Solar proposal ignites conflict among New Concord residents

The New Concord Planning Committee met on Dec. 12, 2011 for the first time since April 12, 2010.

The issue in question at the meeting focused on the site plan approval request by Muskingum University concerning a solar field, proposing that solar panels be located at the current Donna J. Newberry Softball field, with car ports in the Stag/Stadium Heights and Kelley parking lots.

While many questions were posed about the logistics of the plan (including the overall costs of such a project and removal of a green space to create a "green" space), the main tension was with the actual location of the solar field, both that it is bordering a residential neighborhood and with the fact that the solar field will replace the Donna J. Newberry Softball Field.

Residents gathered and expressed their concerns that a solar field in their neighborhood and bordering their property would affect their property values. Residents also noted that it seemed wrong for the university to place a solar field beside their homes when they weren't willing to place the field on top of lots beside the academic buildings because they were "ugly."

Along with the residents, I am not against solar energy or "going green," but I understand the reluctance of the community to place an eye sore in their neighborhood when there are zoning rules that even prevent items such as inside furniture to be placed in yards, etc.

The point of zoning is to protect the neighborhood and the majority of residents in attendance at the Dec. 12 meeting were against the solar field site plan proposal that Muskingum presented. Community members repeatedly voiced their support of energy-saving initiatives, but asked if there were alternatives that might protect their property values and neighborhood.

While these are valid and important complaints, some of the community members and university proposal supporters feel that the final decision should not be based on the issues raised by the community, but solely on the New Concord zoning codes and the fact that the proposed site is university property and should be used as the university sees fit, code allowing.

I find both sides of the argument compelling, but I have to wonder: what is the point of having a zoning code, if not to protect the interests of the community at large?

The other major issue raised at the meeting in relation to the site plan approval request was that the plan proposes to demolish the Donna J. Newberry Softball Field and build a new field closer the baseball and soccer fields.

While I have no personal connection to Coach Newberry, I understand the strong emotional connection that players, community members and alum alike feel towards the current field.

One community member commented that demolishing the current field would be like destroying sacred ground.

Muskingum University Associate Professor of English Jane Varley, who helped to write and publish Newberry's autobiography, noted that she was thinking about the small picture, versus the large picture of a green future and voiced her displeasure at the alarming speed with which the process was progressing.

I completely understand that the university wishes to have freedom with which to demolish and create softball fields as the school feels necessary, but I think that the risk of honoring someone with a location is the fact that you will have people who then form a connection with that area as they remember the person. It seems unfair to ask players, friends, community members and alumni to allow a change of location when the loss is still fresh and when people have formed a connection with the current location.