More On Solar Zoning - A 20 ft. Height Allowance For A Solar Array is Far Too Big!!!

It’s nice to see in general in this zoning revision  that there are now page numbers, unlike the 2012 zoning document where in the rush they apparently forgot to put page numbers on the document.  Imagine that…putting page numbers on an important document. Hey…maybe this is why they couldn’t read there own law in the first solar zoning fiasco!

Of course it is kinda important that the table of context page numbers actually match the pages in the document.  If you are looking for the solar zoning it starts on page 56 not page 54. 

Then in the “Intent” explanation about solar on age 56 they categorize solar into ground mounted, and roof mounted both large and small. 

So does someone want to explain to us what this ambiguous “ large” and “small” means?  There is NO definitive explanation. 

Then right under that explanation they then outline a another category of commercial solar that is not under the intent section.   Problem is once again when you go to table 8 on page 12 there is another category listed as residential, yet residential is scratched out on page 56  paragraph 3. 

So we are getting nowhere on this solar revision in this matter.  There is still a confusing inconsistency between table 8 and the initial explanation of solar uses on page 56 and 57.  This is what caused the first solar zoning fiasco.  I guess they don’t learn.

In the 2012 zoning a large solar array or complex was not allowed in either the lake or river front districts.  But watch out for your property viewshed because now a commercial solar installation IS allowed in both the river and lake front districts, and suddenly their doesn’t appear to be many restrictions on size.  Only that the project has to stay within the district setbacks and can’t be taller than 20 ft.  The height was reduced from 25 ft. for commercial solar from the 2012 zoning.

 However, ground mounted solar array height allowances  were doubled from 10 ft. to 20 ft.  Doesn’t matter whether they are commercial where the electricity is sold only to the grid, or residential only for on site use.  In other words as long as you stay under 20 ft. and within the property setbacks…then go for it!  In my opinion this is not real smart

If you live in the river or lake front districts, and the property owner adjacent to you has a large parcel…you could be screwed and living next to a large commercial solar energy complex and it could extend right down to the water front setback.

Now does anybody have a clue just how big a 20 ft high solar array is on a property near your house???

Well let’s explore this a bit.  And luck for us, in Flagstaff, AZ where I live  there are numerous  examples of solar arrays to look at…so let’s do that.

First, look below at the ladder leaning against my house.  The top of the ladder is 20 ft. off the ground.  Would you really want a large solar array of numerous 20 ft. high panels on the property next to your house?

 

 

And keep in mind you could have a lot of these arrays next to your property the way the law has now been relaxed.

That would be a damn big solar array.  It is too big for a residential setting, and with this height we are flirting with violating our comp plan which is largely about preserving the scenic resources of the town. 

In the next picture is a simulation of a large ground mounted solar array only 10 ft. high next to an outline of small pickup truck.  This 10 x 72 ft. array is in fact the solar array project approved in last summer’s solar zoning fiasco in which the town of CV, and particularly the Zoning Board of Appeals did somersaults and distortions of the zoning process to get this approved. 

 

 

Now take a look below at these ground mounted solar arrays at the Flagstaff City Hall parking lot.   The front edge is about 9 ft. off the ground…the back edge isn’t even 20 ft. high.  Do you really think this is appropriate for a residential setting?  Apparently the drafters of the zoning revisions do! 20 ft. high solar arrays are allowed in the river front and lake front districts. And as long at you stay within the district setbacks, or (Lot Utilization Area) there is no limit in the law as to how many arrays can be on a property.

 

 

Now note below  these other large solar arrays that are still under 20 ft. high.  One is at a local Walmart, one at an apartment complex in a commercial zone, and the other is at a public electric utility office.

 

Want to live next to this?  If you don't then take a good look at the solar regulations in the CV zoning revision!

 Even the solar arrays at this massive PV solar complex pictured below south of Las Vegas, NV (one of the biggest in the country) are much lower in height than 20 ft.!  And this is in a area specifically zoned for large solar complexes.  As I remember they are actually a  bit lower than 10 ft!  Somebody here had a clue.

 

 

What exactly are our zoning revision people thinking!  And in addition would you really want an industrial PV solar complex covering a huge swath of land in CV????  Well at this point that is what your zoning law will allow. 

Somebody needs a reality check!

Now there are two things to consider here.

 First Flagstaff, and Las Vegas get a lot of sunshine.  Something like 300+ days a year in Flagstaff and more in the deserts. Here in the S. W. solar might make at least some sense. But you would still be surprised at how low the capacity factors are even in a sunny climate. 

Second…note in the pictures that these Flagstaff solar complexes are in commercial or industrial settings, not in single home residential or rural neighborhoods.  Most of the solar arrays I know of in residential neighborhoods are roof mounted or small ground mounted and not offensive. 

Again a 20 ft. high array is ridiculous not even seen in some large commercial solar complexes.

Here is  part of a roof array and a small ground mounted array in my neighborhood. And the ground mounted array is well under 20 ft. high.

 

The new zoning revision also says ground mounted solar has to be mounted on a concrete base on the ground and not on “structures”  Well what the hell does that mean?  Every solar array I have seen, and I seen a lot of them, both commercial and residential,  is not laying on a ground slab.  It is supported up on some type of “structure” or frame work to tilt it and keep it oriented correctly.  More confusion!

And maybe “ground mounted” is not a good way to describe these solar arrays.  When in fact none of them are actually mounted on the ground.  As I said the vast majority are up on a structure or frame work. 

Like the Flagstaff City Hall solar array.  Is it a ground mounted array, or on a structure?  It is not a parking garage or roof.  The parking lot was there long before the solar panels and the primary use of those structures are to support panels to generate electricity, not protect cars.

The CV solar zoning is still a fiasco, and has gotten worse not better for the protection of CV citizens and their properties.  Hirschey and the town are having an irrational green love affair with PV solar and as a result they are shoving it down our throats in an irrational manner with no real experience or science to back it up.

More later.