Powering Communities: Navigating the Planning Path for Local Solar

Planner Morgan Paterson and Campbell McMath, Director of Kea Energy, have worked together to deliver a number of community-scale solar farm projects. The latest project was personal for Campbell: this small-scale solar farm is located on his property.

Morgan and Campbell reflect on how the current planning system both supports and constrains renewable energy development; sharing insights into what works well, where challenges arise, and what it takes to achieve positive outcomes for communities and the environment.

What’s different or innovative about this project, and community-scale solar farms in general?

Campbell McMath: Kea Energy began around 17 years ago in Canterbury, and we’re a small, family-based company. Being a smaller business means we are closely connected to the community, our work, and our customers. This latest project is located right next to our own home, which makes it all the more personal for us.

From a design perspective, it is also innovative in that we are using a combination of both fixed and tracking systems for the panels. The fixed system has an east–west orientation to capture as much sun as possible, while the tracking system actually follows the sun from the east in the morning through to the west in the evening. The thinking behind this is simple: make the most of the sun’s natural energy and, in turn, generate as much electricity as possible from the solar panels.

Morgan Paterson: Community-scale solar farms generate electricity close to where it is needed, which differs from New Zealand’s traditional model of large, remote generation schemes (such as South Island hydro dams) which require electricity to be transmitted over long distances to demand centres. In that sense, community-scale solar is more closely aligned with local energy needs and can improve resilience at a local level. 

How can community-scale solar farms support infrastructure resilience and energy transition?

Campbell: As Morgan said, community-scale solar farms are typically built close to the communities they serve, which helps reduce the electrical losses that occur when energy has to be transported over long distances. That local connection becomes even more important as the industry begins to incorporate Battery Energy Storage Systems alongside solar generation. Together, these systems can help restore power more quickly after a disruption, because the energy is already near the community that needs it.

For us, that means the electricity generated by our solar farm is available just down the road, rather than needing to be transmitted from further afield, such as Lake Benmore. In a disaster or major outage, having energy close at hand can make a real difference. Even if supply is only available for a few hours a day, it can provide some relief — whether that means charging a phone, warming the house and getting some necessary tasks done, or simply having a small sense of normality while recovery gets underway.

Morgan: Climate change is increasing the risks facing our infrastructure, and we are seeing more frequent and intense events such as storms, flooding, and inundation. In that context, locating solar farms within local communities helps spread the geographic risk to energy infrastructure, which strengthens the overall resilience of the electricity system.

I see this as increasingly important as we move toward the electrification of transport and other sectors. It means more renewable electricity is available in the grid, including for households charging electric vehicles at home.

What are the potential benefits of these smaller-scale solar farms to your business, and to your customers?

Campbell: We live and work locally, so we know our customers. If people have questions or concerns, they can raise them directly with us and we can respond in a personal and practical way. That connection helps build trust and makes the whole process feel more accessible.

Projects like these also create opportunities for local involvement and education. For example, we can show local schools what community-scale solar looks like in practice and help people better understand the technology. That’s part of the value these community-scale solar farms can bring, both to us as a business and as members of the community.

What makes community-scale solar farms particularly relevant right now, in light of upcoming legislative changes? 

Campbell: The Government is aware of how important energy is and they are keeping this in mind with upcoming legislation changes. I think that is a nod to how important locally produced energy is and that it has its place in New Zealand.

Morgan: There has been a clear policy shift over time to better enable renewable energy infrastructure. We have seen recent amendments to the National Policy Statement for Renewable Electricity Generation, including the introduction of a specific definition for “community-scale renewable electricity generation”, separating it from small-scale solar. This helps community-scale solar be recognised as a concept. However, the definition is broad being: “the primary purpose of supplying electricity to a community”. The definition does not define the ‘scale’ of what community scale solar is, for example, by defining how many Gigawatt-hours are produced.

I think the definition of the concept of community-scale solar is useful, but could go further. It is important to keep community-scale solar front of mind as legislative reform progresses, and to continue improving the framework so that this type of infrastructure is more clearly provided for and enabled. It is possible that Regional Spatial Plans may assist with this.

Where did the planning system enable good outcomes for this project?

Campbell: The team at District Council were logical and practical when going through the application. We had general agreement on the layout from the pre-application meeting. It was a relief that we could come to this agreement and that the application could be processed without a hearing.

Morgan: I agree with Campbell. The pre-application process was a useful opportunity to discuss with Council what the consenting pathway would be for the community-scale solar farm project. The planning system overall enabled a good outcome as resource consent was granted, subject to conditions.

Where did the planning system present challenges or delays? How did these impact things?

