This online news website is owned and operated by Becky Watts. If you enjoy reading Pike County Times, consider buying an advertisement for your business or sending a donation to support the only free online newspaper in Pike County. Donations can be sent to: The Pike County Times, PO Box 843, Zebulon, Georgia 30295. Click here to donate through PayPal. Thanks for supporting Pike County's only free online newspaper!
By Editor Becky Watts
ZEBULON - Whenever Pike County Times begins to write on a topic, the first question that is normally addressed is, “Where did this begin?” For Pike County Times, the beginning of the Madden Solar Project was in early 2017 when there were public hearings and the approval of the first property.
Various other questions were also researched including conditions and restrictions on the first property since those conditions and restrictions were agreed upon with the expansion proposal. The expansion would go from 700 acres that have already been approved to 935 acres with the additional parcel. Many of the same concerns were voiced and addressed in meetings that took place in the months prior to the approval with conditions in the March 8, 2017 meeting.
Pike County Times will walk through this project from the beginning with the Planning Commission Report and County Commission approval from 2017 to the recent denial of the project expansion and continue with the request for modification to answer the question of, “Where do we go from here?”
Planning Commission Report from February 9, 2017
The Madden Solar Project came before the Planning Commission for the first time in February of 2017. It had to go before the Environmental Review Board as well as the Planning Commission before it came to commissioners for a vote. The applicant at that time was the same as now with Ryan Gilchrist seeking the application for the Madden Solar Center, LLC with USC Timber Holdings, LLC owning the property located at Ga. Hwy. 18 West / Nixon Road / North Madden Bridge Road.
David Allen was the Planning and Zoning Director at that time. The project was projected to have “a peak power output of 74.9 megawatts and consist of approximately 304,000 solar panels.” According to the Planning Commission report from February 9, 2017, the main environmental concern was Elkins Creek and any associated streams and wetlands. The Environmental Review Committee was asked to review Section 154.04 (E) and issue a report on this project that considered several questions. First, “Will the proposed use create excessive noise, dust, odor, smoke, vibration, or similar objectionable or unhealthful pollution to a degree that is detrimental to the quality of life or to a degree which is harmful to life, well-being or property values?” The committee determined that some dust could be generated during construction, but overall, the solar farm would have to abide by its approved erosion and sediment control plan with regard to dust, silt, and runoff. There would be no smoke, odors, or vibrations that would be experienced on adjacent properties. It was also determined that the inverters, which control the movement of the solar panels, are the only noise-making devices on the solar farm. “Staff and other County officials have visited several solar farms in Georgia in the past, and have reported that the inverter noise can best be described as similar to the “hum” made by an indoor air conditioner unit. Per the applicant, the inverters produce 50 db worth of noise at 100 feet, and noise reduction occurs at 6 db per double the distance. Thus, at 200 feet away, it would be 44db of noise; at 400 feet away, it would be 38 db away and so on.” It was noted that there is truck noise on the highway as well. The Pike County Solar Farm Ordinance has minimum setbacks from property lines and residences to help control the noise, and the farm would be silent at night. The panels at that time were to be about 12 feet tall. There would be no pollution though minor factors to consider would be iron on the base of the panels at the time of construction and the chance of a panel shattering. Periodic mowing would be used to curb vegetation, and there would be no use of chemical herbicides.
The second question was as follows: Are modifications or controls feasible which would eliminate or reduce damage or danger to affected persons or properties, water quality or quantity, the ground water supply, flood protection, water protection, soil erosion protection, air quality, noise pollution or other undesirable effects on the environment? Are these damages or dangers too great for adequate control?
It was noted that there are minimum setbacks to control most of this. However the property was noted to be partially within an S-3 Sensitive Land Groundwater Recharge Area Protection District so the site plan requirements for this Groundwater Recharge Protection District would require erosion and sediment control plans to protect Elkins Creek. It was also noted that there are federal and state setbacks that must be followed to protect the wetlands.
The third question was as follows: “Are public services available to support the project without major expenditures of public funds, thereby degrading other portions of the environment?” No public funds were anticipated for the project.
The fourth question was: “Will any natural resource, such as timber land, farm land, water supply, water tables or other resources be reduced or removed from production of from the resource bank to a degree that the public interest in such resource(s) is damaged greater than the economic and social benefits of the project?” It was noted that clearing of trees and grading of the area for the solar panels and structures would be needed though the area had been timbered about two years ago already. Buffers around streams will preserve trees and vegetation near stream banks, and the southern portion of the property would remain wooded. It was also noted that water usage would be minimal and that the county would receive “significant tax revenue” from the solar farm.
