Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves 3 MW Brook Neal Highway solar permit with mitigation and buffers
Summary
Dominion Energy offered revised conditions for a proposed 3 MW solar project on Brook Neal Highway — a 13.4‑acre cap, 6‑ft security fence, 20‑ft buffer, an updated decommissioning schedule and a $120,000 cash payment schedule including $20,000 to the Gladys Fire Department — and the board approved the special‑use permit with conditions.
Dominion Energy representatives presented revisions to conditions for a previously heard special‑use permit application for a solar facility on the Brook Neal Highway (Route 501) and the board considered the proffered changes before voting.
"We've limited this also to a project shall be only 3 megawatts," Dominion's George Jamerson told the board and described other proffered conditions, including a 6‑foot security fence, a 20‑foot buffer along Route 501 and a project area limited to 13.4 acres. He also described a revised decommissioning plan that will require updated estimated decommissioning costs at least every five to ten years and stated that those estimates shall not include salvage‑value credits.
Jamerson read the applicant's new cash payment schedule totaling $120,000: $60,000 due within 30 days of issuance of the permit, $20,000 to the Gladys Fire Department, $30,000 due at issuance of an erosion and sediment control permit, and $30,000 due 90 days after commercial operation commences.
Board members asked about battery storage and future flexibility for siting the array; Dominion's Austin Jones said, "Batteries are not contemplated for this project." Dominion representatives explained the cap and site‑flexibility language is intended to allow design adjustments during site investigations but not to expand the project beyond the 13.4‑acre limit without further approvals.
The board voted to approve the special‑use permit with the conditions described in the packet. The transcript records at least one board member voting "no" while the majority voted to adopt the permit conditions and approve the project.
