Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Conway Solar topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission recommends Conway Solar project is substantially in accord with Comprehensive Plan despite density concerns
Summary
By a 7–3 roll call, the Planning Commission found Dominion Energy’s proposed Conway Solar 6‑MW project substantially in accord with the county Comprehensive Plan, citing limited incremental density impact, avoidance of cultural resources, and interconnection to a distribution circuit; three commissioners voted no, citing density and timing concerns.
The Charlotte County Planning Commission on Jan. 15 recommended that the Conway Solar 6‑megawatt photovoltaic facility (Dominion Energy) is substantially in accord with the Charlotte County Comprehensive Plan, though several commissioners voiced concerns about solar density in parts of the county.
Commissioner Kerwin Kunath recused himself from Conway Solar review after disclosing a personal interest: he is an owner of LEK Rentals LLC, which owns parcels included in the project; he left the dais and sat with the public during discussion. Kate Jones of the Berkley Group, the county’s third‑party reviewer, presented the Conway Solar analysis and recommended the project be found substantially in accord with the Comprehensive Plan.
Commissioners questioned at what point cumulative solar density becomes problematic; Jones said density policy is a matter for the Commission and Board to resolve and noted conditional‑use review can supply flexibility and mitigation. Commissioner Belinda Strom asked about community benefits; Dominion Energy project manager Morgan Vickery said local tax revenue could support community needs and that Dominion submitted a letter of intent regarding a siting agreement. Vickery said the project would interconnect to an existing distribution circuit adjacent to Route 59 rather than requiring transmission upgrades.
Commissioner Eugene Wells moved that the Planning Commission find the project substantially in accord with the Comprehensive Plan, listing reasons including the project’s relatively small fenced footprint, its peripheral location relative to the five‑mile density radius, lack of identified cultural resources within a 0.5‑mile buffer, proposed setbacks and buffering to minimize impacts, interconnection to distribution circuits, and anticipated tax revenue without new public‑service demand. Curtis Morton seconded the motion. On roll call the motion passed 7–3. Yes: Eugene Wells, Curtis Morton, Brian Poindexter, Patrick Andrews, Andrew Carwile, David Evans and Chairman Jim Benn. No: David Watkins, Belinda Strom and Tina Morgan.
Commissioner Watkins restated his concern about cumulative density; Commissioner Strom said density and the sequence of project build‑out merited additional caution. The Commission’s recommendation will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors as part of the Conway Solar conditional‑use review process.