The Staff recommended the allowance of the operation of the solar farm with undisturbed buffers on all streams and wetlands. Click here to read this original document.
Pike County Commission Meeting - March 8, 2017
The Madden Solar Project then came before the Board of Commissioners on March 8, 2017. These are the notes from Pike County Times on that meeting.
“Public hearing at the last meeting. Reread all of the conditions from the Environmental Board Review and the Board of Appeals. The wording has been reviewed by our attorneys and Ryan Gilchrist as well.
Does the BOC want to review the landscape plan or is it ok for David Allen to review it? They would like see it and approve it.
No unlawful encroachment on wetlands: Ok with ok from the Army Corps of Engineers.
Bond amount was in question. $5,000 per acre will be required.
Access to the substation from North Madden Road will be only for maintenance and they will improve the gravel road up to that point.
Final site plan will have a 200 foot setback.
Approval not transferable: They gave a transfer based on large company and dollar amount as stated in the past meeting.
Motion to approve based on information gathered with conditions. Tim Guy, Tommy Powers.
Discussion: Thought it would be great for the county and the schools for not impacting them or county roads, and it will bring in tax dollars for the county. Approved 4-1. Jenkins opposed.”
The March 8, 2017 meeting brought approval for the project with conditions:
From the Environmental Review Committee report:
1. Minimum 100 foot buffer from stream banks.
2. Minimum 50 foot buffer from property lines and road frontage, and minimum 200 foot setback from Hwy 18 and North Madden Bridge Road for solar panels.
3. Evergreen buffer along Hwy 18 as a visual screen. Where possible, retain existing vegetation along Hwy 18.
4. No use of herbicides for vegetation control.
5. Strong erosion and sediment control plan is required, with regular inspections to protect Elkins Creek.
Revised Recommendations 3.8.17. Approval with the following conditions:
1. Any specified perimeter buffers on the property shall be honored and maintained. Board of Commissioners’ approval for the landscape plan is required for the planted buffer along Hwy 18, and the location and extent will need to be field located.
2. There shall be no unlawful encroachment into any specified state waters buffers or wetlands.
3. Any land disturbance greater than 1 acre shall require approved erosion/sediment control plans and a land disturbance permit.
4. An annual business license shall be required.
5. The proposal shall conform to any solar farm standards set forth in the Pike County Code, Chapter 166, except as may be otherwise conditioned. The bond amount specified in Section 166.06 shall be adhered to.
6. A formal study of wetlands and sensitive areas on the property needs to be completed prior to construction.
7. Herbicides shall not be used for vegetation control and maintenance.
8. Access to the solar farm via Nixon Road is prohibited. Access to the solar farm via North Madden Bridge Road shall be limited for the purpose of maintenance to the southwest substation area, and contingent upon the developer improving North Madden Bridge Road to applicable Pike County standards to the point of access to the substation area.
9. The final site plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Zoning Administrator.
10. This approval is non-transferable to any other use and shall continue to meet all conditions, criteria, and regulations in the event that the solar farm operation is sold or otherwise transferred.
11. Upon cessation of the solar farm, the subject property shall be restored, at no expense to Pike County, to the agricultural conditions of the property prior to the solar farm development (i.e. removal of all solar panels and equipment).
The project was approved with conditions at that time and has sat dormant until now. Click here to see a copy of the 2017 approval and conditions.
Fast-forward to Now - September 29, 2020
The Madden Solar Project came back before the Board of Commissioners on September 29, 2020 with a request to increase the acreage on the project by about 200 acres and increase the number of solar panels. The plan was originally for about 300,000 solar panels on 700 acres on one parcel. The updated plan asks for 451,600 panels on 935 acres of land on 1,671 acres of three parcels.
This proposal includes land south of Hwy 18. The Board of Appeals and staff recommend approval. Count Manager Brandon Rogers reminded commissioners that they were only voting on the special exception and not the overall project.
The Commission meeting was filled to capacity since there were several other hearings scheduled besides this one. A presentation was provided by Ryan Gilchrist through ZOOM on the expansion. The company has been purchased by Orsted since the 2017 approval of the original project. Georgia Power will be the recipient of the project if the project is chosen.
When the land lease is up for renewal in 35 years, there will be a bond in place to dismantle if that is what the community wants to do at that time. The approval of this part of the project would increase about 30% in size with design characteristics remaining the same for the entire project. The company representative advised that Orsted was prepared to agree to all of the requirements from before. This project will bring in about $20 million over its lifetime. About 200 jobs will be created during construction. [Note from the Editor: I had billion here to begin with. Million is correct. I apologize for the error.]
