Meeting Summary
Present: Cooney, Park, Martinez, Reed
This summary was AI-generated to save you time. It may miss or misstate details, so verify against the official recording and the transcript.
At a glance
Utility-Scale Solar Project Amendments
- Staff presented a proposed four-tier permitting system for solar and battery storage, with significant impacts identified in the Program EIR.
- Public commenters raised concerns regarding agricultural land conversion, coastal exclusions, and the classification of parking canopy solar.
- The Commission debated the need for acreage caps, distribution limits on agricultural land, and potential carve-outs for the Gaviota Coast.
- The Commission voted to continue the matter to May 6 with directives to incorporate specific recommendations and prepare options for caps and coastal exclusions.
Full summary
Meeting: Santa Barbara County Planning Commission
- Date: March 11, 2026
Agenda Item: Consent Agenda
- Item Description: Case No. 26 GOV 2, a request by the Real Property Division of the General Services Department for a determination that the vacation and relinquishment of approximately 400 square feet of county fee-owned right-of-way adjacent to APN 005177003 conforms with the Comprehensive Plan pursuant to California Government Code Section 65402A.
- Discussion: No commissioners requested to pull the item from the consent agenda. No public comment was received.
- Motion: A motion was made to approve the consent agenda.
- Vote Outcome: Passed.
Agenda Item: Standard Agenda – Utility-Scale Solar Project Amendments
- Item Description: Case Nos. 24 ORD 28 and 24 ORD 29, ordinances amending the County Land Use and Development Code (LUDC) and the Coastal Zone Ordinance (CZO) to establish a tiered permitting system for utility-scale solar projects and battery energy storage systems (BESS).
- Staff Presentation:
- Background: In 2014, the Board of Supervisors adopted amendments allowing utility-scale solar within a 600-acre Cuyama Valley Overlay. In 2019, the Strategic Energy Plan recommended amending the county code to allow utility-scale solar throughout the county. In 2021, the Board directed Long-Range Planning to develop these amendments.
- Proposed Regulations: The amendments establish four tiers of solar projects:
- Tier 1: Exempt from planning permits (on-site use).
- Tier 2: Allowed with zoning clearance (up to 5 acres).
- Tier 3: Community-scale (up to 30 acres), permitted with a Minor Conditional Use Permit (CUP).
- Tier 4: Utility-scale (over 30 acres), permitted with a Major CUP.
- Zoning: Tier 3 and 4 facilities are allowed in specific zones, including PIPU and Manufacturing zones.
- Williamson Act Land: Solar is proposed as a compatible use on Williamson Act contracted land. Limits are proposed at 10% of premises size or 10 acres (whichever is less) for prime contracts, and 15% or 100 acres (whichever is less) for non-prime contracts. The Agricultural Preserve Advisory Committee (APAC) recommended changing the non-prime limit to 10%.
- Battery Storage: Standalone BESS remains subject to Major CUP requirements. BESS as a component of solar projects must be commensurate in size.
- Environmental Review: A Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared. Significant and unavoidable impacts were identified for aesthetics, agricultural resources, and cultural/paleontological resources. Significant but mitigable impacts were identified for air quality, biological resources, greenhouse gases, hazards, noise, transportation, utilities, and wildfire.
- Alternatives: The EIR evaluated three alternatives. Alternative 3 (prohibiting Tier 4 solar in coastal areas) was identified as the environmentally superior alternative, but all alternatives resulted in significant impacts. Staff recommends the proposed project.
- Recommendation: Staff recommends the Commission adopt resolutions recommending the Board of Supervisors adopt the CZO and LUDC amendments, make required findings, and certify the Program EIR.
- Commissioner Questions and Staff Responses:
- Comment Letters: Staff stated they are reviewing recent comment letters and can incorporate recommendations into the final action if desired.
- Biological Resources: Staff explained that project-specific biological assessments are required, with avoidance as the primary mitigation strategy. Existing county oak tree protection ordinances apply to all development types, including solar.
- Scale: Staff noted existing projects in the Cuyama Valley are approximately 350 acres combined.
- Agricultural Land Conversion: Staff stated there is no county-wide acreage cap for solar, but Williamson Act limits apply to contracted land. The Strategic Energy Plan estimated a realistic build-out of 10–20% of overall land.
- Williamson Act Eligibility: Staff clarified that properties must still meet production requirements to remain under contract.
- Battery Storage vs. Solar: Staff clarified that standalone BESS is not part of this ordinance’s scope, while accessory BESS must be commensurate with the solar project and clearly described in notices.
- Decommissioning: Staff noted state code requirements for waste handling and recycling, and that decommissioning plans are required.
- Fire Safety: Chief Fred Tan (Santa Barbara County Fire Department) stated that newer battery technologies have higher thermal runaway thresholds, are monitored 24/7, and are designed to contain events. The Fire Department has training and policies in place.
- Non-Williamson Act Land: Staff confirmed there is no upper size limit for non-contracted land other than the Major CUP process.
- Economic Impact: Staff stated they do not have specific economic data on lease rates.
