Elbert County board approves Shepherd solar project after commission recommends denial
The board approved applications for the 199-megawatt solar facility and battery system, subject to conditions, after the Planning Commission voted 5-2 to recommend denial.
The Elbert County Board of County Commissioners approved applications Sept. 9 for BayWa Renewables’ proposed Shepherd Solar project after the Planning Commission recommended denial of both permits in 5-2 votes.
The project would include a 199-megawatt solar facility, a 100-megawatt battery energy storage system, a substation and an operations and maintenance building across about 1,990 acres of agricultural land in southeastern Elbert County, near an existing Tri-State transmission line.
The board approved the Major 1041 Land Use Permit, case 1041-2026-0001, and the concurrent Special Use by Review application, case SUR-2026-0002. The county’s approval resolutions require conditions including payment of fees, recordation within 180 days, financial security for decommissioning, a road-use agreement before construction and final plans for county Public Works and Public Health before construction permits can be completed.
The Special Use by Review resolution also requires removal of public-notice signs, recordation of the special-use exhibit within 180 days and satisfaction of conditions before the approval becomes effective. Each approval was contingent on approval of the other application.
At its Sept. 1 hearing, the Planning Commission recommended denial of both applications. The commission’s draft action minutes say commissioners found the 1041 application did not meet criteria related to natural hazards, environmental degradation, nuisance, potential releases of hazardous materials, project benefits and losses, and screening and buffering.
For the Special Use by Review application, commissioners cited a lack of demonstrated compatibility with surrounding agricultural and rural-residential uses, inadequate landscaping, buffering and screening, and potential harm to county health, safety and welfare.
Ten people testified against the project at the hearing, while the minutes list no speakers in favor. Testimony raised concerns about agricultural land, water, property values and taxes, wildlife, traffic, construction impacts, noise and lighting, severe weather, battery fires and public safety.
The commission’s recommendations were advisory. The county board’s later approvals authorize the applications subject to the listed conditions; the records do not establish that construction or operation has begun.