Cloudy with periods of rain. Thunder possible. Low 39F. Winds W at 10 to 20 mph. Chance of rain 100%..
Cloudy with periods of rain. Thunder possible. Low 39F. Winds W at 10 to 20 mph. Chance of rain 100%.
Updated: April 4, 2026 @ 11:33 pm
Ed Sekerak, standing at left center, offers testimony regarding property values in the area surrounding the proposed Solar Flats project. The hearing Thursday lasted over four hours.
Ed Sekerak, standing at left center, offers testimony regarding property values in the area surrounding the proposed Solar Flats project. The hearing Thursday lasted over four hours.
Corry City Council convened a public conditional use hearing Thursday on a proposal by Solar Flats LLC to construct a 3-megawatt AC solar energy facility on approximately 16 acres of land along South Shady Avenue, owned by Troyer Growers Inc. The session drew a crowd of about 45, and featured hours of technical testimony, legal argument and public comment from residents who live within sight of the proposed installation.
Mayor Jeff Fike presided, joined by Councilmen William “Buzz” Hammond and William Roche and Councilwoman Charles “Chuck” Gray. Councilman Andrew Sproveri recused himself, citing concern over potential bias.
At the close of testimony, Council adjourned to executive session and announced it would reconvene at a later date to render a formal decision.
The project
Annika Schiffer-Delagard, project development associate for Greenwood Sustainable Infrastructure, described Solar Flats as a relatively modest commercial solar installation designed to feed power directly into the grid through Penelec. She said the project would have the capacity to power between 300 and 400 homes.
Schiffer-Delagard outlined what she characterized as the project’s low environmental footprint: no lighting, no signage, no smoke, no odor. She said maintenance would require only approximately three truck visits per year. She added that the panels themselves are silicon and glass, are UL-certified and pose no leaching risk to soil or groundwater.
Schiffer-Delagard said the company contracted for noise and glare studies ahead of the application. A noise analysis found all operational sound would fall at or below 45 decibels, comparable to a household dishwasher, and below ambient levels. A glint-and-glare study, performed by Fisher Associates engineer Steve Mellott, found minimal “green glare” — the lowest category, likened to sunlight reflecting off snow or a pond — at two locations, the first totaling 47 minutes of exposure annually, occurring in spring and fall near an agricultural barn at 340 Sample Flats Road; the second at the residence of Dr. Kurt Lund, totaling 16 minutes per year between May and June.
The project will include tracker panels — motors that rotate the arrays to remain perpendicular to the sun — powered by electricity generated by the project itself. Mellott testified the site plans include erosion and sediment controls, post-construction stormwater management and vegetative screening on three of four sides of the property. The north side, he said, is already bordered by existing woods.
Greenwood representative Drew Rogerson told Council that a 100-foot setback from residences is included and that the company maintains a 24/7 operations-and-maintenance team to respond to any damage, such as panels broken by hail. He also addressed concerns about site selection, assuring the audience that Corry was chosen because a willing landowner came forward and the utility interconnection proved feasible — not because the company believed the community would offer little resistance.
Legal arguments over zoning classification
Attorney Kevin Barley of Steptoe and Johnson in Pittsburgh, representing Solar Flats LLC and Greenwood Sustainable Infrastructure, argued that the application was filed at the city’s own direction. He said the city’s interim zoning officer, Samantha Vollentine, consulted with City Solicitor Lydia Caporosa in spring 2025 and instructed Solar Flats to apply under the “special residential and commercial projects” conditional use category in the R-1 single family residential district.
Barley reminded Council that a conditional use is presumed by the legislature to be consistent with the zoning plan and not inherently adverse to the public interest. He said the hearing was not about whether residents or officials favor or oppose solar energy, but whether the applicant meets the conditions set forth in the ordinance. He also noted that under the existing R-1 ordinance, uses with far greater potential impact — including mineral extraction, cemeteries, hospitals, nursing homes and funeral homes — are already permitted by right or conditional use.
Attorney Edward Betza of Elderkin Law Firm in Erie, representing objecting resident Kelly Goodsel and other South Shady Avenue neighbors by extension, offered a sharply different reading of the ordinance. He argued that the city’s zoning code, adopted in 1991 and never updated to address solar development, contains three distinct use categories: “planned commercial project,” “industrial use,” and “special residential and commercial project.”
Betza contended that a solar energy facility is plainly a planned commercial project, a category permitted only in I-1 and I-2 industrial districts, not R-1, or possibly an industrial use, which is similarly barred from the residential zone. Betza argued that the “special residential and commercial project” category requires both a residential and a commercial component, and that Solar Flats, having no residential element whatsoever, cannot legitimately claim that classification.
“The word ‘and’ is significant,” he told Council. “I didn’t write it.”
Beyond the classification dispute, Betza argued that the applicant failed to meet its burden of proof under Section 605 of the zoning ordinance, pointing out that the testimony addressed neither fire protection nor electrical distribution disturbance, both required criteria. He also cited the ordinance’s provision that reflective materials or lighting “which produce objectionable, direct or reflected glare on adjoining properties shall not be permitted,” arguing the standard is absolute.
“It says none — zero. Shall not be permitted,” Betza said.
Property values and decommissioning
Columbus resident Edward Sekerak, a state-certified general real estate appraiser who testified he has completed more than 10,000 appraisals over his career, said he found no evidence in available studies that a solar project of Solar Flats’ size and location would have a measurable negative effect on surrounding property values. He cited research from Virginia Tech and other institutions. Under cross-examination, however, Sekirak acknowledged he had not read the cited studies in their entirety.
On decommissioning, Schiffer-Delagard said the project’s anticipated operational life is 25 to 30 years. She said Solar Flats plans to secure a surety bond covering 110% of estimated decommissioning costs, calculated using 2026 pricing and an inflation rate.
When asked by Councilwoman Gray whether the panels might simply be replaced and the facility continued beyond that horizon, Schiffer-Delagard said she could not commit to that scenario.
When Mayor Fike asked how many sites Greenwood has decommissioned to date, she replied, “Zero.”
Public comment
Ten members of the public addressed Council, the large majority in opposition. Kelly Goodsel, whose property abuts the proposed installation, organized his objections into three categories: environmental concerns, including potential stormwater runoff into a nearby spring and existing wetlands to the north; property and home value impacts; and legal and ordinance compliance questions.
Goodsel also noted that property owners along Stewart Road in Concord Township, whose land would be directly affected by the project, received none of the informational mailings Greenwood sent to Shady Avenue residents in October 2025, and therefore had no advance notice of the proceedings. He said a portion of his own 20-acre property lies in Concord Township.
Lund echoed Goodsel’s testimony and raised additional concerns about glare hazards for motorists traveling roads near the project.
One speaker broke from the majority. Ed Spitman, who said he has lived near the area for 66 years, argued that the landowner has a right to use his property as he sees fit.
“Everybody wants to make money, so everybody’s got to sacrifice a little bit,” Spitman said. “You’ve got to be open-minded to everybody.”
Planning commission previously split
The Corry Planning Commission previously voted 3–2 against recommending approval of the conditional use application, leaving the final determination to City Council. See the March 6 edition of The Journal for more information.
Council has not announced a date for its decision.
Your comment has been submitted.
Reported
There was a problem reporting this.
Log In
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.
Sorry, there are no recent results for popular videos.
Sorry, there are no recent results for popular commented articles.
Success! An email has been sent to with a link to confirm list signup.
Error! There was an error processing your request.
Would you like to receive our daily news? Sign up today!
Your browser is out of date and potentially vulnerable to security risks.
We recommend switching to one of the following browsers:
