SolarDeploymentPlan

4/13/2016 Regulating and
Incentivizing Solar
Energy
Development
Recommendationsfor Salt Lake
City
Jeff Hancock
REPORT COMPLETED FOR SALT LAKE CITY DIVISION OF
SUSTAINABILITY

1
REGULATING AND INCENTIVIZING SOLAR ENERGY DEVELOPMENT
Contents
Introduction 2
Definitions 3
The Question of Scale 4
Zoning and Access 5
Accessory Solar 5
Access and Siting 5
Trees and Solar 10
Historic Buildings and Solar 13
Solar Farms 14
Incentives for Residences and Businesses 16
Rebates 16
Applicable Sector 16
Size of Incentive 17
Caps 20
Financing 22
Leasing and PPAs 22
PACE Financing 23
Low-InterestLoans 24
The Economic Aspect 27
Conclusion 28

2
Introduction
As renewable energy technologies become more practical and financially competitive,
individuals and institutions are looking away from fossil fuels and toward hydro, wind, solar and
other sustainable energy sources. Salt Lake City has a great opportunity to be an important
player in this evolution. Amongst American metropolitan areas over one million people, Salt
Lake ranks ninth in annual hours of sunshine (Osborn, 2016). Almost every day, clean,
renewable energy is available all over the valley, waiting to be harvested.
Having access to solar energy will inevitably change the way we as Americans purchase and
consume electricity, but we are currently still firmly entrenched in a system in which most
consumers have only one option. Solar and other renewable sources of energy have the
potential to open the energy market up and make electricity more affordable and accessible for
all citizens. For this to happen, government must be involved, just as it was when electricity
companies first began spreading across the country in the late nineteenth century.
This report will focus on two of the most urgent needs for solar deployment in Salt Lake City:
zoning and access regulations and financial incentives. In combination with the federal tax
credit offered to those who install solar panels, a calibrated rebate program and affordable
financing options will allow a new portion of the population to consider the financial benefits of
installing a solar PV system. Once these panels begin to produce electricity, zoning and access
ordinances will ensure that they continue to produce at high levels into the future.
This report will describe precedents set by other cities around the United States and provide
best practice guidance for Salt Lake City. These practices, along with the streamlined
permitting process detailed by Solar Simplified (Baldwin and Smallen, 2013) will combine to
make the installation of solar PV an affordable, timely, and reliable process for residents of Salt
Lake City.

3
Definitions
Photovoltaic(s) (PV): Pertaining to the direct conversion of light into electricity.
Solar thermal electric systems: Solar energy conversion technologies that convert solar energy
to electricity, by heating fluid to power a turbine that drives a generator.
Azimuth: The angle between true south and the point on the horizon directly below the sun.
Solar setback: The shortest horizontal distance between the shade point and the plane of the
northern lot line.
Shade point: The part of a building that casts the longest shadow onto the adjacent northern
lot(s) when the sun is at an altitude of 22.6 degrees and an azimuth ranging from 30 degrees
east and west of true south; except a shadow caused by a narrow object such as a mast or whip
antenna, a dish antenna with a diameter of 3 feet or less, a chimney, utility pole or wire. The
height of the shade point shall be measured from the shade point to lowest grade directly
below the shade point. If the shade point is located at the north end of the ridgeline of a
building oriented within 45 degrees of the true north-south line, the shade point may be
reduced by 3 feet. If a structure has a roof oriented within 45 degrees of the true east-west line
with a pitch that is flatter than 5 feet (vertical) in 12 feet (horizontal), the shade point will be
the eave of the roof. If such a roof has a pitch that is 5 feet in 12 feet or steeper, the shade
point will be the peak of the roof. (Eugene Code, 2015)
Array: An interconnected systemof PV modules that function as a single electricity-producing
unit. The modules are assembled as a discrete structure, with common support or mounting.
In smaller systems, an array can consist of a single module.

4
The Questionof Scale
The transition to renewable energy technologies is occurring all over the world at varying
speeds. It is happening at different scales as well. From local governments up to coalitions of
nations. To illustrate how these transitions differ at different levels of government, three
examples will be explored: the island of Samsø in Denmark, the city of Freiburg in Germany,
and the nation of France.
Samsø is an island about nine miles from mainland Denmark with a population of around 3,800
people. In 1997 the island participated in and won a competition between Danish communities
regarding who could present the most realistic plan to transition to 100% renewable power.
The funding granted to the winner went to installing eleven on- and ten off-shore wind
turbines. Most of the turbines are owned by local farmers. By 2007, Samsø had exceeded its
goal of creating 100% of its power from renewables and has been selling the excess power to
the mainland. Samsø has become an example for sustainability-minded communities around
the world.
After the city of Freiburg, Germany was destroyed in the Second World War, it was rebuilt using
energy-saving, sustainable principles and is now considered to be one of the greenest cities in
the world. With a population of about 230,000 and upwards of 400 solar PV installations,
Freiburg gets most of its energy from solar panels. Sixty “plus-energy” homes actually generate
more energy than they use and the residents of these houses each earn €6,000 per year from
the excess (EcoTippingPoints, 2011). In addition to promoting renewable energy generation
the government of Freiburg has used thoughtful and efficient designs to improve its waste
management system, transportation, land conservation and the energy efficiency of its
buildings.
In France, the government has recently passed legislation mandating that 40% of its energy
must come from renewables by 2030 (RenewEconomy, 2015). Even more recently, the
European country announced a plan to cover 1,000 kilometers of roads with solar panels
(Bennett, 2016). These panels are said to offer similar durability and traction as asphalt while
also theoretically providing power for around five million people.
These measures by the French government demonstrate a commitment to their intention of
transitioning toward renewable energies. Unfortunately, they also illustrate the challenge of
promoting renewable energy at such a large scale: neither goal is guaranteed to be reached,
and the price of doing so will be huge in both cases. In Samsø, a modest amount of grant
money and some motivated locals transitioned their community to run off of 100% renewable
energy in ten years; in France it is uncertain whether 15 years will be enough to get to 40%
renewable energy. As with most government functions, the most effective policies are
generally implemented by the institutions that are closest to the citizen. Hence the need for
local regulations and incentives in Salt Lake City.