Campbell: My biggest concern was the level of risk involved, particularly because there was no certainty that we would secure resource consent. My second concern was cost, as there seemed to be an ongoing expectation for technical reports to support the application. In some cases, those reports weren’t required, as there were clear and logical explanations within the design itself, including setbacks from boundaries, that addressed the issues. Speaking as a developer, at times, it felt more like a box-ticking exercise to ensure there was a report on file confirming something was not an issue.

Morgan: For Campbell’s project there was a difference in opinion in how the rules should be interpreted and applied leading to uncertainty in the consent pathway for the community-scale solar farm. The District plan provided for solar panels on a roof as a permitted activity and the plan also provided for large-scale solar farms, which required a resource consent. But community-scale solar sat awkwardly in between the two, leading to a Discretionary activity status being applied. This means that Council’s discretion is not restricted and more detailed assessments and information could be considered. A Restricted Discretionary activity status would have been beneficial as it allows for more streamlined assessment process, where specific matters are listed in the Plan and need to be addressed in the application.

Were you surprised that a Discretionary resource consent was required from both the district and regional council for consenting a community-scale solar farm?

Campbell: Yes, I was surprised that we need consents from both District and Regional Councils. This is another hurdle, and it adds to the uncertainty for community-scale solar projects.

Morgan: I wasn’t really surprised by this. Generally, plans (both district and regional) have limited or outdated provisions for solar farms and associated stormwater discharges. This can lead to a heavy reliance on catch-all rules and discretionary consent pathways, which unfortunately, can make the process quite cumbersome.

Was this a significantly expensive process, in relation to the size and projected output of the solar farm?

Campbell: Absolutely. We are looking at over 10% of the total cost of the project, which in any solar project is over-regulation.

Do you see the current process as being prohibitive to broader uptake of community-scale solar farms?

Campbell: Yes, mainly due to the uncertainty and the cost to show everything will be okay, even where that may ultimately amount to a report simply sitting on file.

Are current planning and renewable energy infrastructure processes set up to deal with these challenges?

Campbell: I think they are getting there, but it is too slow.

Morgan: I agree, the current system is improving, but it’s still trying to catch up with the reality of community-scale solar. There has been a clear shift to make infrastructure and renewable energy easier to deliver, and the reforms are aiming to reduce costs and increase certainty for developers, which are positive steps.

However, the underlying issue is that the system has largely been designed around either small-scale permitted activities, such as rooftop solar, or large-scale infrastructure. Community-scale solar sits somewhat awkwardly between those two categories, and that remains a challenge.

Are there any specific process improvements (statutory or non-statutory) you think would make a meaningful difference?

Campbell: It would be helpful if councils were able to indicate support for a project in principle before requiring all technical reports to be completed. Where a developer has designed a project to clearly address key requirements, such as setbacks from boundaries, there should be scope to take a more practical view on whether reports like electromagnetic frequency, acoustic, or glint and glare assessments are genuinely necessary. If an issue did arise once the project was operational, the developer could then be required to address it.

There also needs to be a more balanced and practical approach when concerns are raised about amenity effects. These concerns can delay an entire project, with significant consequences for timing and cost. At the same time, we continue to hear strong demand for jobs, growth, and lower living costs, so it is important that planning system support well-designed development rather than creating unnecessary barriers to it.

New Zealand should consider approaches used overseas. In places such as Houston and parts of Texas, the planning framework is more enabling, giving people greater confidence to invest and proceed. In simple terms, it is closer to a system where development is generally allowed unless there is a clear rule restricting it. Another option could be to consider a renewable energy directive similar to the approach used in the European Union, with the aim of creating a more supportive and streamlined pathway for renewable energy projects.

In short, the consenting process should not be red tape that prevents good projects from moving forward. If we are serious about growth and about building the infrastructure we need for the future, then the system needs to enable people to get on with that work.

Morgan: The first step would be to create a clear planning pathway for community-scale solar, such as a Restricted Discretionary Activity pathway. I am also interested to see how legislative reform develops, particularly with the introduction of Regional Spatial Plans.

Regional Spatial Plans may provide opportunities and challenges for Renewable Electricity Generation activities, like community-scale solar. Mandatory matters for Regional Spatial Plans include future key infrastructure, including strategic sites, and other infrastructure services that may be needed to serve future urban areas. There is an opportunity to proactively identify suitable locations for this community-scale solar infrastructure, including areas close to the grid and with appropriate land use capability, while also taking account of landscape values and amenity. There is also the opportunity to enable areas of community-scale solar generation adjacent to areas of existing and future growth. Having these locations mapped, would assist in communicating with the community the change and certain levels of effects. However, it may also increase competition for developers to buy certain areas of land and increase the cost of development.

It is an interesting time to be a planner, and I am looking forward to being part of the change.