The Warren County Planning Commission Just Approved an 11-Acre Electrical Substation Behind Our Farms
With No Public Hearing or Input

April 10, 2026

Warren County Board of Supervisors
c/o Bradley N. Gotshall, County Administrator
220 N. Commerce Avenue
Front Royal, VA 22630

RE: S-03-2026 – Comprehensive Plan Compliance Review – 386 Ashby Station Road (Tax Map 5-5) – Formal Objection and Request for Remand and Public Hearing

Dear Chairwoman Cullers and Members of the Board:

We are writing to formally object to and appeal the Planning Commission’s April 8, 2026 approval of a proposed Rappahannock Electric Cooperative (“REC”) electric substation at 386 Ashby Station Road. The Planning Commission’s decision to provide no notice to neighbors and no public hearing displays a lack of transparency that is deeply troubling – and potentially creates legal liability for the County.

On behalf of the Alliance, we respectfully request that the Board of Supervisors remand this matter to the Planning Commission with instructions to conduct a full public hearing before any further action is taken. By Virginia law, if you require a public hearing and revote, the Planning Commission is obligated to conduct one. This is the correct remedy given the egregious facts in this matter.

For the 6 reasons stated below, the Planning Commission’s actions of April 8, 2026 were both procedurally and substantively defective.

1. Prior Attempts to Industrialize This Same Parcel Faced Strong Public Opposition.

Fifteen months ago, this same parcel was the subject of a proposal by the Planning Commission for recharacterization from agricultural use to future commercial or industrial use within the then-in-progress Warren County Comprehensive Plan. That proposal generated an enormous backlash of public opposition. Residents mobilized in anger, created flyers, and dozens of North Warren residents, farmers, local influential figures, and community organizations united to speak out at the public hearing in opposition to the recharacterization.

Not one person spoke in favor of the change. The Planning Commission heard the overwhelming public sentiment at the time and correctly removed this parcel from potential recharacterization in the Planning Commission’s recommended Comprehensive Plan presented to you, the Board of Supervisors.

The Planning Commission is therefore intimately familiar with the depth of community sentiment around this particular piece of agricultural land. And so it makes it even more shocking that this past Wednesday night – rather than hold the public hearing that the situation clearly warranted – the Planning Commission approved this substation without a public hearing.

The audio records of Wednesday’s meeting capture the appropriate discomfort among some of the Commissioners about the lack of a public hearing. Ultimately a majority of Commissioners prevailed in cramming through the approval over the concerns of their colleagues.

The procedural choice to forgo a public hearing on a large, 11-acre industrial substation pad – on the very same parcel that the community rallied against just 15 months ago – cannot be viewed as anything other than a deliberate effort to avoid the anticipated opposition the Planning Commission knew would result if the project were discussed publicly.

2. The Agenda Item Was Designed to Avoid Public Attention.

The item was placed on the Planning Commission’s public calendar as a “Comprehensive Plan Review - 386 Ashby Station Road” – a description that would lead any reasonable citizen to believe the Commission was reviewing the Comprehensive Plan itself, not approving the siting of an enormous industrial electric substation on agricultural land.

A more candid description – such as “Approval of Electric Substation – 386 Ashby Station Road” – would have alerted the community.

The vague title chosen had the effect, if not the purpose, of suppressing public awareness and participation. This fact alone puts the Planning Commission’s action in legal jeopardy.

3. The Community’s FOIA Request Regarding The Parcel Has Gone Unanswered.

On January 27, 2026, we filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request after receiving information suggesting potentially improper communications between the seller, Rappahannock Electric Cooperative, and County officials regarding this project.

That FOIA request has not been substantively responded to, reportedly due to a payment dispute – raising serious questions about whether the County has complied with its obligations under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (§ 2.2-3700 et seq.).

The community’s concerns about this parcel run deep. An alliance of local organizations – including the prominent Alliance for the Shenandoah Valley, the Rockland Rural Historic District, and the newly formed North Warren Citizens Alliance – has been closely monitoring activity on this property since the failed recharacterization attempt.

The Board should be deeply troubled that a lawful FOIA request bearing on the integrity of this process remains unanswered at the exact same time the Planning Commission rubber-stamped this application. Clearly the payment dispute needs to be resolved and the FOIA needs to be answered to provide the community with the information to which it is lawfully entitled.