5
Zoning and Access
The first step in paving the way for widespread solar use in Salt Lake City is creating a
comprehensive set of ordinances to ensure that best practices for solar PV are represented in
zoning law. There are many potential conflicts that could arise from the installation of panels
on buildings or in open spaces around the city, and creating legislation anticipating these
conflicts will prevent future headaches and give peace of mind to potential solar users about
access to sunlight into the future. There is currently a small set of solar zoning ordinances in
the city and this plan will acknowledge these regulations and propose a few additional best
practices from other municipalities around the country, but it will primarily focus on the more
contentious and relevant issue of solar access. The two main types of solar that will be
explored are accessory solar, or panels on buildings or in yards, and solar farms.
AccessorySolar
Taking advantage of the built space in our city to harvest the sun’s energy is a key step in
making Salt Lake City a healthier and more sustainable place. There are countless underutilized
roofs and yards within the city that could be producing energy every single day. It is the
responsibility of the government to make the rules and regulations that ensure these panels are
installed safely, attractively, and without the risk of loss of access to sunlight.
Access and Siting
Every solar panel ever built is one shadow away
from its effectiveness being compromised.
Consequently, ensuring citizens and businesses
access to sunlight in the future is a crucial
responsibility of government. Salt Lake City
currently offers easement agreements to
property owners after they have negotiated with the affected neighbors, which, if agreed upon,
could prevent buildings from being built that infringe upon a neighbor’s sunlight. Unfortunately
this is dependent on the willingness of the neighbor; and nowhere has Salt Lake changed its
planning protocol to maximize access to sunlight for new developments.
Solar access is still a fairly new issue, and only a limited number of American cities have added
ordinances addressing it. Many, like Salt Lake City, rely on a few lines of code to resolve
disputes and make no mention of solar in their planning ordinances, but there are a few cities
that have crafted comprehensive and forward-thinking plans addressing the issue.

6
Madison, WI
Madison mostly focuses on the planning side of the issue. The land subdivision regulations of
the city require that all streets “be oriented in an east-west direction to the maximum extent
possible of within 20 degrees of such orientation” (DSIRE, 2015). Within the ordinance there
are exceptions to this rule based on a number of considerations such as existing street pattern
and property shape. There is also language in the code stating that subdivision lots and open-
space lots within subdivisions “provide greater achievement of solar access objectives and
requirements of the entire subdivisions.” (DSIRE, 2015)
Madison does not have a detailed plan for solar access. Their approach leaves much in the
hands of the developer and does not have specific requirements to ensure access. This may
look good politically for the Madison government but it does not do enough logistically.
Nonetheless, simply stating that solar access is a priority for new subdivisions is a step in the
right direction.
Eugene, OR
In Eugene, the law designates that subdivisions containing mostly one and two family dwellings
have 70% of the lots meet certain standards that allow them to be designated as “solar lots.”
These specified lots must have a “minimum north-south dimension of 75 feet and a front lot
line orientation that is within 30 degrees of the true east-west axis.” (Eugene Code, 2015)
There are exceptions for subdivisions that exceed a certain density or have existing easements,
natural features or applicable street standards that will not allow compliance. There are also
exemptions for lots that have a certain slope, “20 percent or more in a direction greater than 45
degrees east or west of true south” (Eugene Code, 2015), and already existing off- and on-site
shade.
Solar setbacks in Eugene are determined by formulas. Each of the two relevant subdivision
zones has its own and the setback must be greater than or equal to the number generated.
Only lots exceeding 4,000 square feet apply. The formulas are:
SSB = (2.5 X SPH) + (N divided by 2) - 82.5
and
SSB = (2.5 X SPH) + (N divided by 2) – 95.
Where
SSB is solar setback
SPH is shade point height
N is north-south lot dimension (max N is 90ft for these calculations)
(Eugene Code, 2015)

7
There are exceptions to these setbacks based on slope, existing shade, insignificant benefit,
neighbor approval to waive solar access rights, or Planned Unit Development exemptions.
Eugene’s code is one of the better examples of planning for solar. The rule of 70% solar lots
allows for some leeway and flexibility when planning a new subdivision and the large number of
exceptions and exemptions attempts to avoid any conflicts before they occur. Also, the
formula system is comprehensive and tailors each property’s setback individually, ensuring
access and avoiding wasted space. Logistically these ordinances are exhaustive and it stands to
reason that the citizens of Eugene appreciate the politicians who oversaw their
implementation.
Ashland, OR
Also in Oregon, Ashland has ordinances similar to those in Eugene but differing in the details,
and setbacks are the primary focus. There are three formulas. Which formula each lot uses
depends on the north-south lot dimensions and the slope of the lot. The formulas are:
SSB = (H-6)/(.445+S)
SSB = (H-16)/(.445+S)
SSB = (H-21)/(.445+S)
Where
S is the decimal value of the slope
H is “the height in feet of the highest shade producing point of the structure which casts
the longest shadow beyond the northern property line.” (Ashland Ord., n.d.)
These formulas are designed to guarantee that shadows are no greater than, respectively 6
feet, 16 feet, and 21 feet at the north property line. The angle of the sun at noon on December
21 is calculated into the formulas.
There are similar exemptions to those in Eugene with additions such as architectural
projections like flag poles and chimneys.
Ashland also has requirements that streets be oriented “as close as possible” to an east-west,
north-south layout, and that the long sides of buildings are facing north and south, where
possible.
Where Eugene calculates its setbacks to ensure solar access on the entirety of each property,
Ashland allows a certain amount of shade to cross the northern lot line into the neighboring
property, depending on the size of the lot. This allows more flexibility for construction of
buildings but somewhat limits the area in which a solar PV system could be installed.