Other important items included the fact that none of the panels will be more than 12 feet tall even at full tilt and that storm water management is a priority. The county engineer will be able to work with them to design a water management, and buffering of the site will accomplished through planted pines. They have completed a 2 year study for Georgia Power and are now in the final process for this project. This has been in preparation for 3 years.
Frequently asked questions were addressed. Storm water control has conditions. Glare was addressed. The inverters do have some noise, and there are about 30 of them. However, it was said that they are inaudible by the time one gets to the fence line. Removal of the system is also important with the county requiring money in place for decommission of the project when it is removed. It will take close to 18 months to get to the final phase.
Ginny Blakeney spoke on this on the behalf of the Industrial Development (IDA) as the Executive Director. They have worked on this project. Blakeney told commissioners that they were being asked to approve the expansion of this project with another 200 acres, more solar panels, and this will increase from $90 million to $165 million. She advised that the IDA is working on a bond for this.
She advised that this is not final approval of the project. This is allowing the IDA to pursue this in order to see if this is a good fit for the county. This company has looked extensively to find somewhere to serve customers. The IDA will come back with a Memorandum of Understanding.
Former Planning and Development Director David Allen cited the permit fees and revenue for the county. He said that this project is relatively low impact. He said that he is sick of property taxes going up.
Pam Blakeney said that need to take into consideration the 200 foot buffers and said that she likes the expansion, but she asked for stringent guidelines.
Kyle Gable, a representative of the timber company, spoke and said that if we thought that this would be a detriment, we wouldn’t do it because we have other property there.
There was opposition to the project. Michelle Gravitt spoke on the behalf of Pike Residents for Responsible Solar, a group that has gathered against the expansion of this property. She gave a file for all of the commissioners with their research and a petition with over 60 residents who are opposed to the solar project.
They asked for an investigation into the parent company and recommended this going along Hwy 19 and not out where this is being proposed. She said that storm water and erosion are issues even with planted vegetation. She included several cases where the storm water or erosion plans failed residents and said that some cases went on for years. She cited a Virginia case involving Essex Solar LLC, which is also owned by Orsted, and said that Essex just settled a case on 8 counts including soil erosion. She said that residents have groundwater concerns as well as floodplain concerns.
Gravitt advised that she and her neighbors would rather have a subdivision across from them saying that Pike County doesn’t have the experience needed to watch this project and that the payoff is rarely what is promised. She also said that she was worried about this precedent and spot zoning.
Others who spoke in this meeting included Ricki Reeves who said that if he had known about the first one, they would have heard from him before because this infringes on what home owners will see every day. He agreed with the boundaries being a minimum of 200 feet, but said that he would rather see a no on this.
Devin Chappell warned that we had better have our ducks in a row before we approve this and asked for 200 feet for minimum on the edges and 500 feet for inverters.
Marcie Bradberry said that this sounds like a great draw but is concerned where this is going. She also liked the 200 foot buffer but has well water and is concerned. She also said that she did not move to Pike County to live across from a solar farm and that this truly affects us as a community.
Terri and David Bailey and David Gravitt also spoke in opposition. Bailey cited runoff across his driveway with a close nearby creek and asked commissioners to come out and look at it.
Discussion at the meeting included County Manager Brandon Rogers advising that commissioners are only approving the expansion tonight. He said that they were not awarded the contract last time so there is a very good chance that it would not go through if the expansion is not approved.
Chairman Briar Johnson saw no solar farms with erosion like has been talked about in the meeting. He said that there is going to be houses here eventually and asked what would it take for a house to pay for one child going to school to break even. $478,000 was the answer. And then double that for each additional child. Triple for 3. He said that he would rather see solar panels than houses and that he supports this.
Commissioner Tim Guy thanked Ryan Gilchrist for considering Pike County. He said that he made the motion to approve in 2017. He made a motion to deny. Commissioner James Jenkins gave the second. [Note from the Editor: Commissioner Jenkins was the dissenting vote in the 4-1 approval in 2017.] Further discussion included Commissioner Tim Daniel saying that he wouldn’t have had a hard time with this if they hadn’t jumped Hwy 18. Chairman Johnson advised that if this project was to be approved, he would like to see a 200 foot setback and 50 foot buffer on all roads around the project.
The project was denied in a 3-2 vote with Commissioners Daniel, Guy, and Jenkins voting for denial. Commissioners Proctor and Johnson voted in opposition which would have been in favor of approval of the project.
