Charlotte County holds joint hearing on 125‑MW Quarter Horse Solar permit amendment; public largely supportive
Loading...
Summary
At a July 18 joint public hearing, Charlotte County staff and Dominion presented a proposed amendment to the conditional use permit for Quarter Horse Solar, a 125‑megawatt facility on Devin Logging Company property near the Charlotte–Mecklenburg line. Public comment was mostly supportive citing jobs and local revenue, while some speakers urged performance‑based protections for battery storage, wildlife corridors, cemeteries, and panel disposal; no final action was taken.
A joint public hearing of the Charlotte County Board of Supervisors and the Charlotte County Planning Commission on July 18 reviewed an amendment to the conditional use permit for Quarter Horse Solar (formerly Moody Creek), a proposed 125‑megawatt utility‑scale solar facility on property owned by Devin Logging Company near the Charlotte–Mecklenburg line.
County staff opened the hearing and outlined the criteria for the 2232 comprehensive plan compliance review and options for action on the conditional use permit amendment. Staff reviewed a proposed revision to Condition #5 intended to clarify the permit process for adding battery energy storage to the project.
Meaghan O’Brien, a representative for Dominion, presented the company’s amendment package and addressed items the county had asked be covered, including the permit expiration date, wildlife corridors and setbacks, protection of cemeteries, stream crossings and entrances, stormwater management, and the project’s potential economic benefits to Charlotte County.
During the public comment period, most speakers expressed support. Noah Toombs (Red Oak) and Lane Gunn (Wylliesburg) said the project would provide jobs and financial incentives that help keep young people in the county. Several other supporters—including speakers recorded as Cullen, Curtis Morton, and written commenters Tune and Linda Devin, Robert “Robbie” Tate, and Jennifer Lacks—pointed to local business opportunities and county revenue. Cesar Navarro, identified as a project manager for Kiewit, said improved technology reduces land use and that local construction work creates jobs.
Not all comments were positive. Daniel Dixon (Madisonville) supported the project in principle but asked the county to add performance‑based conditions to protect residents and agricultural and rural land. A speaker recorded as Saxe opposed the project, citing distrust about Dominion’s handling of panel disposal and arguing that solar could become obsolete, concerns the transcript does not show Dominion addressing during the excerpt.
Planning Commission member Belinda Strom asked whether Condition #7 could be amended to incorporate guidance from the Department of Wildlife Resources on fence heights; Vice‑Chairman James Benn advised that any amendment be handled procedurally during motion and discussion. The hearing record shows no final vote or formal action on the conditional use permit amendment before the Board and the Commission adjourned and reconvened their regular meetings.
The project is described in the record as sited on Tax Parcels #81‑A‑14 thru 20, 87A‑1, and 87‑A‑14 along Route 47 (Crafton’s Gate Highway). The county’s staff review, the Dominion presentation and the stream of public comments will inform the next steps in the county’s 2232 compliance review and the conditional use permit process.