8
In the end, Eugene and Ashland reach the same goal, they simply employ slightly differing
approaches.
Boulder, CO
More unique methods are used in Boulder, Colorado. The local government guarantees solar
access by creating a hypothetical “solar fence” applying to new construction. Shade from
adjacent structures cannot pass beyond the solar fence. The goal of this plan is to ensure at
least a four hour period of sunlight on December 21st. Depending on the applicable zoning
district, solar access protection comes from a 12 foot solar fence, a 25 foot solar fence, or a
solar permit process. (DSIRE, 2016) Figure 1 illustrates the concept.
Figure 1
(Boulder Planning and Development Service Center, n.d.)
The solar access permit offered by Boulder guarantees access to sunlight for the lifespan of an
installed or proposed PV system. This permit can offer extra protection beyond the applicable
solar fence.
Boulder’s zoning laws also reflect a city priority to encourage solar. All planned construction of
subdivisions and units must meet certain requirements to protect access to solar. Residential
units must:
 have an orientation within 30 degrees of true east-west
 be flat or not sloped toward true north
 be “physically and structurally capable of supporting at least 75 square feet of un-
shaded solar collectors for each individual dwelling unit in the building” (DSIRE, 2016)
Nonresidential buildings with a hot water demand of at least 1,000 gallons a day also have solar
friendly requirements. The roof surface of these buildings must:
 be flat, or the building must be oriented within 30 degree of true east-west

9
 be “physically and structurally capable of supporting a solar collector or collectors
capable of providing at least 50% of the anticipated hot water needs of the building”
(DSIRE, 2016)
Both residential and nonresidential buildings must have unimpeded solar access through the
solar access ordinance or through easements, covenants, or private agreements. Waivers of
these requirements can be obtained for a variety of reasons.
Unlike in the two cities in Oregon, in Boulder the government simply states how far a shadow
can reach into a property for each type of district and leaves the formulations to the developer
or property owner as to how high neighboring buildings can be. This simplification of the code
has a couple of benefits: politically it is easier for the public to understand; and logistically it
allows our brightest architects and engineers to experiment and find the best formula or
method for constructing neighboring buildings without allowing shade to cross the solar fence.
Boulder is also the only of the examples to specify that new structures must be capable of
supporting solar panels, a common sense ordinance that is missing from other cities’ code.
Recommendations for Salt Lake City
 75% of lots in new subdivisions must meet the solar standards
 Streets must be oriented within 30 degrees of true east-west
wherever possible
 Roofs must not slope solely true north
 Where possible, the long side of buildings should face north and
south
 New construction must be capable of supporting solarPV
installations
 Inclusion of a solarfence in new lots within certain residential
districts
 Develop strong solar access permits that protect access for the
lifetime of the panels protected without a need to negotiate with
neighbors
[Cite your sourcehere.]

10
Trees and Solar
Man-made structures and their shadows are relatively easy to plan for since they are of a fixed
size. Trees make access to sunlight more difficult over time simply by growing. Previously
unblocked panels can be made vastly less efficient by a small shadow cast by a growing tree.
The issue becomes even more difficult when one considers the social and environmental
benefits that come from the
presence of trees in our cities. Salt
Lake City currently has no code on
the books addressing this issue, but
it is only a matter of time before
these disputes becomes more
common.
Like Salt Lake, most cities have not
created official ordinances regarding
the conflict between trees and solar.
A few that have follow.
Greenwich, NJ
The code Greenwich has adopted to regulate for solar and wind collectors has a small section
on trees. It states that if an applicant to install solar cannot find an area to place his energy
collection systemthat does not require the removal of trees, he must create a plan
demonstrating why the trees must be removed and also how they will be replaced. (Greenwich
Ord., 2011)
Sunrise, FL
Sunrise has a similar, but more detailed, approach to Greenwich. Before any trees are
removed, an applicant requesting to install solar must prove: that there is no other way to
install without tree removal; that the minimum number of trees are removed; that the trees to
be removed are ‘nuisance trees’; and that the trees will be relocated, replaced, or that the
applicant will pay the necessary deforestation fee. (Sunrise Ord., n.d.)
Ashland, OR
Ashland has a detailed section of code on solar and vegetation. The government here chose to
tackle the issue through a solar access permit. Citizens who have installed or plan to install a
solar PV system can apply for the permit which would require any vegetation to be trimmed
before growing to shade the panels. In order to receive the permit the applicant must give a
detailed plan including a sun chart, the slope of the property and the location of the panels,

11
amongst other details. If the permit is granted, owners of neighboring properties must then
trim their vegetation to avoid shading the panels at their own expense. (Ashland Ord., n.d.)
The three examples described above are indicative of the current trend to value solar over
trees. Most municipalities that have addressed the issue have mandated the removal or the
trimming of trees that interfere with solar, though some also require the trees’ replacement. In
California, after public outcry related to the removal of trees planted before the solar panels
were installed the policy was changed; now trees cannot be affected by solar if they were
planted before the PV system was installed (American Planning Association, n.d.).
Anticipating the Dilemma
The ordinances in place around the country relating to trees and solar are mostly short sighted
and do not address the issue in a holistic manner. Trees are very valuable to many aspects of
city life, and as solar use spreads, they must not be undervalued. The best way for government
to avoid any conflict between trees and solar is to make certain that all new subdivisions are
planned with both in mind. Each new lot should have a solar access zone, or SAZ (Staley and
Duvivier, 2013). SAZ’s use the angle of the sun and the path it traces on the ground to
determine the height that vegetation can reach for each part of the neighboring lots. This way
vegetation is still allowed but the maximum height of the tree must be certain not to cross into
the SAZ. Arborists should be consulted during the planning process to understand what plants
can be planted relative to the SAZ.
The real benefit of the SAZ theory is that since every property is unique it is near impossible to
create a universal plan for solar access, but each SAZ is tailored to each location: building
height, property slope, and seasonal sun location are all taken into account and both energy
collection and neighboring vegetation can be preserved. Figure 2 by green infrastructure
consultant Dan Staley illustrates SAZs:

12
Figure 2
(Staley and Duvivier, 2013)
It is important that Salt Lake City begin to add language in the zoning
ordinances to reflect the possibility of both panels and trees in new
subdivisions, ideally by including arborists and solar experts in the process
and/or using the SAZ theory.
In terms of currently existing properties and potential tree/solar conflicts,
right-of-way should be given to whichever was installed/planted first.
Potential solar users must do their due diligence to discover if the existing
trees in their neighborhood will grow to interfere with their planned
panels, but new vegetation should not be allowed to limit their solar
access.

