but as far as Xcel is concerned they have jurisdiction over how many poles are on their
line.
Were you able to connect with Xcel, as well? Talk soon. -Jane
On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 9:46 AM, Neil Soltis <n.soltis@ci.scandia.mn.us> wrote:
Jane
I think the issue of the interconnection is the biggest impediment, but I’m not sure how we could bind Xcel Energy into
the future. Once you have gathered the information I will try to set up a call or meeting with Xcel.
Neil
From: Jane Qualey [mailto:jane.qualey@us-solar.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 8, 2018 3:22 PM
To: Neil Soltis <n.soltis@ci.scandia.mn.us>
Subject: 8/7 Planning Commission Mtg
3
Hi Neil,
Thanks for letting me attend the meeting last night. I honestly enjoyed hearing the debate regarding grading
regulations-- pretty interesting.
I'm checking in with my team about the interconnection concerns and hopefully will get back to you next
week with some info. Stay tuned and let me know if anything comes up in the meantime.
Talk soon and thanks. -Jane
--
Jane Qualey – Project Development
United States Solar Corporation
100 N 6th St, Suite 218C, Minneapolis, MN 55403
O: 612.930.4108 x31 M: 612.260.2230
jane.qualey@us-solar.com
us-solar.com
Right-click
here to download pictures. To
help protect your privacy, Outlook prevented
automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
The information contained in this message is privileged and confidential, and is intended only for the use of the individual named above and others
who have been specifically authorized to receive it. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, or if any problems occur with transmission,
please contact sender.
--
Jane Qualey – Project Development
United States Solar Corporation
100 N 6th St, Suite 218C, Minneapolis, MN 55403
O: 612.930.4108 x31 M: 612.260.2230
jane.qualey@us-solar.com
us-solar.com
4
Right-click here to download pictures. To help protect your privacy, Outlook prevented
automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
The information contained in this message is privileged and confidential, and is intended only for the use of the individual named above and others who
have been specifically authorized to receive it. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, or if any problems occur with transmission, please
contact sender.
--
Jane Qualey – Project Development
United States Solar Corporation
100 N 6th St, Suite 218C, Minneapolis, MN 55403
O: 612.930.4108 x31
jane.qualey@us-solar.com
us-solar.com
Right-click here to download pictures. To help protect your privacy, Outlook prevented
automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
The information contained in this message is privileged and confidential, and is intended only for the use of the individual named above and others who
have been specifically authorized to receive it. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, or if any problems occur with transmission, please
contact sender.
On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 10:53 AM, Jane Qualey <jane.qualey@us-solar.com> wrote:
Hi Neil,
Below is an excerpt from the Wright County solar ordinance that was recently updated to include
1-pole language. It's not posted online yet but I've requested the document and will send it your
way when I receive it. Let me know your thoughts. -Jane
From Wright County's current ordinance:
Onsite external power and utility interconnection. All grounding transformers, the utility
interconnection to the main electrical grid, electrical meters, main service meters, protective
relays, reclosers, and any other similar electrical meter, regulator, control, or shut off device shall
be ground-mounted unless specifically permitted to be aerially mounted by the Planning
Commission. Utility poles associated with each solar energy farm shall be limited to up to one
general utility pole and one additional pole for each permitted megawatt AC of electricity. The
Planning Commission may require fewer utility poles. Utility poles legally permitted in any road
right-of-way or which are currently existing are not included in this calculation. The proposed
placement of all utility poles and any proposed aerially mounted equipment shall be shown in
any proposed plans submitted. The Planning Commission shall specifically approve the
placement of all utility poles outside of the road right-of-way.
We've simplified it below:
Onsite external power and utility interconnection. Utility poles associated with each solar
energy farm shall be limited to up to one general utility pole and one additional pole for each
permitted megawatt AC of electricity. Utility poles legally permitted in any road right-of-way or
which are currently existing are not included in this calculation. The proposed placement of all
utility poles and any proposed aerially mounted equipment shall be shown in any proposed plans
submitted. The Planning Commission shall specifically approve the placement of all utility poles
outside of the road right-of-way