Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Solar topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board Denies Extension for Powell Creek Solar; Developer Said Landowner Signature and Rollback Taxes Remain
Summary
Prince George County supervisors denied a developer's request to extend the time to begin construction on the Powell Creek solar project. The applicant said a landowner signature and payment of rollback taxes remained outstanding.
The Prince George County Board of Supervisors voted on May 27 to deny a developer’s request to extend the deadline to begin construction on the Powell Creek solar energy facility special exception.
Why it matters: The special‑exception approval contained a condition requiring construction to begin within a fixed period; denial of the extension means the special exception will expire on the original deadline unless the developer petitions the board again.
Details of the request and denial: The Powell Creek project was originally approved on July 12, 2022, with a condition that construction begin within 36 months. The developer requested an extension, citing pending landowner signatures, payment of rollback taxes, and final approvals related to erosion and sediment control and decommissioning bonds.
Joel Malafide, representing the developer, told the board the company was “requesting an extension…in case there are any delays in that process for review of the decommissioning bond, paying the rollback taxes, or things that we cannot predict between now and July 12.”
Motion and vote: Supervisor Cox moved to deny the extension; Supervisor Pugh seconded. The board’s roll call recorded votes of yes from Webb, Pugh, Cox, Womack and Brown; the motion carried and the request was denied.
Public comment and context: Several residents who addressed the board earlier during public comment urged denial. Speakers noted the special exception was approved in 2022, that construction had not begun and that the applicant had publicly announced other acquisitions while permitting had not proceeded. Residents argued that after more than three years, the county should not extend the deadline.
Next steps and implications: Denial of the extension will cause the special exception to lapse on the original expiration date unless the developer submits a new request. County staff noted that if the developer obtains the landowner signatures and satisfies outstanding requirements, the company may seek to return to the board but would need to follow applicable procedures.
Ending: The board’s denial closes the current administrative path for the Powell Creek extension; the developer may pursue administrative remedies or resubmit if circumstances change.