Questions Asked of and Answered By the IDA – October 2, 2020
Why is the original 700 acres not enough? “The original 700 is still able to be utilized as a solar farm, but according to Orsted the requirements for Georgia Power in this cycle resulted in an increase of minimum power capacity, which means there now needs to be more solar panels, hence the need for additional acreage,” advised Executive Director Ginny Blakeney. “The same possibility exists today that did in 2017 - we could get everything approved on our end, the company could submit their proposal, and then Georgia Power could award another project. It's unfortunate that we have to do so much up front that is based on a speculative project, but that is just the nature of this one.”
Blakeney pointed out that the Commissioners have requirements in place that make this proposal non-transferable so if Orsted does not win the award this time, they will have to repeat this process again in the future. “I believe that we will continue to hear from them every few years until they are able to bring this to fruition,” she said.
The project revenue and financing are still in negotiations so there is nothing in concrete yet, but the company is requesting that the IDA issue an approximately $165 million dollar bond with an abatement. “The IDA retained the best bond counsel in Georgia (Attorney Dan McRae and Attorney Kevin Brown) who are both representing Pike County with the utmost regard for ensuring that the community benefits from this and is protected,” she said. “As soon as we have that in place we are able to better estimate the true fiscal impact of the project since a percentage abatement is most likely going to occur. I can say with confidence that there will be no 100% abatement for any period of the project, and there is still substantial revenue to be considered even with doing this.”
“The bond will have many hoops and hurdles that the company will abide by, and they have been agreeable to most all of them, including the decommissioning bond where if the project were to fail, they have to convert the land back to its natural state,” Blakeney advised. “With the original structure from back in 2017 we anticipated approximately $25 million in revenue. But, the investment jumped from $95 million to $165 million so we entered negotiation for a different financing structure.”
“All of this is far beyond my experience and the scope of the IDA board hence the need for our own attorney,” she said. The bond attorney attended the October 7, 2020 IDA meeting that Pike County Times listened to by phone.
Pike County Times was advised at that time that the IDA had not seen the solicitation from Georgia Power but was hoping to see it in the near future along with other materials that need review. Pike County Times will update with the request for proposal and documentation regarding dollar amounts as soon as this can be obtained. [Note from the Editor: Thank you to IDA Executive Director Ginny Blakeney for answering my numerous questions and sending information for this article.]
Industrial Development Authority (IDA) Meeting - October 7, 2020
An update was given in the IDA meeting on October 7, 2020. [Note from the Editor: This is taken directly from my write up of the IDA meeting that is currently online on Pike County Times.]
After the denial of the project last week, Brandon (County Manager Brandon Rogers) and Ginny (Executive Director of the IDA) spoke to the company the next day. Is the project over? No, but the project is dependent on the expansion. They have agreed to 200 foot setbacks on the entire project.
Erosion control is a main concern. Brandon and Ginny are meeting with an expert today. The company agreed to a more in-depth storm water study should the project be reconsidered and awarded by Georgia Power.
They need the other acreage because it needs to produce a certain number of megawatts to give what Georgia Power needs. They are looking for areas in which vegetation needs to be increased to keep the project from being seen. They have been very agreeable to everything that the county has asked for.
There will be a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and a bond that needs to be in place so there is no hold up on this project. Ginny has been in contact with the company’s representatives to keep the line of communication open and provide updates in case the Board of Commissioners reconsiders their application.
After an executive session, there was a motion to authorize for Seyfarth Shaw (bond counsel) to continue negotiations on behalf of the Development Authority of Pike County and to authorize the Chairman to execute on MOU with Orsted Onshore after circulation and review of the agreement by the Board, motion carried unanimously.
Madden Solar Center Reaches Out to Pike County Times
Madden Solar Center LLC reached out to Pike County Times about this project. In the interest of fairness to both sides however, Pike County Times declined to do an interview and asked for a written statement instead. A statement from the opposing side, Pike Residents for Responsible Solar, is included further into the article. [Note from the Editor: Thank you to both sides for understanding where I am coming from on this and being kind with my refusal on an interview. This article is so extensive that I simply could not add two more interviews and do justice to both sides.]
• The proposed Madden Solar Center will invest $165 million and provide a positive economic return in the form of over $55 million in new tax revenue and landowner income. This will enhance Pike County services, schools and benefit the local economy over the life of the project. This includes:
o Stable revenue that the county can use to cover operating expenses, for example the projected annual county tax revenue generated by Madden Solar exceeds the entirety of the county’s FY 2019-2020 roads and bridges maintenance and repair budget.
o Stable revenue that Pike County schools can use to make long-term financial plans for new or improved facilities, and offset tax burden created by state funding changes.
