Fluvanna planners discuss transmission-corridor addendum tied to ValleyLink application; undergrounding prioritized by some
Loading...
Summary
Commissioners reviewed a time-sensitive comprehensive-plan addendum prompted by the proposed ValleyLink transmission line, debated whether to limit policy language to existing transmission corridors, and heard recommendations to prioritize undergrounding and protect scenic entrance corridors and historically overburdened neighborhoods.
Planning staff presented a three-and-a-half-page addendum to Fluvanna County’s comprehensive plan at the April 7 work session, saying the change is time-sensitive because ValleyLink representatives could submit a state application as early as September.
"We feel like we need to get this added to the current comprehensive plan ASAP," Mr. Porschick said, explaining the addendum outlines infrastructure and corridor policy intended to guide county review and comments to state or federal permitting bodies.
Commissioners debated scope and wording. One member argued the county should prioritize colocation in existing transmission corridors rather than opening rights-of-way across additional properties; another said limiting the policy to existing transmission corridors may invite disputes about enlarging easements or consolidating multiple easements in the same corridor.
Environmental-justice concerns surfaced as commissioners warned the county should not make already-overburdened areas automatic targets for infrastructure. "I don't want to see all of the areas where predominant African Americans are being used for stuff like this," a commissioner said, stressing the need to avoid repeating historic patterns of unequal siting.
On undergrounding, a commissioner proposed adding explicit language that "Fluvanna County prioritizes siting of underground transmission lines over overhead lines." Staff cautioned that the State Corporation Commission and federal agencies retain permitting authority and the county cannot unilaterally prohibit overhead alternatives, but commissioners said aspirational language could signal county priorities in comment letters and local reviews.
Commissioners requested staff produce maps showing existing transmission mileage and easements, suggested the commission spend a May meeting working through language, and outlined a schedule: additional discussion in May, a planning-commission public hearing in June, and a Board of Supervisors hearing in July if needed to meet time-sensitive needs.
Next steps: staff will prepare maps of existing transmission lines, draft narrowed language to avoid unintentionally creating siting "targets," and supply a revised addendum for the May work session so the commission can set a public-hearing timeline.