- Inverters: Staff stated that accessory equipment, including inverters, is included in the project footprint and considered in the EIR.
- Public Comment:
- Claire Weinman (Grower Shipper Association of Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties): Raised questions regarding the definition of "on-site" use for solar arrays on separate parcels, concerns about the conversion of agricultural land, battery fire risks, and soil health impacts. She requested clarification on appealability of solar use permits, site coverage limitations, and whether Tier 3 and 4 projects are discretionary or zoning clearance. She also asked for clarification on the determination of feasibility to avoid agricultural land.
- Mary Hayden (Beef Cattle Rancher): Inquired about the definition of prime land under Williamson Act contracts and how it applies to specific acreage on her property. She asked about the process for removing land from Williamson Act contracts for solar development and the potential timeframe for obtaining a major Conditional Use Permit (CUP).
- Ben Schwartz (Clean Coalition): Presented recommendations to clarify the distinction between front-of-the-meter and behind-the-meter projects. He advocated for categorizing parking canopy solar as Tier 1 (exempt from planning permits) and including battery energy storage systems up to 0.25 acres in Tier 1. He emphasized the importance of energy storage for grid resilience and microgrid deployment.
- Isabel Stice (Clean Coalition): Reinforced the recommendation to move parking canopy solar to Tier 1, noting that these projects are on already developed land with minimal environmental impact. She urged the Commission to avoid adding new restrictions to behind-the-meter projects.
- Juan Lattis (Regional Partners/Community Engagement): Supported the ordinance updates but recommended categorizing projects on the built environment (rooftops, parking lots) as Tier 1. He suggested including small battery energy storage systems paired with solar in Tier 1 to support local energy resilience.
- Deborah Williams (Resident/Lecturer): Supported the Clean Coalition’s recommendations, specifically advocating for the expansion of solar parking lot projects as Tier 1 and the adoption of storage recommendations for systems up to a quarter-acre.
- Ana Citrin (Gaviota Coast Conservancy): Expressed support for the transition to renewable energy but opposed allowing Tier 4 facilities on the Gaviota Coast, particularly within the coastal zone. She requested that the Commission either approve the ordinance with a change disallowing Tier 4 facilities in the Gaviota Coast Plan Area or approve Alternative 3 (the environmentally superior alternative identified in the EIR).
- Staff Response and Discussion:
- Tier Structure: Staff explained that the proposed tiered structure moves away from a strict front-of-meter/behind-the-meter distinction to a size-and-scale-based approach. Tier 1 allows unlimited rooftop/building-integrated solar and up to 0.5 acres of ground-mounted solar. Tier 2 allows up to 5 acres of ground-mounted solar (e.g., parking canopies) via a zoning clearance (ministerial) process.
- Battery Storage: Staff clarified that standalone battery energy storage was outside the scope of the current project. Paired storage within Tier 1 size limits is allowed. Staff noted that allowing standalone storage in all zones (Recommendation 4) would permit storage in residential zones without connection to solar, which staff viewed as overly broad.
- Williamson Act Land: Staff clarified that regulations apply based on the type of contract (prime vs. non-prime) rather than specific acreage designation.
- Alternatives: Staff explained that Alternative 3 was deemed environmentally superior to Alternative 2 in the EIR because it reduced more impacts, but noted that hybrid options combining elements of different alternatives are possible if they do not introduce new, unevaluated impacts.
- Commission Deliberation:
- Agricultural Land Protection: Concerns were raised regarding the potential conversion of large amounts of agricultural land, particularly rangeland and prime row crop land, to utility-scale solar. Commissioners discussed the need for data on the total available acreage and the number of premises to assess the potential scale of development.
- Caps and Distribution: There was discussion about implementing an overall cap on utility-scale solar acreage and ensuring the distribution of projects does not disproportionately impact specific agricultural areas.
- Coastal Zone Exclusions: Commissioners debated the request to exclude Tier 4 facilities from the Gaviota Coast/coastal zone. Some commissioners expressed concern that a blanket exclusion might be overbroad, citing the potential need for solar to replace existing high-emission facilities (e.g., cogeneration plants). Others supported accommodating the concerns of the Gaviota Coast Conservancy and the City of Carpinteria.
- Incorporating Recommendations: Commissioners generally supported incorporating the Clean Coalition’s recommendations, with specific exclusion of Recommendation 4 (standalone battery storage in all zones).
- Motion and Vote:
- Motion: Commissioner Park moved to continue the matter to May 6. The motion included the following directives for staff:
- 1. Incorporate the Clean Coalition’s recommendations, excluding Recommendation 4. 2. Provide an explanation of which recommendations are already addressed in the ordinance. 3. Prepare options regarding an overall cap on utility-scale solar in the county. 4. Prepare options regarding the distribution of utility-scale solar on agricultural lands. 5. Explore options related to the environmental alternatives, including potential hybrid approaches or carve-outs for the coastal zone/Gaviota Coast Plan Area.
- Second: The motion was seconded.
- Vote Outcome: Passed.
Adjournment
- Following the vote, a speaker thanked staff and public commenters. The Chair declared the meeting adjourned.