• Utility-scale solar is a low-impact, highly productive use of land that supports local economic development and can preserve the underlying soil for future generations.
• Ørsted is dedicated to being a good steward of the land and developing, constructing, and operating safe and reliable solar energy projects. During construction and throughout project operations, Ørsted prioritizes best in class site management, safety, and security.
• Materials used in solar panels are safe for people and the environment and designed and to withstand catastrophic events such as flooding or fire.
• Ørsted is committed to being a good neighbor by shielding the visual impact of the solar equipment. In the case of Madden Solar, the height of the solar array is less than 10’ and we have agreed to maintain a visual buffer of timber such that the project will largely not be seen from neighboring properties.
Industrial Development Authority (IDA) Addresses Some Questions - October 27, 2020
Pike Residents for Responsible Solar has asked a lot of questions about this project. As the editor and owner of a newspaper, this is something that is done here on a regular basis. These questions were asked on social media and Pike County Times asked IDA Executive Director Ginny Blakeney if the questions and answers could be shared on Pike County Times. [Note from the Editor: You can find Pike Residents for Responsible Solar on Facebook.] Items in bold are from the original document. Items in regular font are the answers from the IDA.
We have been asked for clarification on CURRENT issues surrounding the expansion of the Madden Solar project. **Please note our opinion and stance on solar located on agricultural/residential land has not changed.
1. The current request before the Zoning board of appeals and the County Commissioners is a modification to the original APPROVED application.
CORRECT – but this is the SECOND modification to the original application
2. It has already been DENIED by our commissioners once.
FALSE: the application now before the Board has modifications to the original proposed setbacks so it is not the same as the one recently denied
3. This decision is to approve/deny the expansion for another 140,000 panels, not to approve/deny the original 304,000 panel project.
CORRECT
4. If denied, the original project stays in tact-by their own calculations the county can still expect $10 million in permit fees.
CORRECT, but the project will not submit their application to Georgia Power if the expansion is not approved, the original proposal is no longer adequate to meet the required capacity needs that the power company is seeking
5. 75 KW of power is substantial and is equivalent to other installations in the state.
FALSE, it is not substantial enough for the need Georgia Power has identified which is 145 mw, equivalency to other installations is irrelevant
6. State approved plans need to be implemented prior to project expansion approval by the board. Even our opposition is acknowledging erosion control on solar installations during and after construction as valid issues.
This is previously addressed by:
condition #5 of the Environmental Review Committee: strong erosion and sediment control plan is required, with regular inspections to protect Elkins Creek
condition # 3 of Revised Recommendations 3.8.17: Any land disturbance greater than 1 acre shall require approved erosion / sediment control plans and a land disturbance permit
Also, studies of this nature are not conducted in advance of a project having at least a nod of approval as there is considerable expense in each. It is already a requirement for strong erosion and sediment control plans and a land disturbance permit that the company agreed to.
7. GA Army Corps of engineers have not been consulted with regards to the location of the project. How will this impact the ecosystem? Well water? Isn’t it reasonable for surrounding residents to ask that our government be proactive in matters pertaining to residents drinking water rather than waiting until it makes someone sick?
This is previously addressed by:
Condition #1 of the Environmental Review Committee: Minimum 100’ buffer from streams
Condition # 4 of the Environmental Review Committee: no use of herbicide for vegetation control
Condition # 2 of Revised Recommendations 3.8.17: There shall be no unlawful encroachment into any specified state waters, buffers, or wetlands.
Condition #6 of Revised Recommendations 3.8.17: A formal study of wetlands and sensitive areas on the property needs to be completed prior to construction
An additional remedy for this concern could be that surrounding residents have an annual water inspection conducted from each well to determine if any new contaminants or issues are presenting themselves in comparison to their water as of the beginning of the project.
Condition # 7 of Revised Recommendations 3.8.17: Herbicides shall not be used for vegetation control and maintenance.
8. Minimum setbacks off creeks, streams, wetlands, and flood plains, are not always the best practice. They are the minimum that is accepted by the state. Shouldn’t our local river experts be involved in planning and working towards a solution that protects the land-PRIOR TO A PROJECT BEING SITED
Once again, studies of this nature are not conducted prior to a nod of approval. A comprehensive wetlands study should reveal any issues.
