Elbert County Planning Commission recommends denial of Shepherd Solar project

The Elbert County Planning Commission voted 5-2 on Sept. 1 to recommend denying the roughly 1,990-acre Shepherd Solar project, citing concerns about compatibility with the surrounding area, buffering and screening, and the health, safety and welfare of county residents.

The recommendation is not final. The county staff report says the project was scheduled for a Sept. 9 hearing before the Board of County Commissioners. The supplied record does not show whether that hearing occurred or whether the board approved, denied or continued the project. As of the Sept. 4 reporting cutoff, the hearing remained a future event.

Shepherd Solar LLC, a BayWa r.e. subsidiary, is seeking approval for a 199-megawatt photovoltaic facility paired with a 100-megawatt battery-storage system. The project would cover about 1,990 acres across three Agriculture-zoned parcels near Matheson. It requires a Special Use by Review permit and a concurrent Major 1041 permit, according to the project application.

The commission cited three approval criteria: harmony and compatibility with the surrounding area and neighborhood; adequate landscaping, buffering and screening; and protection of residents’ health, safety and welfare. The staff report says 10 residents spoke at the hearing, all opposing the project, with concerns including traffic, natural hazards, the area’s character, soil, health and wildlife.

Several technical requirements also remained incomplete or conditional. Traffic review had not been finalized, and a county consultant said the application lacked a Level 2 turn-lane evaluation and Level 3 traffic-impact study. The matter was referred to the Colorado Department of Transportation for review through the state access-permitting process.

Before construction, the applicant would need to finalize haul routes, complete road-condition surveys and enter a Road Use Agreement with the county. Public Works called for improvements to about 3.5 miles of County Road 54 between County Roads 149 and 169, as well as upgrades to haul routes and project access points. The agreement’s final terms, including financial security for road repairs and the timing and scope of improvements, were not documented as complete.

Drainage reviewers requested additional calculations for culverts, outlets, flood flows and erosion protection. The project would also need a construction stormwater permit, a stormwater pollution-prevention plan and erosion and sediment controls because construction disturbance would exceed one acre. Fire-safety requirements included all-weather emergency access roads, a 30,000-gallon cistern and compliance with the 2024 International Fire Code and 2026 NFPA 855 provisions for battery-storage systems. Final battery-fire, detection and emergency-response submittals remained deferred. Sanitation arrangements for construction workers and the project’s onsite wastewater system also required final design and permitting, according to the first-referral materials.

The records describe the project’s solar capacity differently. The application and staff materials identify a 199-megawatt facility, while a second-referral package identifies preliminary civil plans for a 309-megawatt-direct-current/231-megawatt-alternating-current array. The records do not explain the difference, and the larger figures are not presented as a separate county approval.

The application estimates construction would take 18 to 24 months, with grazing or crop farming continuing on portions of the property. No final BOCC action is established in the supplied record.