HANEY (file)
INVERNESS SITE APPEAL IS THURSDAY
One of Nottoway County’s fiercest opponents of industrial solar sites — or “solar farms” — says he fears upcoming applications for such facilities are going to divide the Nottoway County community.
“What I’m seeing right now is what I thought I was going to see,” District One Supervisor Dicky Ingram said Thursday night: “Neighbors against neighbors, and family members against family members.”
Ingram made his comments near the end of the Board’s monthly worksession — the first hour of which was spent discussing an appeal by Shawn & Katherine Haney of Inverness Road, Burkeville.
Ingram this week said his remarks Thursday about the potential for division and hard feelings weren’t focused on the Haneys’ application. He said he was referring to an anticipated solar proposal that has grown in size — up to 400 acres under panel — along Rocky Ford, Lone Pine, Robertsons Siding, and Mallory Hill Roads. Ingram said the “Rocky Ford” application has become so large, County Planner Gregg Zody has had to send letters to 240 property owners adjoining the proposed solar site.
Ingram last Thursday also mentioned a recently-approved 7,500-acre solar farm in northern Brunswick County, where 2,500 acres are slated to be under panel. Ingram said nearly two dozen residents have joined forces and are suing the Brunswick County Board of Supervisors for approving that project. The Inverness Road Appeal
The Haneys own 316 acres at their historic Inverness Farm.
They’re proposing a 40-acre solar site, which would include 20 acres under panel. The proposed site would occupy about 13% of the Haneys’ farm.
The request was unanimously rejected by the Planning Commission, and the Haneys are appealing to the Board of Supervisors. A public hearing is scheduled for tomorrow night (Thursday) at 7:00 p.m. in the General District Courtroom.
The Haneys are asking the Board to reduce the setback requirement from 300 ft. to 150 ft. from the property line along Inverness Road. The County’s ordinance requires specific minimum setbacks but also includes language giving Supervisors flexibility to make adjustments on a case-by-case basis.
The Haneys also are seeking to reduce the County’s stated 1,200 feet from non-family inhabited dwellings to 375 feet.
Consistency Urged County resident Rose Wootton urged Supervisors to stick with their required setbacks. She said that if officials relax setbacks for some and not others, they could be accused of favoritism. The Haneys’ proposed “small community solar project” would produce up to five megawatts of power and provide the County an estimated $10,000 per year in tax revenue. Haney said he realizes his planned project alone won’t solve the County’s financial challenges, but he said that if the County were to reach its stated cap of 1,700 acres countywide under panel, that could mean about $17 million over the next 40 years.
Baby Steps “We’re stepping into solar,” said Board Chairman Bill Collins. “We’re limiting ourselves in the beginning, and if everything goes fine, then maybe larger.” Haney said his project won’t include a battery storage facility and that his site will run power lines underground to a nearby Dominion Energy substation. Haney also said that due to vegetation and rolling contour of his property, “You’re not gonna see any of this.” Haney added, “In a perfect world, everyone would prefer that we find a revenue source that did not involve any of this. But it’s very difficult to generate revenue on 300 acres of land. And stewardship of a 300-acre historic property is expensive, and gets more expensive all the time — not just because of the tax burden. Everything on this is a little bit more expensive than it might be 10 miles away from us.” Haney told Supervisors he doesn’t want to re-litigate the County’s past debates on solar, but “there are plenty of folks not
really against solar, but would like for it to not be here.
“And there are plenty of people that are not really in favor of solar, but say, ‘Property rights — it’s your land. You do what you want.’’
“And then there are folks that are understanding and have said some positive things, but in the grand scheme of things, if everybody here was tied and the vote went to a neighbor on this road, they’re going to probably say, ‘I’d rather you not do it there.’”
Stewardship Haney added, “But I think
we have tried to foresee as many the obstacles as we can and alleviate them…We’re not trying to hide anything from anyone.”
Haney said his project is using new technology that can produce more megawatts with fewer acres of panels. And the panels proposed for his property won’t include cadmium, a toxic metal denounced by some solar opponents.
Supervisor John Roark commended Haney’s approach and asked that if panels are damaged, can they be replaced and “re-powered” with more effective panels? Haney said yes and also indicated he plans to sell the project to Dominion Energy.
If Haney’s project is approved, any restrictions in the conditional use permit would carryover to future owners.
Supervisor Ingram said there are still concerns about potential erosion run-off into Mallory Creek.
Haney emphasized that his proposed project won’t require land clearing. “We’re just sticking holes in the ground” for panels.
Supervisor Daphne Norton said she appreciates the Haneys’ “due diligence.”
Haney said he realizes solar is a hot button issue. “No matter how much we’ve tried, there will be people who drive through there and hate it and cuss us.”
Loading Comments