This is previously addressed by:
Condition #1 of the Environmental Review Committee: Minimum 100’ buffer from streams
Condition # 4 of the Environmental Review Committee: no use of herbicide for vegetation control
Condition # 2 of Revised Recommendations 3.8.17: There shall be no unlawful encroachment into any specified state waters, buffers, or wetlands.
Condition #6 of Revised Recommendations 3.8.17: A formal study of wetlands and sensitive areas on the property needs to be completed prior to construction
An additional remedy for this concern could be that local “river experts” (whoever that may be, with sufficient knowledge and an appropriate background in this field) be included to review the studies and offer recommendations to the organization conducting the study and developing the plans.
Pike Residents for Responsible Solar
In the interest of fairness on this project, Pike County Times asked for a statement from Pike Residents for Responsible Solar as well. This is the statement that was sent by email.
"Pike Residents for Responsible Solar began in an effort to educate people on the impact of utility scale solar on agricultural/residential land and gain support to stop the expansion of the Madden Solar project.
Pike Residents understand the need for sustainable solutions in a world that is rapidly consuming natural resources. We also understand the need to diversify the tax base in Pike as well as bring in revenue from industry to achieve this goal. But, we need to balance the demand for renewable energy and tax revenue while protecting the rural character of the community, resident property values, and the environment.
Pike County officials have received an application for modification of a special exception from USC timber and Madden Solar LLC to expand a utility scale solar development to 1600 acres of agricultural land. The project would require clear-cutting hundreds of acres of trees, taking forestry land out of production for 35 years, threatening property values, and jeopardizing residents’ wellbeing by installing 451,000 on solar panels on 900 acres. Some within 100-200 feet of residential property lines. In September 2020, Pike County Commissioners voted against the expansion of this project, but Madden Solar has resubmitted its application to try again.
This 145 watt project is not a “solar farm;” this is a power plant. A power plant does not belong on agricultural land. You could fit 390 Walmarts on 1,600 acres, but current zoning wouldn’t allow the construction of even 1 Walmart on this land. Nor should it be allowed. These power plants belong on industrial-zoned land, marginal or contaminated land, or in urban areas. Our own land use plan reflects this belief. An appropriate use for solar would be on commercial or residential rooftops, Brownfields, or covered parking structures. We don’t oppose solar energy but these industrial-scale projects require proper siting.
The acreage for this project by Madden Solar is not only an agricultural/residential A-R zoning area, is also in an S-2 area which means that land is particularly sensitive to any disturbance, and the construction of this industrial-scale solar power plant could increase erosion and sedimentation that could threaten the storage capacity/quality of the reservoir. The S-2 ordinance states that “storm water runoff, particularly from impervious surfaces, can introduce toxins, nutrients and sediments into drinking water supplies, making water treatment more complicated and expensive and rendering water resources unusable for recreation. Industrial land uses that involve the manufacture, use, transport and storage of hazardous or toxic waste materials result in the potential risk of contamination of nearby public drinking water supplies.” Every resident in this area is solely using ground water as their primary and only source of drinking water.
The Concord area already sees its fair share of flooding, storm water issues, and erosion problems. The owner of Madden Solar is Orsted who has a track record of devastating environmental pollution at its Coronal Energy solar power plant in Essex County, VA. Heavy rains at this site led to muddy storm water runoff and erosion so severe that the Department of Environmental Quality imposed large fines and had to take legal action to correct the construction problems. The Virginia attorney general made a public statement after the settlement that “Essex Solar had numerous warnings and chances to change the way they were operating to come into compliance with environmental protection laws but they chose not to”. They are still working on cleanup almost three years later. Our ground water and waterways are already designated sensitive areas and we cannot take chances with an industrial developer and project that could pollute the land. Why would we take any chances with our health and our water?
Madden Solar is making Pike County officials and residents a lot of promises and offering financial incentives to approve a project that is completely out of character with its current zoning. In order to protect the county and residents, independent studies regarding the economic benefits, costs to the county in additional services, alternate water source strategies, environmental impact and decommissioning bond should be researched and verified by third-party experts. As of October 26th, with our last record request, no current environmental study exists in the clerks file for the land impacted by the expansion.
While people may think that solar energy is “green” and good for the environment, industrial-scale solar on rural land negatively impacts our ecosystem and contributes to climate change. Once deprived of nutrients for 35 years, the land would never be the same. Clear-cutting hundreds of acres of trees to build a power plant isn’t “green.” Trees remove carbon from the atmosphere and slow global warming. A United Nations report from 2019 shows that deforestation without sustainable forestry practices contributes to climate change.