13
Historic Buildings and Solar
For those Americans who live in historic districts, installing a solar PV system can be even more
of a challenge. Modifying or adding to houses in historic districts usually requires an extensive
review process and solar panels will frequently not be approved. In Salt Lake City there is a list
of ordinances addressing the issue of solar in historic districts. Citizens living in these areas
must receive a Certificate of Appropriateness before installing,
and, unless reviewed by the Historic Landmark Commission and
approved, the panels must not be visible from the public right-
of-way (Solar Simplified, n.d.).
These ordinances are a reasonable solution that theoretically
allow solar panels on these houses while maintaining the
cultural value of their appearance. This report would
recommend, however, that there be a rapport established
between the Historic Landmark Commission and the Division of
Sustainability, and that the members of the commission be
educated on the value and importance of solar developments.
Additional Zoning Practices for Accessory Solar
 Add a clause to the city code stating that solar panels on flat roofs can be 12 feet
above the roof instead of the current limit of 3 feet. This allows for the tilt of the
panels.
 Make exceptions for solarcanopies when it comes to roof mounted solar
ordinances. A parking canopy with solar attached should not have the same
limitations as roof mounted solar. Access to the roof of the canopy is not
necessary.
 Stormwater: For ground mounted solar, the panels must be far enough apart to
allow runoff, and vegetation and soil must not be stripped from the area,
preventing the panels from creating an impervious surface.

14
Solar Farms
While accessory solar
on homes and
businesses has the
potential to drastically
change the way we
produce energy in this
country, the majority of
the solar power
produced in the future
will likely come from
primary use solar.
Power companies and
cities around the
country are creating
large solar farms to supplement their energy needs. In 2014, Salt Lake City’s own solar farm
began generating energy. Each year 1.2 million kilowatt-hours of electricity will be produced
from the roughly 3,000 panels taking up four acres just west of downtown (SLCGreen, 2016).
More solar farms in Salt Lake will certainly follow. And as with accessory solar, the city needs to
create regulations anticipating any issues that may arise with these large arrays. Very few local
governments in the United States have addressed solar farms yet, but one such is actually in
Utah:
Iron County, UT
A common regulation for solar farms is a restriction on where they can be built. In Iron County,
only the Commercial and Light Industrial zones may harbor solar farms. Design standards
specified by the ordinance include:
 Minimum lot size: Solar thermal power plants must be at least forty acres in size and
solar photovoltaic power plants must be at least five acres in size.
 Maximum height: Established through the Conditional Use Permit process. Generally
thirty feet is the maximum.
 Setbacks: The greater of thirty feet or 1.5 times the height of the structure from
property lines and public road rights-of-way; and 100 feet from any residences.
 Safety: Appropriately sized security/livestock fence must be placed around the plant and
warning signage must be placed around the perimeter.
 Noise: Different decibel level limits are enforced and measured from neighboring
residential zones or from the plant boundary.

15
 Visual Appearance: The plant must use materials that best blend into the existing
environment and be screened from neighboring roads and residences. Also no glare
that causes a nuisance to neighboring residences or roads is allowed.
 Electrical interconnections: Unless exempt due to environmental constraints, all
electrical lines within the project boundary must be underground
 Fire protection: Plants must have a defensible space for fire protection
(Iron County Ord., 2010)
Erie, PA
Erie also has ordinances in the code relating to solar farms. As in Iron County, plants are limited
to certain zoning districts and there are similar design standards:
 Fencing: An 8.5 foot fence must surround the perimeter
 Signage: Warning signs must be clearly visible
 Electrical interconnections: Wires must be placed underground where possible
 Setback, height, and coverage: Must conform to the district in which the plant is located
Also there are specifications as to what is required when applying for a permit, such as design
plan and evidence that the local power provider is aware of the planned construction, and a
clause that states if a solar farm is inactive for twelve months it will be removed.
(Erie County Ord., 2010)
Regulation of solar farms is not a complicated issue and these two
examples essentially cover the ordinances found around the country.
Salt Lake should adopt something similar to these in anticipation of an
increase in the number of solar plants.

16
Incentives for Residences and Businesses
Assuming that a property has enough exposure to sunlight, an installation of solar photovoltaic
panels will produce energy cheaply enough to, over the long term, pay off the high initial cost
of installation. The issue we face is that many residents and businesses cannot afford that high
initial cost, or if they can afford it they are hesitant to stretch themselves so thin. If there is to
be a significant increase in solar energy generation in our city, the local government will need to
add to the incentives already offered for solar panel installation. The National Renewable
Energy Laboratory notes that incentive plans work best when there is a number of different
types of incentives working together (Gouchoe, Everette and Haynes, 2002). The current
incentives offered are: a 30% federal income tax credit for commercial and residential projects
with no cap, a 25% state income tax credit with a $2000 cap for residential projects, as well as a
10% corporate tax credit with a $50,000 cap for commercial projects (Solar Simplified, n.d.).
Here I propose adding a local rebate program and a local financing program.
Rebates
There are a select few city governments around the country that offer rebate programs for
solar, it is more common for a power company to do so. A city government run rebate
program, combined with the other incentives offered at different levels, has the potential to
kick start solar production in the city. There are a number of variables involved in creating a
rebate program and they are each addressed in different ways by different governments.
Applicable Sector
When developing grant or rebate programs, most cities narrow the eligible applicants by only
allowing certain sectors to apply for the incentive. Usually direct cash incentives like this are
limited to lower income or multifamily houses, as well as nonprofits. This is the case in Boulder,
CO, where only nonprofits and the owners of multifamily houses are eligible to apply (DSIRE,
2016). But, there are exceptions. For instance, San Francisco opens up their rebate program to
commercial, industrial, nonprofit, residential, multifamily residential, as well as low income
residential (DSIRE, 2015), with a different rebate structure within each of these sectors. The
scope of the rebate program depends on each city’s resources and political will.

