1) Solar ordinance decisions should remain at the local level. Each locality has its own unique circumstances and localities should retain their decision making and abilities to create their own ordinance. This reason alone is enough to defeat HB2438.
2) Serious Environmental Justice issues would be violated by HB2438. Citizens would NOT have the opportunity to participate in the development of local solar ordinance. Decisions that forever change the character of a community should remain with that community. Where is the meaningful involvement of all people in decisions that affect them?
3) A one size fits all solar ordinance ignores the differences across the Commonwealth. There is wide variation in community character, citizen goals, topography, watersheds, habitats, agricultural, economics, etc. To impose a state mandated ordinance is unfair and causes damage.
4) Strikeouts (red-lining) in the bill eliminate the application of a local ordinance.
5) Many flaws exist in the model ordinance proposed by HB2438. The following is a partial list of the flaws with brief explanations:
Numerical limits: The proposed ordinance has narrow, strict, and inadequate limits. Example 1: HB243 has setbacks from wetlands and streams that cannot exceed 100 feet. According to DWR, there are instances when a 300 feet setback is recommended from the James River, and instances when a 200 feet setback is recommended from tributaries of the James River. Clearly more latitude is needed for protection of state waters. Example 2: Maximum of 100 feet from roadbed. Consider that the average trailer of an eighteen wheeler is 53 feet. According to the model ordinance, there could be a fence and a 25 feet tall industrial solar facility less than two trailers lengths from the road. Greater setback distances should be permitted to waterways, wetlands, buildings, roads, shared property lines, etc.
Decommissioning: Language is open to interpretation. Example: “decommissioning plan shall remove facility’s equipment” is not definitive and a wide range of exclusions could result. Further, where is the requirement for land reclamation along with the decommissioning?
Completion of land disturbance activities: “An ordinance may require up to 75 percent vegetative cover…” Example: If a county has 15,000 acres of industrial solar facilities and is only permitted by state statute to require a maximum of 75 percent vegetative cover, there would be 3,750 acres WITHOUT vegetative cover. At 150,000 acres of industrial solar, there would be 37,500 acres WITHOUT vegetative cover.
Land Disturbance: Does NOT address proper storage of topsoil to maintain viability. Specific protocols of soil depth and duration of storage greatly impact the integrity of topsoil. Carbon capture is an important function of soil. Grading: Many facilities across the Commonwealth have seen millions of cubic feet of earth moved. Cut and fill earth-moving destroys the natural topography of the site.
Wildlife passage: This should not be window dressing. On-site studies of wildlife would be necessary to determine adequate and appropriate locations of wildlife passages. These areas should not a byproduct of site design. They should be a purposeful feature. In reality, huge swaths of habitat are destroyed and nature lost!
Imperviousness: Model ordinance uses phrase “…shall minimize…”. This terminology gives the developer free rein to greatly alter a sites characteristic. Virginia DEQ has reported nearly 70 percent of solar facilities had water issues. https://www.chesapeake.org/stac/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Rolband-VA-Landscape-Hydrology-and-Water-Quality.pdf
Vegetative Visual Screening (line 145/146): “shall not exceed between three and four feet” is an extremely narrow limit. How does a four foot bush screen a 25 feet tall solar array? (25 feet is the solar array height limit in HB2438.)
In summary:
- A one size fits all statewide solar ordinance is inappropriate and should be rejected.
- There are numerous harmful flaws in the wording of HB2438.
- Local decisions should continue to be the method of establishing solar ordinances.
- Citizen participation is blocked from creation of an ordinance that impacts them, their family, and their community.
- Environmental Justice issues exist.
Please defeat HB2438.
Sincerely,
Dr. Scott Flood
Virginia resident
President Friends of Buckingham
0 Comments