The energy from the sun might be free, but the process to convert the sun’s energy into solar energy requires industrial processes to make cement, steel, glass and its other components. If your motive is to protect the environment, you might want to rethink solar because like all machines, they’re made from non-renewable materials. At the end of its usable lifespan, a solar panel produces a tremendous amount of toxic waste that usually end up in landfills. The International Renewable Energy Agency calculates that by 2050, the disposal of worn out solar panels will constitute over double the tonnage of all global plastic waste.
There are many concerns about this project, including the siting of the power plant, the threat to the environment and the impact on county residents. The financial incentives being offered through impact fees are not verified. The long-term impact on the land, our water protection areas, and the negative impact on property values should give the commissioners enough reasons to deny Madden Solar’s proposal. Industrial-scale solar does not belong on agricultural land and does not belong in Pike County."
Michelle Gravitt
[Note from the Editor added 11.4.20 at 12:55 a.m. I received notification from Orsted earlier tonight as follows: "Orsted does not own Essex Solar and is not connected to it in any way."]
[Note from the Editor added 11.4.20 at 7:08 p.m. Pike County Times did a web search on Orsted, Coronal, and Essex today and then sent an email asking for clarification and proof of the above statement at 12:43 p.m. this afternoon. Anyone who does a quick web search on "Orsted and Coronal" and "Coronal and Essex" will understand why I am asking for clarification though I freely acknowledge that there is information that I may not have which is why I asked for it directly. As soon as that information is received, Pike County Times will update this page with the response.]
[Note from the Editor added 11.4.20 at 7:22 p.m. Pike County Times was contacted by an Orsted representative and advised of the following which is verbatim from the email:
• Orsted does not own nor has it ever owned the Essex Solar project. Orsted acquired a sub-set of Coronal’s development platform including a select portfolio of projects and members of the development team in 2019. Essex was not included in that portfolio of projects. Capital Dynamics is the current owner of the project, which purchased the project from Coronal this year.
• It is accurate that Coronal managed early-stage development of the Essex project prior to the sale of the platform. Coronal contracted with an engineering subcontractor to manage construction. Said subcontractor submitted a stormwater management plan that was reviewed and approved by local and state officials.
• Orsted’s financial strength and construction standards are among the highest in the industry, and is confident the Madden project will meet and exceed all required local, state, and federal construction and stormwater management standards.]
Where Do We Go From Here?
Madden Solar Center LLC made a request for a modification to the Special Exception SE-17-03 to expand the size of the proposed project on October 13, 2020. Click here to read the Application for Modification.
In the October 9, 2020 explanation letter, Ryan Gilchrist, Director of Development for Orsted Onshore North America, advised that there is a need for increased capacity from 75MWac to 145MWac. This plot of land on both sides of GA Hwy 18 owned by USC Timber Holdings and approximately three miles south of Concord represents an expansion from 304,000 to 451,600 solar panels. He advised that all relevant utility, state, and federal agencies have been engaged in this project and that conditions from these agencies as well as conditions from Pike County will “govern the ultimate design of the facility.” He also advised that that the final documentation as part of the final site plan approval process will conform to Section 166 of Pike County’s Code pertaining to Solar Farms as well as any conditions that are placed on the project as a result of the two upcoming meetings. Click here to read the explanation letter.
There are two letters of Constitutional Objection that have been filed on behalf of US Timber Holdings LLC and Madden Solar Center LLC by Newton M. Galloway of Galloway & Lyndall LLP out of Griffin. The Constitutional Objection demands that the county provide a reason for a denial based on Pike County ordinances, state code, etc. Click here to read letter one and click here to read letter two.
The Board of Appeals will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on November 5, 2020 at 6:00 pm on the second floor of the Pike County Courthouse located at 16001 Barnesville Street, Zebulon, Georgia. The public is invited to attend and provide comments in favor or in opposition of the request below:
(1) Modification of Special Exception, MOD-SE-17-03. USC Timber Holdings, LLC, owner, and Madden Solar Center, LLC, applicant, are requesting a modification to Special Exception application SE-17-03. The current special exception allowed a utility scale solar farm on a portion of the 1671-acre property with conditions. The request for modification wishes to incorporate those same conditions and increase the overall size of the project from 304,000 solar panels to 451,600 solar panels. The subject property is located in Landlots 184, 169, and 166 of the 9th land district of Pike County. The total property spans the following parcel ID’s: 031-003A, 031-004, and 031-012. The subject property has approximately 9,300 feet of road frontage along Hwy 18, approximately 4,930 feet of frontage along Flat Shoals Rd., approximately 2,290 feet of frontage along Curtis Rd., approximately 1,930 feet of frontage along Nixon Rd., and approximately 4,000 feet of frontage along Madden Bridge Rd. Applicant has submitted an updated site plan design for consideration. The public is invited to attend to speak in favor or in opposition of the request.