17
Size of Incentive
The actual size of the incentive varies from plan to plan as does the format which determines
the size of the rebate. Austin, Texas has a residential incentive systemthat decides the size of
rebate based on how many people have already received the funds. Operated on a first-come,
first-serve basis, as soon as the highest capacity rebate has reached its pre-set limit, that level
closes down and the lesser rebate kicks in for the next applicants. This is illustrated by Table 1
taken from Austin Energy’s website.
Table 1. Residential Rebate, Austin, Texas
Step # Rebate (Dollars Per Watt) Capacity (Megawatts AC) Status
1 $1.00 1.0 Closed
2 $0.90 1.5 Closed
3 $0.80 2.0 Available
(Austin Energy, 2016)
Austin’s plan does not take into account the size of the systembeing installed. Compare this to
San Francisco’s program, which offers incentives to residential, commercial, industrial, and
nonprofits, with the residential incentive dependent on the kW produced by the PV system.
Each of these sectors has a different structure for rebate size, and residential has add-ons for
environmental justice areas, city installers and low-income houses. Table 2 illustrates the
structure of the San Francisco rebate program.

18
(San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, 2016)
Another method for determining incentive size is based on the ability of the PV system to
generate energy. A Performance Based Incentive (PBI) promotes installation of highly
functioning solar arrays by monitoring the productivity of a system and paying the incentive out
over time depending on the system’s efficiency. One issue with this approach is that the
upfront cost of installing the panels is not significantly reduced since the incentive is spread out
over time.
An Expected Performance-Based Buydown (EPBB) attempts to address the issue of high upfront
costs by predicting the performance of a proposed systemand offering an up-front lump sum
based on this prediction. Elements of the proposed panels such as tilt, location, azimuth and
Table 2. Incentive Structure for San Francisco, Fiscal Year 2015-2016
(All kW sizes are CEC-AC)
Residential
1 kW -
1.24
kW
1.25
kW -
1.49
kW
1.5
kW -
1.74
kW
1.75
kW -
1.99
kW
2 kW -
2.24
kW
2.25
kW -
2.49
kW
2.5
kW -
2.74
kW
2.75
kW -
2.99
kW
3 kW -
3.49
kW
3.5
kW &
larger
Select One:
Basic
or
Environmental
Justice
$500
or
$600
$650
or
$750
$1,000
or
$1,100
$1,100
or
$1,300
$1,300
or
$1,500
$1,600
or
$1,900
$1,700
or
$2,100
$1,900
or
$2,300
$2,000
or
$2,500
$2,000
or
$2,800
Add on if
eligible:
City Installer $250 $300 $350 $400 $450 $500 $550 $600 $650 $700
Add on if
eligible:
Low-income $2,000 $2,500 $4,000 $4,500 $5,000 $6,000 $6,500 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000
Non-profit:
$1,000/kW. Cap: $50,000 cap per service site.
Non-profit residential:
$1,000/kW. Cap: $50,000 per service site.
Business:
$500/kW. Cap: $10,000 per meter and $50,000 per service site.
Multi-unit residential virtual net metering:
$500/kW. Cap: $500 multiplied by the number of assessed units at the building plus $10,000.
Under no circumstances will a building receive more than $50,000.

19
mounting type all go into the calculations. A calculator formulated for this purpose can be
found at the California Solar Initiative website (http://www.csi-epbb.com/).
A good example of these types of incentive comes from the state of California. Possibly the
most successful solar incentive program to be implemented in the United States is the
California Solar Initiative (CSI). This program uses PBIs and EPBBs as well as size of installation,
in megawatts, and building district to determine incentive size, as seen in the Figure 3.
Figure 3
(California Solar Initiative, 2016)
The CSI recommends that PBIs are best for large commercial, government and nonprofit
projects and even require it for any systemover 30 KW; and EPBBs are ideal for residential and
small business projects. (California Solar Initiative, 2016)

20
Caps
Incentive programs around the country usually cap the amount of money that will be given to a
project. These either come in the form of a percentage of total systemcost or simply a dollar
amount. Percentage of total systemcost ranges from 20% to 60% and dollar amount depends
on the type of project proposed. As seen above, San Francisco caps its nonprofit incentives at
$50,000 per site and its business incentives at $10,000 per meter and $50,000 per site. In
contrast, a multijurisdictional consortium operating in a few smaller towns in Colorado, Energy
Smart Colorado, caps its residential incentives at $3,000 per renewable energy technology and
$6,000 per household (DSIRE, 2016). As another example, Austin, Texas caps its incentives at
50% of the total systemcost.
CertifiedContractors:To ensure incentive dollars are not wasted it is important to have
a clause in any rebate or grant program that requires the contractor installing the panels be
certified.
Application Process
As is covered in detail by Sara Baldwin and Billy Smallen in their action plan for cutting red
tape and costs of solar for Solar Simplified, a convoluted, time consuming, or expensive
application process can doom any government program. To ensure potential participants
are not scared away, a clear, simple, application needs to be developed for the incentive
program to be successful. (Baldwin and Smallen, 2013)
Declining over time
In order to save money and to adjust for the continuing decline of the price of PV systems,
many rebate/grant programs lower the amount of rebate money offered over time. A
simple way to do this is to fix the rebate amount to the price of solar PVs.
Different Rates for LowIncome, Multifamily or LEED houses
As is seen in the San Francisco program already mentioned, some programs add bonuses for
homes that are low income or multifamily. This gives those that would otherwise have no
chance of installing solar panels the opportunity to do so.
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) is a third party certification program.
Buildings with this certification employ the most modern techniques to reduce waste and
ensure high efficiency. Offering lowered rates for LEED certified buildings rewards those
who waste less and ties energy generation to the efficient use of that energy.
ADDITIONAL REBATE PRACTICES

21
 Offer rebates for residential and nonprofit sectors
 Offer rebates for all income levels with bonuses for low income areas
 Determine size of incentive based on size of the project
 Offer EPBB’s for residences and PBI’s for nonprofit projects
 Cap rebates depending on sector
 Fix the rebate amount to the price of solar PV’s with rebates phasing out within
five years of program initiation
 Offer a bonus for houses that are LEED certified
 Only allow certified contractors to install panels
 Streamline the application process

