Residents press supervisors to reject proposed Shiloh industrial solar project, raise environmental and zoning concerns

Dozens of public commenters urged the King George County Board of Supervisors to reject a proposed industrial‑scale solar project sited in the Shiloh District, saying the proposal conflicts with the county’s long‑range plan and agricultural zoning and raising environmental and procedural concerns.

Speakers at the public comment period included landowners who said the applicant’s public presentations downplayed the project’s scale and its likely land‑clearing, topsoil disturbance and long‑term impacts on wells, streams and property values. Several speakers named the applicant and project variants — Gibson Solar, Open Roads Renewables and Green Energy Ventures — and said map materials, environmental statements and company testimony to the county had been inconsistent.

Larry Buckner Jr., a Shiloh landowner, told the board the project is not a farm and said he feared long‑term leaching of contaminants and catastrophic risks from fire. Mark Morgan said the company had called portions of the plan “agrisolar” and touted no topsoil disturbance, while the written plan references removing and replacing topsoil; he said only about 10 of nearly 40 parcels involved are owned by county residents. Several speakers said they were not contacted directly by the applicant and that flyers, door‑to‑door outreach or mailed notices were insufficient.

Board members and staff discussed technical details raised at previous meetings: permitted building heights, whether the applicant had increased proposed heights and setback adjustments, and whether planning commission findings had accurately reflected the company’s statements. Supervisor reports noted the county must ensure consistency with the comprehensive plan and current zoning; Fauquier County was cited as an example where a similar application was unanimously rejected because it did not meet agricultural zoning.

Supervisor Kathy Bender and others said they plan to start the county’s comprehensive plan review; supervisors also reported they have met with Green Energy Ventures and that staff and board members are collecting technical information, including aerial imagery from drone flights, to better understand tree‑clearing and visual impacts.

No formal board decision on the Shiloh project was taken at the meeting; public comment record and planning commission materials will remain part of the file if and when the matter returns to a future public hearing or vote.