Dominion drops Lincolnia pool plans
Utility confirms soil tests were for a distant data center project, ending months of local dispute.
By Lorenzo Patterson ·
Dominion Energy has ended its involvement with the Lincolnia Park community pool.
The utility completed soil tests at the site and stated it has no further interest in the property.
The situation began in July when Dominion asked the Lincolnia Park Recreation Club to allow access to a field.
The company requested permission to test soil for a project linked to a proposed substation.
That substation is planned for the Plaza 500 site on Edsall Road, which is not near the pool.
Dominion told the club it would use eminent domain if they refused entry.
Leaders of the recreation club and the Lincolnia Park Civic Association worried about a new transmission line.
They asked Dominion to clarify its plans for the neighborhood.
A response from Dominion arrived on Nov. 5.
Ingrid Torres-McCullough, president of the recreation club, and Karl Ensign, president of the civic association, confirmed the details via email.
They noted that the Edsall project does not involve the club's property.
No construction is planned at the pool location, they said. "It took nearly four months and substantial investment of time and resources on behalf of the LPRC and LPCA to receive these assurances," Torres-McCullough and Ensign wrote. They argued that Dominion's earlier actions suggested the property might be under consideration for an alternative route. When the leaders contacted Dominion in August, a right-of-way representative called the eminent domain request a standard form. The representative did not explain that the club's land was outside the approved corridor. The utility stated the site was used solely for comparative soil testing. "LPRC expended its own financial resources responding to what Dominion’s communications reasonably suggested could be a threat to our property," the leaders said. They cited volunteer time, organizational effort, and community resources spent on the issue. They described these as real expenditures for a volunteer-run nonprofit. If the Nov. 5 explanation is accurate, the costs and disruptions were avoidable, they said. A clear explanation in July or August could have prevented much of the effort.
