.jpg)
Planners Endorse Solar Array Site Warm Run Project Heads To Supervisors
The Warm Run solar project planned for a tract of land near the U.S. 11/Interstate 64 interchange, north of Lexington, will go before the Rockbridge County Board of Supervisors Oct. 28 after the Planning Commission, on a 3-2 vote, recommended its approval last Wednesday, Sept. 11.
The array of solar panels, planned for 34 acres of the 167-acre Huffman farm to the north of Interstate 64 and behind commercial development along U.S. 11, is to be “a quiet, passive neighbor to the adjacent landowners and it will maintain the character of the agtransitional district it’s sited at,” said Tyler Mc-Gilvary, associate project developer.
The 3-megawatts facility “is a small project. It’s the right size in the right place. It’s unequivocally safe. There’s no risk to the environment, persons or property.” It will generate “five times the tax revenue compared to the land’s current use as well as a one-time surge of near-term economic benefits totaling approximately $2 million during construction.”
The project, he continued, complies with the county’s Comprehensive Plan and “produces no emissions when generating electricity … The project parcel is in an assigned suburban service area, it sits cradled between three major highways, it’s proximate to large com mercial development such as [Magic City Ford], Walmart, Lowe’s and Spencer’s Home Center.”
Two members of the Planning Commission weren’t persuaded by McGilvary’s presentation.
“One of the big points I have is the ag transition and you kind of explained your point of view and I appreciate it,” said Robert Kramer. “But I go back to what I consider the ultimate discussion is – how does this support agriculture? … I just don’t see how this does anything to support agriculture in Rockbridge County. I look at it from the standpoint of the Comprehensive Plan. … We have a goal of making agriculture economically profitable. … This isn’t agriculture. This is solar.”
Adam Sandridge expressed skepticism about the pasture and other vegetation associated with the site being properly maintained so it could one day return to agricultural use, as proponents contend. He said he drives by the solar array on the Alexander farm in Fairfield every day. “There’s been no maintenance of it,” he said. “Weeds are essentially growing up all between those solar panels. I don’t think we’ve set up some kind of accountability if nothing happens. That’s my main concern.”
Chris Slaydon, the county’s director of community development, responded that improvements are being made to the grass and plantings of the Fairfield solar array. The site has been “permanently seeded” and landscaping has been done on the side of the project adjacent to U.S. 11. He said landscaping has been started also on the side next to Interstate 81.
Tom Beebe offered “another argument” to those concerned about taking farmland out of production. “This is a transitional zone, it’s on the 11 corridor, this is prime development land and at some point that land is going to be developed. It’s set off as a suburban service area, which is where we want growth. I mean, it’s painful, but that is a designated area for growth.” The Comprehensive Plan supports this, he said. “That’s where they want the growth to happen, to keep the personality of the county as it is. That’s where growth should happen.”
David Whitmore said he’d rather see a solar array in an ag-transitional district, rather than in A-1 (agricultural and limited uses) or A-2 (agricultural and general uses). The site selection and presentation for this project have been the best of any such solar array proposals that have been made since he’s been on the Planning Commission, he said.
“The two closest neighbors will have short-term impacts [during construction],” he said. “As the old saying goes, you can’t control everything unless you own it. I do believe in private property rights. This one could have been a whole lot worse. They could have put it 50 or 100 feet off the property line. I think the mitigation will work on this one. I think it’s compatible with the Comprehensive Plan, as written. It’s another piece of the puzzle to the clean energy puzzle.”
Tony Subrizi said the Commission needs to look at the “bigger picture” when it reviews the draft of a proposed solar ordinance. “I think we need to work really hard to get that right and do it soon.” He asked that the Commission review the proposed conditions for the Warm Run project that would be attached to the requested special exception permit.
The 14 proposed conditions include provisions for planting native species and pollinators, limiting grading to 35 percent of the panel zone (6.5 of 19.0 acres), limiting the height of the solar array at maximum tilt to 15 feet, specifying the composition of the array materials to conform with safe industry standards, having an acceptable decommissioning plan with an appropriate financial bond to assure its completion, restricting hours of construction and decommissioning activities to 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., Mondays through Saturdays, and setting a timetable for implementation and completion of the project.
Whitmore made a motion to recommend approval of the special exception permit, with the stated conditions. Subrizi seconded the motion, which was adopted on a 3-2 vote. Whitmore, Subrizi and Beebe voted in favor while Kramer and Sandridge voted in opposition.
A tentative date of Oct. 28 has been selected for the Board of Supervisors to consider the recommendation.
