Commission forwards Linn renewable energy code amendments to supervisors

A new set of amendments to Linn County’s renewable energy ordinance is on its way to the Linn County Board of Supervisors for consideration. But unlike the current ordinance, which critics have claimed is excessively favorable to utility-scale renewable energy developers, the amendments are now being called into question as being excessively restrictive to such developments. At the end of a three-hour special meeting Wednesday night, Aug. 16, the Linn County Planning & Zoning Commission voted unanimously to forward the amendments to the supervisors for further discussion – and possible changes, as suggested by speakers and officials at the meeting. However, Linn County Planning and Development director Charlie Nichols said the amendments were developed based on input from several county-appointed committees, and clarified the commission’s function in the overall amendment process. “It is not your role as planning and zoning commissioners to evaluate if code makes projects too hard or too easy to build,” Mr. Nichols said. “Your role as the Planning and Zoning Commission is just to evaluate (if the code adheres) to the comprehensive plan and then to recommend approval, based on the comprehensive plan, to the Board of Supervisors and pass the code on to them for further review and revision.” The ordinance revisions were driven by issues raised during the board’s consideration, and eventual approval, of utility-scale solar projects near Coggon and near the now-closed Duane Arnold Energy Center in Palo. After those projects were approved, the board of supervisors enacted a moratorium on consideration of new utility-scale renewable energy projects – a moratorium which has been extended several times – and county officials appointed four renewable energy committees to review portions of Linn County’s renewable energy ordinance. Those committees included:

• Good Neighbor Practices, which discussed setbacks and screening;
• Battery Energy Storage Systems, which discussed placement and safety considerations;
• Balancing Agriculture and Solar, which discussed vegetation requirements and agrivoltaic considerations; and
• Lifecycle Costs, which disussed decommissioning plan requirements and considerations, operation and maintenance plan requirements and considerations.

The committees met several times in the first half of 2023 and forwarded reports to Linn County Planning & Development staff, which then used statements from the committees, board of supervisors, and the public to draft the proposed ordinance changes, which address a host of issues ranging from setbacks from neighboring properties to panel heights, viewshed screenings, impacts on agriculture, vegetative plantings and soil protection, development standards, decommissioning procedures, and many more. In addition to the proposed ordinance changes, staff also created a Linn County Utility-Scale Solar Scorecard to assist in the evaluation of utility-scale solar project applications. The scorecard is designed to help determine if a utility-scale renewable energy proposal should be considered for approval, and includes opportunities for projects to earn bonus points based on compliance with incentivized criteria. A draft of the solar scorecard is available on the Linn County website. Most speakers at Wednesday’s meeting expressed support for utility-scale solar projects, and while some suggested changes to specific portions of the amendment report, others said they were concerned that the solar scorecard was redundant and that the 20-page list of recommendations would impose too many restrictions for potential solar project developers. Phil Engen of Cedar Rapids said he felt the amendments should be reconsidered. “I think there’s some revisions to this policy that could be beneficial,” Mr. Engen said. “Back when the moratorium was being considered by the board of supervisors, my recollection was that we wanted to find a streamlined process, not an impenetrable bureaucracy. So we don't want to make this so difficult that we get no more development. We need this development, for many reasons.” Swati Dandekar, president of Bright Future Iowa, a group advocating for renewable energy development, said she felt any county ordinance should take property owners’ rights into account. “We need to ensure we have not harmed the future growth of solar in Linn County,” she said. “I have spoken with many landowners, and they are wondering why we are putting all the restriction on them. It’s their land, and they should be able to talk to a utility company on their own … an environmental impact scorecard may be an admirable goal on paper, but a scorecard forces projects to conform to one size fits all, and that may not be best for the landowners or the project.” Bill Gerhardt of rural Johnson County, who attended the meeting as a representative of the Local 43 chapter of the Laborers’ International Union, said members of the union have been involved in renewable energy projects across the state, and cautioned county officials against imposing too many restrictions on such projects. “Don’t have so many rules and regulations that the whole ordinance becomes a poison pill and we don’t have any more of these projects coming here, because they have a huge impact on the county and the surrounding areas,” he said. “We have a good ordinance in place now that might need some tweaking, but let’s not let perfection be the enemy of good.” After discussion, the commission voted unanimously to forward the proposed ordinance amendments to the board of supervisors for further discussion, including any possible revisions. The supervisors will now consider the amendments at meetings set for Sept. 5, Sept. 6 and Sept. 13.