22
Financing
Offering citizens and businesses loans with competitive interest rates for solar projects is
another method for easing the up-front burden of installation. This approach may be more
financially viable for governments that may not have the political will or budget capacity to
devote significant funding to renewable incentive programs. Salt Lake City currently employs a
revolving loan fund for businesses that covers a number of different developments including
energy efficient equipment and building upgrades. Three sizes of loans are offered: businesses
younger than three years old can apply for up to $100,000, businesses older than three years
old can apply for up to $350,000, and microloans are loans of up to $25,000 (Econ.
Development Loan Fund, 2016). There are a few different types of financing for solar available
to communities that could incentivize the spread of solar power generation.
Residential Solar Leasing and Power Purchase Agreements
A method that is gaining popularity around the country is third-party financing. In these
scenarios a resident and a third-party company, usually a solar company or a power company,
enter into an agreement in which the company installs solar panels on the property of the
resident, paying for all installation costs, and either leases out the use of the panels or sells the
power produced by the panels to the citizen. The former is known as solar leasing and the
latter as a power purchase agreement (PPA). These options can be appealing because there are
no up-front costs to the homeowner yet they get to produce and consume clean energy, and
they also do not have to worry about maintenance and repair of the panels. On the downside,

23
since the resident does not own the panels they are not investing and will never have the
benefit of paying off the panels.
Twenty-six states now allow third-party financing for solar, including Utah (NC Tech Center,
2015). Until recently, PPAs were only allowed for businesses and nonprofits, but a law was
passed this year freeing residences to participate in PPAs as well. Leasing is only offered by
select solar companies.
To elaborate on government’s role in third-party financing The Interstate Renewable Energy
Council in 2015 created an exhaustive toolkit for local governments interested in best practices
for PPA’s that can be found here: http://www.irecusa.org/2015/05/new-toolkit-to-help-local-
governments-with-solar-financing/ (Interstate Renewable Energy Council, 2015)
PACE Financing
Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) financing is an increasingly popular method for
financing renewable energy projects in the United States. PACE programs pay for the entirety
of the up-front cost of qualifying renewable energy or energy efficiency projects on residential
or commercial buildings. The building owner repays the loan over a period of time (up to
twenty years) in the form of an assessment added to the property tax bill (PACE Nation, n.d).
Salt Lake City currently offers a commercial PACE program but not a residential program.
Offering only commercial PACE financing is a common practice since the Federal Housing
Finance Agency (FHFA) issued a statement warning that PACE loans may constitute first liens
and would have priority over more traditional liens such as mortgages (Lexology, n.d.). Since
FHFA issued this warning PACE programs have continued to expand, frequently with terms that
attempt to avoid the lien conflict or simply by not allowing single-home residential financing.
The simplest of these being a specification that “PACE loans shall be subordinate to consensual
liens already on the subject property” (Lexology, n.d.). Other municipalities have dealt with the
issue differently as illustrated by the following examples.
St. Louis, Missouri
On behalf of the St. Louis Clean Energy Development Board, with project financing provided by
PNC Bank, Energy Equity Funding LLC offers PACE financing for commercial property owners,
community associations such as HOA’s, and residential property owners who do not have an
existing mortgage. Many forms of energy efficiency improvements as well as solar PV, solar
water heat, and wind installations can be covered. The terms of the loan are:
 Maximum financing amount is 35% of the property value and the minimum is $25,000
 Loans can be paid off in 5, 10, 15, or 20 years depending on the size of the project
 Interest rates will be competitive market rates for land-secured loans, currently ranging
from 3%-6% (DSIRE, 2016)

24
San Francisco, California
GreenFinanceSF is a PACE program in which property owners identify their own lenders and
negotiate the financing terms themselves. This program applies to commercial, nonprofit, and
multifamily residential sectors. The PACE lien will be the senior lien but the property owner
must receive written consent from all other lenders with existing liens on the property. The
terms are:
 Maximum financing amount is 10% of the property value and the minimum is $50,000
 Loans are repaid over a period of up to twenty years
 For renewable energy projects, the property owner must improve building energy
performance by 10%
(DSIRE, 2016)
Even with the FHFA’s warning, PACE programs are still a viable option for renewable energy and
energy efficiency financing. Governments and businesses simply need to realize the issue and
adjust the language in their plans accordingly.
Low-Interest Loans
Due to the lien issue, attempting to legalize PACE financing for the residential sector and
especially single family homes could be a challenge. Fortunately many municipalities have
made up for this by offering low-interest loans for renewable energy and energy efficiency
projects on residences, frequently through partnerships with local banks and credit unions.
Adding a loan program for homes to the existing program for the commercial sector would be a
simple, cheap method for Salt Lake City to increase its renewable energy generation. There are
a number of examples of this to be found in other cities around the country, as illustrated by
the following examples.
Denver, CO
The city of Denver partnered with Elevations Credit Union to offer a loan program. Applicants
receive assistance froman energy advisor from EnergySmart and Denver Energy Challenge to
help them apply for all applicable incentives, schedule an energy assessment, and review
contractor bids. These bids will come from a predetermined pool of contractors that the loan
applicant is required to choose from. In order to apply, a borrower must pay a $25 processing
fee and become a member of Elevations Credit Union. The terms of the deal are:
 Minimum loan of $1,000 for businesses and $500 for homes
 Repayment ranges from three to ten years
 2% loan fee for loans over $40,000

25
 Interest rates as low as 3.75% APR for businesses and 2.75% for homes
(DSIRE, 2016)
Honolulu, HI
Honolulu offers some of the most generous financing terms in the country for solar water heat
and solar photovoltaic installation on residential properties through its Rehabilitation Loan
Program. The program is designed for low- to moderate-income homeowners and has the
following terms:
 0% interest
 Up to 20 year repayment term
(DSIRE, 2016)
Milwaukee, WI
The Milwaukee Shines Solar Financing program is offering loans to 1-3 unit, owner occupied
homes for solar water heat and solar photovoltaic projects. The first 20 participants received
$1,000 cash-back reward. The terms of the loan are:
 Maximum loan amount is $20,000
 Maximum interest rate is the prime rate plus 2.25%
 Minimum interest rate is the prime rate plus 1.5%
 15 year maximum loan length
(DSIRE, 2016)

26
 With the legal troubles facing PACE financing, basic low-interest financing will
be the most likely option to put panels on roofs
 Use longer loan repayment terms
 The interest rate offered must be lower than the market rate
 Either establish a maximum loan amount or add a loan fee for loans over a
specified number
 Partner with local organizations to share resources and help to market the
program
 Create a mechanism to ensure the panels are being installed effectively, ie
allow only certified contractors to be hired
 Minimal fees and a simple, quick application process
 Create a means to track program use, cost, and energy savings