4. The “Substantially in Accord” Standard For Approval Under the Law Was Not Met.

Under Virginia Code § 15.2-2232, the Planning Commission must determine whether a public utility facility’s general location, character, and extent are substantially in accord with the entire adopted Comprehensive Plan.

The applicant on Wednesday night cited only Goal VI of Chapter 6 (infrastructure to support development) while ignoring at least a dozen competing provisions that the Commission was obligated to weigh, including: the Growth Management Goal directing future development away from rural and agricultural areas (Chapter 4, p. 87); Objective M requiring that land uses “shall be harmonious with and will not adversely affect the use or development of neighboring properties” (Chapter 4, p. 72); the Rural Character Preservation Goal to preserve open space, agricultural, and forest lands (Chapter 4, p. 86); the Environmental Quality Goal to protect natural resources and environmentally sensitive lands (Chapter 3, p. 63); the Plan’s Karst Terrain protections for the Route 340/522 corridor (Chapter 3, pp. 42–43); and the Rockland Community Vision priorities of protecting rural and agricultural character, natural resources, and night skies (Chapter 4, p. 84).

A one-goal analysis is not a legitimate “substantially in accord” determination – it is a rubber stamp. The Planning Commission’s decision to not ask questions about these important other areas of the Comprehensive Plan was a dereliction of their duty to residents.

The audio recording of the meeting shows the Commissioners felt admittedly rushed (see below) and as a result did not base their approval on the totality of the Comprehensive Plan, as required by law. The remedy is a proper public hearing, followed by an informed, thorough, and deliberative re-vote.

5. The Public Has Been Denied the Opportunity to Evaluate Critical Information.

No member of the public has had the opportunity to review the site plans, understand the height and scale of the proposed substation structures, see drawings or images of the station itself, understand the required additional power lines and traffic access points, evaluate potential health effects from electromagnetic fields on neighboring residents and livestock, the environmental impact on local ecology, wells, and the karst terrain identified in the County’s own studies, understand the noise profile of transformer operations, understand any night-time lights or light pollution, or evaluate impacts on property values and the viability of adjacent agricultural and agritourism operations that the Comprehensive Plan expressly encourages.

REC has said they may conduct a public question and answer session. But what good is a Q&A session after the approval has already been obtained and the project is already moving forward.

For example, the World Health Organization has classified the electromagnetic fields produced by this type of equipment as a possible carcinogen, particularly in relation to childhood leukemia. There are residences nearby the proposed 11-acre substation. Whether or not you believe the risk is real, don’t you think our community deserves the chance to ask questions about it before the project is approved – not after.

For a government to be responsive to its citizens, the government must give residents an opportunity to learn about the planned project before the project is considered for approval. To do otherwise is not good governance, it is merely after-the-fact damage control.

6. The Applicant’s Commercial Urgency Does Not Excuse Deficient Process.

Comments at the April 8 hearing indicated that the applicant was operating under intense time pressure due to the expiration of the applicant’s purchase contract for the property. While the applicant’s contractual deadlines are its own concern, they cannot and must not dictate the rigor of the Planning Commission’s review or the public’s right to participate in it.

The Board should be aware that a determination rushed to accommodate a private party’s deal timeline – on a project of this size, on a parcel with this history of community interest, without a public hearing, and on the basis of a one-sided Comprehensive Plan analysis – exposes the County to legal challenge by affected residents.

Legal Posture & Request

Virginia Code § 15.2-2232(A) says the Planning Commission “may” hold a public hearing. On Wednesday night, the Warren County Planning Commission treated “may” as “may freely choose not to.” But read in context with § 15.2-2204’s elaborate notice requirements, the General Assembly clearly intended the public hearing mechanism to be the default process for consequential determinations, not an exception.

The word “may” grants procedural flexibility – it does not grant license to approve an 11-acre industrial facility on contested agricultural land, on a parcel with known community opposition, without any public participation whatsoever.

Virginia courts have held that discretionary authority must be exercised reasonably and not arbitrarily. A decision to forgo a hearing specifically because the community would object is the very definition of arbitrary.

Therefore, we respectfully request that the Board of Supervisors decline to ratify the Planning Commission’s determination and remand this matter for a full public hearing under Virginia Code §15.2-2204, at which the community can examine the site plans, hear from the applicant, and present evidence on the substation’s consistency – or inconsistency – with the Comprehensive Plan as a whole.

Warren County’s residents deserve nothing less.