The Board of Appeals will forward a recommendation on to the Board of Commissioners for final decision. The Board of Commissioners will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on November 19, 2020 at 6:30 pm on the second floor of the Pike County Courthouse located at 16001 Barnesville Street, Zebulon, Georgia. The public is invited to attend to speak in favor or in opposition of the request.
Click here to read the Public Notice Letter.
Click here to read Chapter 166 of Pike County’s Code of Ordinance that pertains to Solar Farms. [Note from the Editor: Thank you to Planning and Zoning Director Brad Vaughan for answering my questions and quickly sending Open Records Request information so I could finish up this article today.]
The Staff recommendation is for approval on this modification for special exception with the same conditions as were made and approved on the original application by the Environmental Review Board, Board of Appeals, and the previous Board of Commissioners including a 200 foot setback from Flat Shoals, Road as is required on GA Hwy 18, Nixon Road, and Madden Bridge Road. The updated site plan includes a 50 foot buffer in that 200 foot setback. “With the increased buffer, approximately 1050 acres of land will be included to house the project from the 1671-acre total of the parent tracts.”
The recommended conditions are as follows:
Revised Recommendations: Acceptance of Environmental Review Committee report, with the following conditions:
1. Minimum 100-foot buffer from stream banks.
2. Minimum 50-foot buffer from property lines and road frontage, and minimum 200-foot setback from Highway 18 and North Madden Bridge Road for solar panels.
3. Evergreen buffer along Highway 18 as a visual screen. Where possible, retain existing vegetation along Highway 18.
4. No use of herbicides for vegetation control.
5. Strong erosion and sediment control plan is required, with regular inspections to protect Elkins Creek.
Revised Recommendations, 3.8.17: Approval with the listed conditions:
1. Any specified perimeter buffers on the property shall be honored and maintained. Board of Commissioners' approval for the landscape plan is required for the planted buffer along Highway 18, and the location and extent will need to be field located.
2. There shall be no unlawful encroachment into any specified state waters buffers or wetlands.
3. Any land disturbance greater than 1 acre shall require approved erosion / sediment control plans and a land disturbance permit.
4. An annual business license shall be required.
5. The proposal shall conform to any solar farm standards set forth in the Pike County Code, Chapter 166, except as may be otherwise conditioned. The bond amount specified in Section 166.06 shall be adhered to.
6. A formal study of wetlands and sensitive areas on the property needs to be completed prior to construction.
7. Herbicides shall not be used for vegetation control and maintenance.
8. Access to the solar farm via Nixon Road is prohibited. Access to the solar farm via North Madden Bridge Road shall be limited for the purpose of maintenance to the southwest substation area, and contingent upon the developer improving North Madden Bridge Road to applicable Pike County standards to the point of access of the substation area.
9. The final site plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Zoning Administrator.
10. This approval is non-transferrable to any other use and shall continue to meet all conditions, criteria, and regulations in the event that the solar farm operation is sold or otherwise transferred.
11. Upon cessation of the solar farm, the subject property shall be restored, at no expense to Pike County, to the agricultural conditions of the property prior to the solar farm development (i.e. removal of all solar panels and equipment).
Click here to read this analysis.
Closing
There are many ways that citizens can give their support or opposition to this project. First, citizens can go to the meeting and speak on the record in the public hearing.
Other ways to voice opinion on this project is to make a phone call to your commissioner, sign a petition by Pike Citizens for Responsible Solar that is against the project, or send an email to the Board of Commissioners at ablount@pikecoga.com.
Click here to examine a copy of the modified preliminary plan proposal.
Thank you to First Bank of Pike for sponsoring Pike County Times’ Breaking News Alerts! First Bank of Pike has been serving customers in Pike County and the surrounding area since 1901 and offers Personal and Business banking with a personal touch. Services include checking, savings, money market, certificates of deposit, and IRA’s. Mobile Banking and Bill Payment services are also available! Click here for more. Please let First Bank of Pike know that you appreciate their sponsorship of Breaking News Alerts on Pike County's only FREE online newspaper!
If you want to find out about how you can get Breaking News Alerts, click here. Thanks for reading and supporting Pike County Times.com!