27
The Economic Aspect
As a general rule, any plan touting sustainability will go nowhere if there are no financial and
economic benefits. Looking at the economies of the cities mentioned we can get an idea of
what it would mean for Salt Lake City to adopt similar measures. Scrolling through Forbes’ list
of ‘The Best Places for Business and Careers’ it was shocking to see how many of the cities
researched for this plan appeared. San Francisco, Austin, Honolulu, Eugene, Erie, Milwaukee,
St. Louis, Madison, Boulder, and Denver were all there (Forbes, 2016), along with many other
cities that are solar friendly. In fact Denver is number one, while Austin is number 21, Boulder
is number 26, and San Francisco is number 32 (Forbes, 2016).
Of course, the fact that these economies are thriving is not solely due to their solar friendly
policies, but making it easier for citizens to install panels has clear economic benefits. Simply
put, solar is now a good investment. Whether a citizen owns a PV system or is leasing one, the
monthly price for energy is noticeably lower. So every month, every household or business
with solar panels installed has more money to save or to put back into the economy. Spread
this effect across a city and the results will become profound.
The other side of the issue is how economies can be negatively affected by pollution. In China
pollution has gotten so bad that the economy has begun to slow down dramatically. Increases
in sick days, hospital visits, and factory shutdowns as well as decreases in number of tourists
and amount of outdoor recreation are taking a serious toll on the Chinese economy. This loss
of productivity costs the Chinese GDP about 6.5% annually (CNBC, 2016).

28
Conclusion
Figure 4
(SEIA, 2016)
Solar is the future; with or without the government’s help. But it is still a new trend, and we are
at a point where individual states and cities can establish themselves as innovators and leaders
by preparing and investing properly. The most urgent need is to change the way we plan and
zone our city. New developments should be oriented such that the sloped roofs face the sun
and new structures should be physically and structurally able to support PV panels. Solar
Access Zones should be mapped out and kept free of structures or vegetation. Solar farms
should be made safe and separate.
Nearly as pressing is addressing the issues within the already developed city. Historic buildings
and solar should be valued equally, and the Historic Landmark Commission should be educated
on the importance of solar. Citizens should have an official means to protect their solar access
into the future through a permit. Trees and solar should be valued equally and disputes
regarding the two should favor whichever was established first.
With a comprehensive set of regulations anticipating problems, we can feel secure in
jumpstarting the purchasing of panels through incentives. A short lived rebate program,

29
accompanied by a low-interest loan program that will not cost the government but will put
money in the pockets of our citizens over time will add to the currently offered incentives to
make installing solar a very attractive option.
The examples in this report each attempt to tackle these issues in their own way. In Boulder,
CO, and Ashland and Eugene, OR, comprehensive setback laws in their zoning ordinances will
anticipate any future conflict and ensure access to sunlight into the foreseeable future. In
Greenwich, NJ, Sunrise, FL, and Ashland, OR solar users will not have to be concerned about
neighboring trees limiting the sunlight that feeds their PV panels. In Iron County, UT and Erie,
PA solar farms will be built in a safe and responsible manner that avoids future dangers and
minimizes the intrusiveness of the plants. In San Francisco, CA and Austin, TX residents will pay
less for solar panels after rebates than in most cities in the country. And in Saint Louis, MO, San
Francisco, CA, Denver, CO, Milwaukee, MN, and Honolulu, HI residents will be able to pay for
their panels over long periods of time with low interest rates, without using a significant
amount of taxpayer money.
By implementing similar measures, our city will be taking steps to improve our air quality, add
jobs to the economy, empower our citizens, battle climate change, and attract tourists and
transplants. We will be creating a framework for a new era of power generation and we will be
fighting the system of monopolies that currently dominates our power industry.

30
References
Ashland Ordinance. §18.4.8. Accessed March 24, 2016.
http://www.ashland.or.us/SIB/files/AMC_Chpt_18_current.pdf
"Germany - Freiburg - Green City." A New Hope for Positive Change and Sustainability.
Accessed April 27, 2016. http://www.ecotippingpoints.org/our-
stories/indepth/germany-freiburg-sustainability-transportation-energy-green-
economy.html
"Balancing Solar Energy Use with Potential Competing Interests." Balancing Solar Energy Use
with Potential Competing Interests. American Planning Association. Accessed March 29,
2016.
https://www.planning.org/research/solar/briefingpapers/potentialcompetinginterests.h
tm
Baldwin, Sara, and Billy Smallen. An Action Plan to Cut Costs and Red Tape in Salt Lake City.
Report. May, 2013.
http://solarsimplified.org/images/CS_Solar_CAPS_SaltLakeCity_Art.pdf
Bennett, Jay. "France Wants To Build More Than 600 Miles of Solar Roads."
Popular Mechanics. 2016. Accessed April 27, 2016.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/infrastructure/news/a19362/france-
planning-over-600-miles-solar-panel-roads/
"Blue Sky Community Project Funds." Blue Sky Community Project Funds. Accessed March 5,
2016. https://www.rockymountainpower.net/env/bsre/bscpf.html
"California Solar Initiative (CSI) - Rebate Levels." California Solar Initiative (CSI) - Rebate Levels.
Accessed March 3, 2016. http://www.gosolarcalifornia.ca.gov/csi/rebates.php
“Solar Access Guide.” City of Boulder Planning and Development Services Center. Accessed April
12, 2016.
https://www-
static.bouldercolorado.gov/docs/PDS/forms/815_Solar_Access_Brochure.pdf
"This Is What's Choking the Chinese Economy." CNBC. 2016. Accessed April 26, 2016.
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/02/11/pollution-crisis-is-choking-the-chinese-
economy.html
"Programs." Database of State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency (DSIRE). Accessed
March/April 2016. http://programs.dsireusa.org/system/program

