Solar facilities; local regulation, special exceptions.
HB2438 revises Virginia law governing local regulation of solar facilities, with a focus on where solar projects may be installed and what conditions local governments may impose. The bill clarifies that rooftop solar on residential, agricultural, commercial, industrial, institutional, and mixed-use property is generally allowed if it meets height, setback, and historic-district requirements. It also provides that ground-mounted solar facilities in those zoning categories are permitted unless a local ordinance provides otherwise, while other solar uses remain subject to local zoning rules.
The bill also expands and standardizes special-exception rules for solar photovoltaic projects and energy storage projects. It directs localities to include detailed ordinance standards covering setbacks, fencing, screening, panel height, viewshed impacts, stormwater controls, soil handling, vegetation, wildlife passage, labor and apprenticeship compliance, and decommissioning. It further requires updated decommissioning cost estimates and financial assurance every five years, notice of ownership transfers, and replacement financial guarantees when project ownership changes.
The bill would amend Code of Virginia sections 15.2-2241.2, 15.2-2288.7, and 15.2-2288.8, tightening and standardizing local authority over solar siting and decommissioning. It would require localities to allow certain solar facilities by right in specified zoning districts, while preserving local zoning control over other solar projects and allowing local ordinances to add by-right authority in additional districts. It also imposes detailed statewide minimum criteria for special exceptions and requires local ordinances to address decommissioning, financial assurance, environmental protections, and project design standards, affecting solar developers, landowners, and local governments.
The bill appears to have mixed but substantial support, with narrow passage in the House and earlier committee approval, but also notable resistance in later committee action. It passed the House by a slim margin and received favorable votes in a subcommittee and the Counties, Cities and Towns committee, suggesting support for clearer statewide solar siting rules. However, it failed to report in Commerce and Labor, indicating significant concern among some members about the scope of the mandates and the balance between state standards and local discretion.
The main points of contention are likely the degree to which the bill limits local control and the extent of the operational requirements imposed on solar developers. Supporters likely favor uniform statewide standards, clearer permitting rules, and stronger decommissioning and environmental protections. Opponents likely object to mandatory by-right treatment in some zoning districts, detailed special-exception criteria, and requirements related to setbacks, screening, stormwater, labor standards, and financial assurances, especially where those provisions constrain local flexibility or increase project costs.