Charlotte planners endorse 240-megawatt Tall Pines solar


The Charlotte County Planning Commission voted last week to green-light a 240 megawatt utility-scale solar facility spread across 2,083 acres of land near the town of Cullen.

The project, known as Tall Pines, will now go to the Charlotte County Board of Supervisors for a vote on final approval.

Voting to recommend the solar project with conditions at their meeting on May 24 were Planning Commission Chair Andrew Carwile, Kenny Howard, Cornell Goldman, W.V. Nichols, Eugene Wells, Jr., Jim Benn, and Patrick Andrews. Miller Adams, Clark Poindexter and David Watkins opposed the project.

Commissioner Kewin Kunath was not present at the meeting.

Without a special called meeting, the earliest date that Charlotte County supervisors can consider the Tall Pines conditional use permit application is June 13. That is not likely to happen as the agenda for that meeting already includes three public hearings — on a draft plan for solid waste management, a solar revenue-sharing ordinance, and a taxation proposal on small-scale solar projects.

If approved by supervisors, Tall Pines will be developed on two distinct areas. The first, referred to as the “northern cluster,” is located off Bethlehem Road. The second larger “southern cluster” area is located on the southwest side of Welsh Tract Road, extending to the south side of Reynolds Lane with frontage along Fox Hollow Lane. The total fenced area of the project would be 1,373 acres, or 65.8% of the total site area.

The solar generation facility will connect to the power grid using the existing 115 kV Twittys Creek Substation.

Ahead of the vote, commission chair Carwile and commissioner Andrews both made statements about potential conflicts of interest. Andrews said he works for Dominion Energy but has no affiliation with the proposed Tall Pines Project. Carwile said he consulted with various legal sources who advised him that he was free to vote on the Tall Pines Project since he had no personal interest in Tall Pines and no business involvement with the company looking to develop the property, nor with Dominion Energy, the utility that is likely to eventually own or operate Tall Pines Solar.

Carwile said he has an interest in a company that owns land under an option for development as a solar facility, but the option is not for Tall Pines.

Lucy Edwards, a clean energy specialist with The Berkley Group — the consultants hired by Charlotte County to perform the staff evaluation for potential solar developments — said they recommended the county approve the request for a conditional use permit sought by Michigan-based NOVI Energy, with conditions.

The Berkley Group made the recommendation despite the fact the proposed use exceeds the maximum density allowed under existing ccounty zoning.

Edwards said the 45 recommended conditions are similar to those imposed on other solar projects previously approved by Charlotte County. Before the vote, Benn added a 46th condition — that the project be managed by a third-party independent construction manager.

The conditions include limits on the number of fenced acres, 1,373, and would prohibit the installation of a battery energy storage area at the site without additional approval of the county. Any ownership changes, or power purchase agreement entered into by NOVI must be shared with the county within a set period of time.

Wildlife crossing will have to be developed in coordination with the Virginia Wildlife Resources Commission and added screenings around the project site must be at least 6 feet tall.

The staff report submitted by The Berkley Group found that Tall Pines as proposed includes setbacks, buffers and other landscaping and site maintenance procedures that “adequately mitigate potential impacts on surrounding properties and public facility, services, and infrastructure.” Staff also concluded that the project “is not inherently incompatible with existing, planned, or proposed uses in the neighborhood, and adjacent parcels, because of its location and design.”

Edwards said the reviewers with the Berkley Group questioned whether “limiting the use of a sizeable area of the county [over 2,000 acres] for upwards of 35 years was in the best long-term interests of the County.” They also expressed concern that the application filed by NOVI “does not address the duration, phasing, and management of development activity.” Edwards suggested this issue could be mitigated by requiring the submission of a construction management plan.

Edwards said her office believes the Tall Pines Solar development will result in some short-term benefits to the local economy, along with tax revenues, but over time will neither contribute to nor be detrimental to the welfare of the public, and noted that solar projects create “very few, if any, long term jobs.”

The primary benefit is during active construction, though most project developers bring in outside labor.

Speaking after the vote, PK Pettus of Keysville again asked commissioners to pause any future requests for solar development in Charlotte County until a stakeholder group that is developing a regulatory framework for solar in Virginia issues its recommendations.

“Surely it would be wise for Charlotte County to wait for this stakeholders group … to issue its report before going forward with additional solar approvals,” Pettus said.

She spoke about a recent conference she attended at which Lee Daniels, a professor of environmental soil science at Virginia Tech, described the impact of solar fields on farmland. She said Daniels explained that soil compaction during construction is inevitable and can be difficult to remediate once the site is operational. He also said that establishing and maintaining vegetation under certain panel arrays poses another set of challenges.

According to Pettus, Daniels says that when a solar installation is removed, returning that land to farmland will be “very difficult” because so much topsoil has been scraped away. Reclaiming the land for farming will be costly, take time and require special equipment.

Removal of the infrastructure — solar panels, racking system and other elements of the array – will result in another round of soil disturbance and more compaction. The result being that the ability to return the land to its pre-solar use will be difficult if not impossible, Pettus said.

She asked planning commission members to consider what will happen to thousands of Charlotte County acres that will be severely compacted by solar. She also wondered if landowners who are so willing to jump on the solar bandwagon understand that they will be left with disturbed soil at the end of the project life.

“It may not matter to them because of the significant income, but severe compaction has an impact downstream on natural resources and other landowners,” Pettus said.

She suggested the county consider a provision that imposes the financial responsibility for repairing the “wounded land” on the developer or subsequent owner as part of the decommissioning costs. Alternatively, she asked if “some income from the county siting agreement could be set aside to cover the future cost of land reclamation.”

The Concerned Virginia Initiative has identified acreage across the Commonwealth that natural resources officers classify as “high priority conservation land,” Pettus said, adding that Charlotte County’s Roanoke Creek and Staunton River corridors are among those lands — yet a portion of them will be impacted with solar arrays totaling 1,200 megawatts.

“Who will evaluate the combined impact of all these projects on soils, water quality, wetlands and wildlife habitats,” Pettus asked as she implored commission members to “wait to hear from the 206 committee before approving additional solar projects.

(Editor’s note: this story has been corrected from the original to reflect the votes by David Watkins and Patrick Andrews on the Tall Pines Solar permit application. Watkins voted against approval and Andrews voted in favor.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *