SAN BERNARDINO – The county Planning Commission on Thursday approved a major draft ordinance that takes the first step in overhauling the countywide development code for solar energy facilities.
The proposed Solar Energy Ordinance was approved unanimously by commissioners and now will go before the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors, intending to “amend regulations expeditiously to end the temporary moratorium,” according to a staff report by Terri Rahhal, the county’s planning director for the Land Use Services Department.
The proposed Solar Energy Ordinance is intended to amend San Bernardino County Development Code for solar energy generation facilities, requiring approval standards that will “guide appropriate siting, protect sensitive natural resources, safeguard existing and future neighborhoods and rural residential uses, and promote a vibrant tourist economy,” the report said.
Rahhal summarized the Planning Commission’s public hearing for the Civic Bee, saying about 20 members of the public made comments on the draft ordinance, “and all their comments will become part of the record for review by the Board of Supervisors.”
She also said that staff will compile all the letters and minutes from the Planning Commission meeting and will prepare a summary report to review with the board of supervisors in a few weeks.
County officials said Tuesday, Dec. 17, would serve as a tentative date for the board of supervisors to consider the proposed ordinance. Staff then will present the draft ordinance, along with all the public comments and input from the Planning Commission, according to Felisa Cardona (CAO), the county’s deputy public information officer.
* * *
The proposed ordinance is only the first step toward a long-term process for the renewable energy plan required for the county’s Renewable Energy Element (slated for completion by the end of 2014) – which is to establish “a comprehensive body of policies and standards to guide all development of renewable energy in the county,” according to the staff report.
The county received $700,000 in grant funding from the California Energy Commission to prepare a Renewable Energy Element for the County General Plan – with companion regulations for the development code.
According to Rahhal’s staff report, the board of supervisors directed that “an ordinance amending the commercial solar energy project development regulations of the development code be proposed to end the moratorium within six months.”
The board adopted a temporary moratorium on the approval of commercial solar energy generation projects on June 12, while county staff drafts proposed amendments to the renewable energy chapter of the development code. The moratorium on approving solar projects was extended on July 23 for 10 months and 15 days.
The proposed ordinance contains supplemental requirements for approving commercial solar energy facilities, along with development standards and application process requirements to “ensure compatibility of the project with surrounding properties and adequate notification of surrounding property owners,” according to the report.
In fact, among the provisions of the proposed ordinance are requirements that affirm appropriate siting and screening (if required to maintain compatibility with existing communities and residential areas), as well as consistency with “sphere city policies and standards.”
Of particular concern regarding a city’s sphere of influence is the Sycamore Physicians Partners solar project planned for Oak Hills.
The permit for the 2.7-megawatt photovoltaic solar facility on 20 acres was denied by the San Bernardino County Planning Commission in September, with the action report concluding that not enough evidence was introduced to show the project would not have a “significant impact on the environment, specifically with regard to scenic resources.”
Though Sycamore Physicians Partners have recently appealed the commission’s decision (hoping to reverse the denial at a future board of supervisors meeting yet to be announced), the City of Hesperia has told the county that it is opposed to “solar farms within residential or agricultural zones,” and that development requirements within the unincorporated area of Oak Hills falls within Hesperia’s municipal sphere of influence – thus holding any proposed solar projects to the city’s own development restrictions.
Hesperia adopted a resolution on Aug. 20, expressing its opposition to the proposed solar farm in Oak Hills, declaring the project was “inconsistent with the city’s regulations.”
Dave Reno, principal planner of Hesperia’s Planning Department, suggested that language in the county’s ordinance be revised to reflect the city’s position on solar projects in its sphere of influence.
“As we discussed, Finding No. 30 (of the ordinance) says, ‘When located within a city’s sphere of influence, the proposed commercial solar energy facility is consistent with relevant city requirements that would be applied to similar facilities within the city,’” Reno said in an email to Land Use Services Department Senior Planner Chris Conner – an email that was shared with the Civic Bee by a concerned Oak Hills resident. “While this finding can certainly be interpreted to include development requirements, such as landscaping or screening, it may not be construed to include zoning regulations for prohibited uses. This finding should be revised to make this clear that zoning regulations for permitted or prohibited uses are given consideration when reviewing a proposed solar project.”
* * *
According to the Newberry Springs Community Alliance website, http://newberryspringsinfo.com, “the proposed code enhancements will have a significant and direct impact upon Newberry Springs’ future regarding solar power installations.”
Newberry Springs residents are upset over a recently-completed 27-acre solar farm constructed in a residential area of their community – which prompted the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors to impose the current moratorium on future solar project applications. Residents were outraged after the project’s new owners increased the size of the photovoltaic panels from about seven feet in height to about 27 feet tall.
The Community Alliance said that though the Planning staff’s proposal extends safeguards to neighborhoods and rural residential uses, it disappoints with several omissions.
“Despite the Community Alliance speaking at the workshop held on the subject on September 10, 2013, requesting that wind energy generation be included in the solar energy ordinance, only a brief mention (page 7, line 44) is commercial wind facilities briefly noted,” the alliance stated. “This is actually counterproductive in differentiating a separation between wind and solar; whereby, wind energy production facilities is not later mentioned in the ordinance.”
The Community Alliance also observed that the proposed draft ordinance omits notices of application for approval of commercial solar energy facilities being sent to communities that operate under a Community Service District, mandating only that notices “be provided to the Municipal Advisory Council for the area.”
The public may view the Solar Energy Ordinance online at
http://www.sbcounty.gov/uploads/lus/PC/SolarOrdiancePC10-17-13.pdf, which outlines the proposed amendments to the county’s development code on renewable energy generation facilities.
