Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Caledon Solar topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Caledon Solar developers present 22 MW plan emphasizing buffers, pollinators and decommissioning

6705193 · October 21, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Developers for the proposed Caledon Solar project described a 22-megawatt facility sited to minimize visibility and watershed impacts and committed to pollinator plantings, resource-protection replanting and a decommissioning bond; neighbors raised drainage concerns during public comment.

Tyler McGilvray of TerraForm Power presented details Oct. 21 about the Caledon Solar project, a proposed 22-megawatt AC solar facility sited on a larger private parcel on the north side of Caledon Road in King George County.

McGilvray said the project would occupy roughly 122 acres of a 1,431-acre parcel and produce about the equivalent of electricity for 3,500 homes. He told the board the developer plans no battery-storage component, will interconnect at the distribution level and will avoid new transmission infrastructure. "This is a small facility, but the benefits go far beyond the footprint," McGilvray said, adding the project would generate an estimated $11.3 million in economic benefits over the life of the project and more than $3 million in direct revenue to the county.

McGilvray emphasized environmental measures: the design includes a 100-foot vegetative buffer along the eastern boundary, maintenance of a wildlife corridor through the site, plantings aligned with the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) Pollinator Smart Program, and reestablishment of vegetation in internal resource-protection areas (RPAs). He said only about 2.5 acres of trees would be removed and that revegetation would create a net increase in vegetated acreage on the project footprint. "We're committed to reestablishing the resource protection areas internal to the site," McGilvray said.

On construction and operation, McGilvray described an 8–10 month construction window with most work limited to a concentrated period; he said long-term operation would be quiet, largely unstaffed and monitored remotely. He said the project would be decommissioned at end of life (expected ~40 years), with removal paid for by the project owner through an upfront decommissioning mechanism that will be reassessed every five years.

Board members asked specific questions about the decommissioning cost estimate, escalation and county review. Supervisor Collins asked about how the county would ensure the decommissioning fund grows with inflation; county staff responded that the decommissioning cost estimate is updated by a professional engineer every five years and that if the board did not accept an updated estimate the ordinance provides mechanisms to increase the bond amount.

Neighbors and supervisors asked about stormwater and watershed impacts. McGilvray and the developer’s engineers said the site is nearly flat, that the project’s drainage features (erosion-and-sediment controls and stormwater management facilities) are designed to prevent off-site sediment movement and would be subject to DEQ and county oversight. McGilvray said topography directs drainage away from Caledon State Park and that revegetation of RPAs would strengthen Chesapeake Bay watershed protections.

During the public comment period some residents expressed concern about downstream runoff and the potential for future different commercial uses on the rezoned land; the developer and county staff noted that the project connects at distribution voltage, will not include a substation on site and that no battery component is proposed. The board did not take a land-use vote on Caledon during the presentation; staff indicated future hearings and permitting steps would follow the procedural schedule.

Why this matters: the Caledon project is one of multiple energy proposals in the region that have raised public concern about viewsheds, noise, drainage and habitat. The developer’s commitments on buffers, pollinator habitat and a five-year decommissioning review are design elements the county will review as part of its special-exception and permitting process.

Quotation highlights: - "This is a passive, quiet, and unlit use with no dust, odor, or noise during operation," Tyler McGilvray said. - "We're committed to reestablishing the resource protection areas internal to the site," McGilvray added.

Next steps: staff will advance technical review, consider comments from nearby residents and stakeholders, and schedule any required public hearings under the county’s zoning ordinance.