31
"Despite FHFA Prohibitions, PACE Loan Programs Continue to Expand | Lexology." Despite
FHFA Prohibitions, PACE Loan Programs Continue to Expand. Accessed March 8, 2016.
http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=ed22b89a-2fa6-4d08-8e88-
2a1e0ffc7fad
"Economic Development Loan Fund." Economic Development Loan Fund. Accessed March 8,
2016. http://www.slcgov.com/node/1014
"Samso: World's First 100% Renewable Energy-Powered Island Is a Beacon for Sustainable
Communities." EcoWatch. 2014. Accessed April 27, 2016.
http://ecowatch.com/2014/05/01/samso-renewable-energy-island-sustainable-
communities/
Erie Ordinance No. 80-2005. Section 305.55. February 4, 2010.
http://www.erie.pa.us/Portals/0/Content/Ordinances/Zoning/Zoning%20Ordinances%2
0(updated%202010-02-03).pdf
Eugene Code. §9.2780. October 22, 2015.
file:///C:/Users/Jeff/Downloads/Chapter%209_201510221339100025%20(3).pdf
Forbes. Accessed April 26, 2016.
http://www.forbes.com/best-places-for-business/list/#tab:overall
Gouchoe, S., V. Everette, and R. Haynes. Case Studies on the Effectiveness of State Financial
Incentives for Renewable Energy. Report. 2002.
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy02osti/32819.pdf
Greenwich Ordinance. No. 17-2011. §5.2. September 19, 2011.
http://www.greenwich-twp.com/ord._17-2011_wind_solar_ordinance_final.pdf
"New Toolkit to Help Local Governments with Solar Financing." Interstate Renewable Energy
Council. 2015.
http://www.irecusa.org/2015/05/new-toolkit-to-help-local-governments-with-solar-
financing/
Iron County Ordinance No. 2010-4. April 26, 2010.
http://planning.utah.gov/Library/Index_files/PDFs/Iron17.33.pdf
Lovelady, Adam. Planning and Zoning for Solar in North Carolina. Report. Accessed March 1,
2016. http://sogpubs.unc.edu/electronicversions/pdfs/pandzsolar2014.pdf

32
"N.C. Clean Energy Technology Center Releases Q4 Solar Policy Update to The 50 States of
Solar." NC Clean Energy Technology Center. 2015.
https://nccleantech.ncsu.edu/n-c-clean-energy-technology-center-releases-q4-solar-
policy-update-to-the-50-states-of-solar/
Osborn, Liz. "Sunniest US Cities." - Current Results. 2016.
https://www.currentresults.com/Weather-Extremes/US/sunniest-cities.php
"What Is PACE? | PACENation." PACENation. Accessed March 8, 2016.
http://www.pacenation.us/about-pace/
"France Passes Law to Cut Nuclear Power and Double Renewable Energy." Renew Economy
RSS. 2015. Accessed April 27, 2016. http://reneweconomy.com.au/2015/france-passes-
law-to-cut-nuclear-power-and-double-renewable-energy-12677
Salt Lake City Ordinance. No. 20 of 2011. §21A.40.180. May 17, 2011.
http://www.slcdocs.com/Planning/Projects/Sust/Ord20.pdf
"Solar Industry Facts and Figures." SEIA. Accessed March 31, 2016.
http://www.seia.org/research-resources/solar-industry-data
"GoSolarSF Incentive." San Francisco Public Utilities Commission : Solar. Accessed March 3,
2016. http://sfwater.org/index.aspx?page=133
"SLCgreen - Alternative Energy Projects for City Buildings." SLCgreen. Accessed April 12,
2016. http://www.slcgov.com/slcgreen/altenergybuilding
"Solar Energy Glossary." Solar Energy Glossary. Accessed April 5, 2016.
http://www.energy.gov/eere/sunshot/solar-energy-glossary
"Solar Photovoltaics (PV) Incentive." Solar Photovoltaics (PV) Incentive. Accessed March 3,
2016.
http://powersaver.austinenergy.com/wps/portal/psp/residential/offerings/solar/solar-
photovoltaics-
rebate/!ut/p/a1/jZBNa4NAEIZ_Sw4edSdrP6Q3MdJsa7q1IanZS9mEdRU2jqxbhf76GtqLJa
GZy8vA8zDDSwQpiGhkX2vpamykOe3i7gNoRJcJUMZTvgC25duYPycAeTgCuwnAX2-
B3b_RLF-H82gzv9K_MDH85z9dcYDaVbLSRLTSVX7dlEiKDo20v-
G3FTrs0ThZHzrfqr106uTFzT6MRs-
qUlllg087FlI513YPHngwDEOgEbVRwQGPHpxTKuwcKaYkeSdi-
nUUpxTYC6RhlubweAN_gTO1_gCXe2uPm-IrW5o-
K9dMz2bfwBsiCg!!/dl5/d5/L2dBISEvZ0FBIS9nQSEh/

33
Solar Powering Your Community: A Guide for Local Governments. Report. 2011.
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/solar/pdfs/47692.pdf
"Solar Simplified - Financing Options & Programs." Solar Simplified - Financing Options &
Programs. Accessed March 8, 2016. http://solarsimplified.org/component/k2/item/16
"Solar Simplified - HOAs, Trees, & Historic Districts." Solar Simplified - HOAs, Trees, & Historic
Districts. Accessed March 29, 2016. http://solarsimplified.org/zoning/solar-zoning-
toolbox/hoas-historic-districts
"Solar Simplified - Solar Incentives in Utah." Solar Simplified - Solar Incentives in Utah. Accessed
March 1, 2016. http://solarsimplified.org/incentives-financing/solar-incentives-in-utah
Staley, Dan, and K.K. DuVivier. "Managing the Dark Side of Trees." Solar Today. 2013.
http://solartoday.org/2013/08/managing-dark-side-trees/
Sunrise Ordinance. §16-130, §16-172, §16-277. Accessed March 29, 2016.
http://www.broward.org/GoGreen/GoSOLAR/GoSOLARFlorida/Documents/Sunrise.pdf
"Utah Solar Incentive Program." Utah Solar Incentive Program. Accessed March 5, 2016.
https://www.rockymountainpower.net/env/nmcg/usip.html

SolarDeploymentPlan

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to SolarDeploymentPlan

Similar to SolarDeploymentPlan (20)

SolarDeploymentPlan