Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solar Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents in Banister/Shawko area urge supervisors to reject nearby solar project
Summary
Dozens of residents from the Banister/Shawko/Charcoal area told the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors on Jan. 21 they oppose a proposed solar farm, citing property-value, health and environmental concerns and uncertainty about tax revenues.
Residents from the Banister and Shawko area told the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors on Jan. 21 that they oppose a proposed nearby solar farm and are asking supervisors to reject any extension or approval for the project.
At the hearing of citizens, speakers described potential impacts they say would follow if arrays are sited next to homes. Comments included worries about decreased property values, long-term environmental impacts of panel degradation, traffic and landscaping concerns, and skepticism about projected tax revenues.
Kathy B. Ramsey, speaking for the Charcoal community, listed discussion topics from a Jan. 16 community meeting: “project pros and cons, tax benefits, future health challenges of both humans and wildlife, property value, environmental long-term conditions, solar panels after their lifespan and landscaping traffic concerns.” Ramsey told the board that landowners next to the proposed solar site are asking supervisors to vote against development in that part of the Banister District.
Michelle Motley Wilson, a landowner in the Banister District, told the board about about 80–85 homes she said would be directly affected by the project. Wilson said she had researched the developer named in public comment materials, referenced a past corporate legal issue and questioned whether the county would receive the tax revenue that had been promised to the community.
Adela Lanier, Jimmy Lee and Patricia Fitzgerald Jones also addressed supervisors, emphasizing that many residents live within sight of the proposed arrays and asking that the county consider locating large energy projects farther from populated stretches of road and clusters of houses.
Speakers raised several technical and financial claims that members of the public said they had researched, including a change in projected cost per megawatt since the project’s earlier proposal. Those statements were offered during public comment and not verified by county staff during the meeting.
Board members acknowledged the comments and noted that land-use authority and formal permitting processes are governed by the county’s zoning rules and state regulations. Supervisors did not take a formal vote on the solar project at the meeting; speakers’ remarks were part of the hearing of the citizens and public-comment record.
Speakers and county materials referenced the developer Hanwha Energy in public remarks; county staff did not offer an independent factual update on the developer’s corporate history or on projected county tax revenue for the project during the Jan. 21 meeting.
The board packet and planning staff can be consulted for filings, permit applications and any pending zoning cases related to utility-scale solar in Pittsylvania County.
