|
bracket -mounted panels
<br />steeper than roof pitch
<br />r;
<br />oi
<br />flush -mount panels
<br />@The new model solar energy ordinance published in From Policyto Reality: Updated Model Ordinances for Sustainable
<br />Development includes a design standard illustration for pitched -roof solar installations.
<br />governments to establish any siting stan-
<br />dards for solar or wind installations, particu-
<br />larly in historic or design review districts.
<br />In 20o9, a new law was passed directing
<br />the Wisconsin Public Service Commission
<br />to establish statewide siting rules for wind
<br />energy in order to address the conflict be-
<br />tween promotion of renewable energy and
<br />consideration of other reasonable land use
<br />and development goals.
<br />Minnesota has no preemptive law re-
<br />garding local land -use regulation. The Min-
<br />nesota state building code is a "max/min"
<br />code that preempts most focal building
<br />code modifications, but land -use regulation
<br />remains the prerogative of local govern-
<br />ment. Some discussion of statewide land -
<br />use standards has taken place in regard to
<br />wind energy installations, but no preemp-
<br />tion of local solar land -use regulation has
<br />been seriously considered.
<br />Minnesota does, however, have state
<br />law enabling local governments to use "solar
<br />easements" to protect solar access, and has
<br />very recently enabled local govemments to
<br />use bonding and property tax assessments
<br />for leveraging private sector solar invest-
<br />ment. The solar easement statute (Minn.
<br />Statute Section 500.30) has the greatest
<br />relationship to land -use regulation, offering
<br />direction on how to address solar access is-
<br />sues, one of the potential land -use conflicts
<br />that can arise with broad solar investment.
<br />The statute does not, however, solve the so-
<br />lar access issue, but merely offers a potential
<br />solution by enabling solar easements to be
<br />purchased from adjoining property owners.
<br />CONCLUSIONS
<br />Local government land -use regulation is de-
<br />signed to meet a variety of goats, including
<br />protecting safety and well-being, minimizing
<br />nuisances (perceived or real), and creating a
<br />mix of land uses that creates synergy rather
<br />than conflict. Promoting investment in re-
<br />newable energy is a relatively new goal, and
<br />balancing renewable energy goals with the
<br />other myriad goals of land -use regulation
<br />can be a challenging issue.
<br />velopment standards that explicitly address
<br />solar as an allowed accessory use, such as
<br />lot coverage, height, setback, and roof set-
<br />back, are a good place to begin encouraging
<br />investment in solar installations. The next
<br />step might be to create incentives, such as
<br />reduced setbacks, expedited permitting, or
<br />The cities with the most developed solar energy
<br />markets have state legislation that defines limits
<br />on local regulation, effectively addressing many of
<br />the land -use conflict issues at the state level.
<br />The cities with the most developed
<br />solar energy markets, primarily in Califor-
<br />nia, also have state legislation that defines
<br />limits' on local regulation, effectively ad-
<br />dressing many of the land -use conflict
<br />issues at the state level. In most states,
<br />however, solar energy land -use conflicts are
<br />left for local governments to address. De -
<br />reduced permit fees, for solar installations.
<br />The most challenging issues may surface
<br />when local government are faced with large-
<br />scale solar farms that function as primary
<br />land uses. As energy production approaches
<br />this industrial scale, the potential for actual
<br />or perceived land -use conflicts is likely to
<br />increase.
<br />Sunflowers, an Electric Garden; Is a.pubhc art installation that uses solar panels to collect
<br />energy along a brke/ped trail in Austin,. Texas. Cover image courtesy of David. Newsom
<br />Photography; design concept by Lisa. Barton.
<br />VOL. 27, NO. u
<br />Zoning Practice is a monthly publication of the American Planning Association. Subscriptions are
<br />available for$90 (U.S.) and $say (foreign). W. Paul Farmer, FAICP, Chief Executive Officer; William R. Klein,
<br />MCP, Director of Research
<br />Zoning Practice (ISSN 1548-0135) is produced at APA. Jim Schwab, MCP, and David Morley, AicP, Editors;
<br />Julie Von Bergen, Assistant Editor; Lisa Barton, Design and Production.
<br />Copyright ©zoao by American Planning Association, 205 N. Michigan Ave., Suite vzoo, Chicago, IL
<br />60601-5927. The American Planning Association also has offices at 1030 t5th St., NW, Suite 75o West,
<br />Washington, DC 20005-1503; www.planning.org.
<br />All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means,
<br />electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval
<br />system, without permission in writing from the American Planning Association.
<br />Printed on recycled paper, including 50-70% recycled fiber and io % postconsumer waste.
<br />ZONINGPRACTICE 11.10 •
<br />AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION Ipoge7
<br />73
<br />
|