Where Utility-Scale Solar Is Already Banned And Where It's Headed Next
- Craig Kaiser
- Jul 24
- 5 min read
Solar development used to face a fairly predictable set of hurdles: interconnection queues, permitting timelines, land control. Increasingly, developers are running into a hurdle that shows up earlier and kills projects faster - a county that has simply voted to prohibit utility-scale solar outright.
These bans aren't isolated. They're accumulating county by county, often faster than developers' own pipeline tracking can keep up with, and they don't always show up until a project is already deep into site control or interconnection study. By then, the sunk cost also includes the months of exclusivity that could have gone toward a parcel that was actually developable.
LandGate's new solar ordinance layer was built for exactly this blind spot. It breaks local restrictions into seven trackable categories - density, height, moratorium, noise, setback, utility-scale ban, and project size - so developers can screen ordinance risk with the same rigor they already apply to interconnection capacity or land price. Before getting into how to use it, it's worth looking at where the ban trend actually stands right now, because it's moving fast and it isn't moving the same direction everywhere.
Where Utility-Scale Solar is Banned & States With Strong Solar Restrictions
Local government opposition to renewable infrastructure has shifted from isolated zoning hearings to systematic, region-wide restrictions. Here is how four key markets illustrate where utility-scale solar is blocked, constrained, or facing rapid statutory shifts.
Ohio: The Clearest Ban Trend in the Country
Following the passage of Senate Bill 52 (SB 52), Ohio granted county commissioners direct authority to establish blanket "restricted areas" or exclusion zones that prohibit large-scale solar facilities (50 MW or greater) across entire townships or counties.
The Impact: Dozens of Ohio counties have passed broad restrictions, while others face voter referendums that freeze project timelines indefinitely. Developers who evaluate land based solely on transmission lines run the risk of optioning land inside an active exclusion zone.
Virginia: Historical Caps and Evolving Standards
Until recent legislative siting reforms designed to establish baseline statewide rules, over 60% of Virginia’s counties either restricted large-scale solar on agricultural land or imposed strict local caps. Starting July 1, 2026, new legislation requires localities to write zoning provisions on setbacks, screening, fencing, panel height, and other siting criteria that are no more or less stringent than the new statewide standards, unless the applicant agrees otherwise. It's a direct response to the fact that, going into this year, nearly two-thirds of Virginia's counties outright banned or severely restricted large solar farms.
The Impact: Countless Virginia municipalities imposed restrictive local measures, ranging from 30-acre to 500-acre project limits, mandatory 200-foot property buffers, and local moratoriums. Even as state-level policies attempt to standardize siting rules, local special use permits and municipal land-use agreements remain major hurdles for project approval.
Indiana: Moratoriums as the Holding Pattern
Indiana's restriction trend looks different from Ohio's outright bans. It's running mostly through moratoriums and acreage caps, which function as bans in practice while development standards get rewritten. While state standards exist under Indiana's Solar Energy Ready Community framework, local enforcement varies wildly.
The Impact: Dozens of counties enforce strict panel height maximums (some capped as low as 12 to 15 feet) or rigid setbacks from non-participating property lines. Furthermore, many rural counties maintain "silent" ordinances - zoning codes that do not explicitly mention commercial solar. Under Indiana's permissive zoning framework, a silent code effectively acts as a total ban, requiring lengthier, high-risk rezoning approvals.
Illinois: Statewide Preemption vs. Local Pushback
Illinois presents a unique "preemption" dynamic. To hit aggressive clean energy targets, the state passed legislation (such as HB 4412 / PA 102-1123) that limits counties from outright banning utility-scale solar or setting standards stricter than state guidelines.
The Impact: While state preemption prevents local moratoriums on paper, local resistance has evolved. Counties and local opposition groups actively challenge procedural deadlines, push for maximum allowable setback distances, strictly enforce vegetative screening rules, or push new legislative attempts to restore local control. Navigating the gap between state law and aggressive local enforcement requires granular zoning data.
Screen Solar Siting Risk Early With LandGate’s Solar Ordinances Layer
To prevent developers from wasting capital on non-viable land, LandGate has launched a comprehensive Solar Ordinances Data Layer integrated directly into our platform. Instead of conducting manual desktop reviews or digging through hundreds of county municipal codes, developers can now instantly view and filter nationwide regulatory boundaries directly over their target parcel maps.
LandGate Map Layer | Overview |
Utility-Scale Ban | Jurisdictions where large-scale solar projects are explicitly prohibited |
Moratorium | Active, temporary freezes in solar project development- important for before option capital is committed |
Setbacks | Distance requirements from property lines or dwellings that shrink usable acreage on smaller or irregularly shaped parcels |
Project Size | Acreage or MW caps that can force a project below viable scale |
Density | Limits on how much of a parcel or township can be developed, independent of any single project's footprint |
Noise | Limits on inverter and transformer noise, less commonly modeled than setback or height but increasingly relevant as BESS gets paired with solar closer to residential zones |
Height | Caps that can rule out certain tracker or mounting configurations |
By combining local regulatory data with LandGate’s parcel buildable exclusion tools, prime farmland screening, and grid infrastructure mapping, your team can filter out non-starter acreage in seconds.
Screened individually, a parcel might clear five of the seven and still be a poor fit - a site under the acreage cap but inside a moratorium window offers no real advantage over one that's outright banned, since neither can move forward on the developer's timeline.
Screening Before You Option
The practical takeaway across all three states is the same: ordinance risk is granular, changes fast, and doesn't track cleanly to county lines the way most site selection workflows assume. A township-level exclusion in Ohio, a case-by-case denial risk in Virginia, or a moratorium expiration date in Indiana all require different data - not just a single "restricted / not restricted" flag.
That's the gap LandGate's solar ordinance layer is built to close alongside its broader solar intelligence layers - including proposed and denied solar project maps to see how nearby projects have actually fared, interconnection queue and ATC data to confirm a technically viable site is worth the ordinance risk, and automatically generated environmental reports that pull siting constraints into a single deliverable during diligence.
For developers building a pipeline across multiple states, checking ordinance status parcel-by-parcel before signing an option is the difference between a diligence cost and a dead project.
