Planners press for wildlife consultation, fix contradictions on vegetation in solar ordinance

During its review of the draft solar ordinance, the Emery County Planning Commission questioned a requirement to install shrubs or trees when the same draft prohibits the use of culinary or agricultural water for landscaping in arid areas. One commissioner said this creates a contradiction that must be resolved.

Commissioners also discussed requiring developers to show consultation with state and federal wildlife authorities or to provide a signed mitigation agreement before a project is accepted. "Can we require that they must consult or have an agreement with them before the project is considered?" one commissioner asked, urging upfront mitigation rather than after‑the‑fact measures. Members agreed the ordinance needs clearer language to avoid internal contradictions and to ensure it follows state requirements for wildlife review.

The commission debated project spacing rules as well: Section 7.2’s proposed five‑mile minimum separation between utility projects was described as non‑waivable, but several members said a rigid five‑mile rule could impede siting near appropriate infrastructure corridors and asked staff to revisit the distance and the county land‑base cap in the draft.