By John Estridge
Some Bath Township residents attended the Wednesday, September 9, Franklin County Area Plan Commission meeting to express their displeasure about the possibility of a solar energy enterprise in that township.
APC members have been trying to work out implementing zoning requirements concerning solar and wind energy as neither is addressed in the current zoning code. At the August APC meeting, a Franklin County resident told the APC members he had been approached by a company about putting a solar energy producing operation on about 2,500 acres he owns in Bath and Springfield townships.
That amount of acreage, 2,500, is roughly four square miles.
David Ramsey and his brother Mike Ramsey were in attendance, as well as others, and David Ramsey implored the APC members to have companies utilize hillsides and other places in the county not suitable for farming but to not allow solar and wind enterprises on prime farmland.
Acreage in much of Bath Township is zoned primary agriculture and remains some of the best farmland in the world. Primary agriculture is the most protected farmland in the zoning process.
Franklin County Attorney Grant Reeves talked about his experience as the Rush County Area Plan attorney a few years ago. Reeves, a Franklin County resident, grew up in Rush County and works in the Barada Law Offices LLC, in Rushville. When he was the Rush County APC attorney, Rush County dealt with wind farm applications while he represented, as a private attorney, neighbors to a proposed 1,600-acre solar energy farm in Shelby County.
The wind energy situation went all the way to the Indiana Court of Appeals, which ruled in favor of upholding the Rush County BZA’s decision expanding the setback limits between the wind turbines and adjoining landowners. The decision was made in February 2017, almost two years after the application process began.
Through the course of Reeves monologue he suggested the APC initiate a hefty permit fee because the county will have to spend some big money to look into any application a company makes in regard to wind and/or solar energy. He said an outside consultant will have to be hired to look at the specifics of any application.
APC President Ruthie Mannix said Posey County has the largest permit fee she has seen at $20,000 and then an additional $1,700 per megawatt in proposed energy output.
Reeves was kind of surprised by those numbers but said the county should consider a $10,000 permit fee at the minimum.
APC member and extension educator Mary Rodenhuis, who was not present at the September meeting, supplied APC members with examples of wind and solar zoning regulations from other counties.
Reeves said he looked at the zoning examples, but did not read them to any great degree. He said they ran the gamut of possibilities from one that looked as if it was written by a utility company to another from a county, which apparently did not want any solar or wind energy operations in the county ever.
He told the APC members they should look for something in the middle of all the examples.
On solar, he said the APC members should make sure the new zoning regulations deal with many different factors. These include but are not limited to: setback requirements, fencing, decommissioning, noise levels, glare-factor for neighbors, runoff and drainage problems.
He used the example of the 2,500 acres brought up at the last meeting. He said that would need a lot of fencing if the 2,500 acres are contiguous because it is four square miles.
While one would not think solar energy would create sound problems, there have been complaints of the solar fields having a high-pitched sound coming from inverter boxes, Reeves said. So, that is one of the factors that has to be addressed. Also, there needs to be some protection given to non-participating landowners in the area regarding sight, sound and other factors.
Then, the decommissioning must be high on the zoning board’s agenda because one does not want the company to walk away from a large solar field in 15-20 years and make the county then pay for the cleanup. He said this could be done through bonding or some other financial means.
With putting posts in the ground to hold up the solar panels, there is always the chance of hitting old clay tiles that were placed in the ground decades ago. That could disrupt the drainage systems used by those owning fields in the area, Reeves said.
Also, Reeves said the zoning board must make distinctions between commercial solar enterprises and residential ones. As there should be less regulations on the residential solar systems. Also, he said some Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) are using solar systems to power their electrical needs. These are larger than the residential units but smaller than the commercial units.
Dennis Brown, an APC member, said he is in favor of solar energy. He also agreed with Reeves concerning Reeves talking about much of the knowledge of commercial solar energy systems comes from North Carolina and the involvement of Duke Energy.
County commissioner Tom Wilson reiterated what Reeves had said about a large permit fee, saying getting experts to come in from places like North Carolina could become very expensive quickly.
APC members plan to talk more about solar and wind energy as well as other zoning topics such as tiny houses, noise levels, and other topics at the APC’s October meeting, which will be 7 p.m., Wednesday, October 14, in the commissioners’ meeting room at the Government Center.