By Lewis Loflin
In the summer of 2008, Bristol, Virginia, initiated the Solar Hill Project, a beautification effort in the city’s oldest residential neighborhood, the Solar Hill Historic District. Initially approved by city leaders in 2004, the project diverts $353,000 in state and federal highway funds, supplemented by $88,000 from the City of Bristol, with an additional $60,000 already spent on planning, totaling $441,000. Inflation has since increased costs by $114,000, bringing the total to $555,000 as of July 2008. The project aims to enhance a five-block area listed on the National Register of Historic Places since 2001. However, I question its timing and priority given broader infrastructure needs and the city’s financial challenges.
The project includes installing new sidewalks, approximately 50 decorative street lights, relocating electrical wiring underground, and adding 10 historic markers, a gateway portal sign at the corner of Cumberland and Johnson streets, and a map dispenser with maps for visitors. Bristol Virginia Utilities (BVUB), a city-owned entity, is responsible for the lighting and electrical work. However, the project has faced delays, primarily due to challenges in securing construction easements from absentee landowners, with about 50 easements still unsigned by mid-2008.
The Solar Hill Historic District derives its name from an astronomical observatory established in 1869 to observe a total solar eclipse, an event that drew scientists and visitors to the area. Located on a hill in Bristol, the observatory led to the naming of the surrounding neighborhood as Solar Hill. The district, encompassing 130 homes, has a rich history tied to notable figures in American history.
According to the Solar Hill Historic District Association, Andrew Jackson, the seventh U.S. president, was a frequent visitor to the area, often staying at the King mansion. William King, a prominent local figure, escorted Jackson to Washington, D.C., for his 1829 inauguration. Another president, Andrew Johnson, the seventeenth U.S. president, was involved in a stagecoach accident in 1835 near what are now King and Sullins streets. A hornet flew into the coach, startling the passengers and spooking the horses, causing the coach to overturn. Johnson sustained a facial scar from the incident that he carried for the rest of his life. These historical connections, among others, contribute to Solar Hill’s designation on the National Register of Historic Places.
The City of Bristol, Virginia, is already grappling with a $110 million debt as of 2008, a result of various municipal projects and investments. Despite this financial strain, the city has allocated significant funds to the Solar Hill Project, which I view as a controversial beautification effort. In 1999, Bristol spent $10,000 to survey the Solar Hill area for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. I question this decision as a potential misallocation of resources when basic street repairs remain underfunded. I find it concerning that the city claims insufficient funds for essential infrastructure while pursuing such discretionary projects.
I also note other recent expenditures by the city, including $2.5 million invested in The Virginian Golf Club in 2007 and $2.8 million for infrastructure improvements to support a Cracker Barrel restaurant. I believe Bristol Virginia Utilities could have handled the electrical and lighting upgrades for Solar Hill without additional public funds, as BVUB is a city-owned utility. The decision to divert highway funds for a beautification project, rather than actual transportation improvements, is a key point of my concern, particularly given Virginia’s broader transportation funding challenges. It remains to be seen which contractor will be awarded the project.
By July 2008, the Solar Hill Project faced significant hurdles, including rising costs and delays in securing construction easements. Inflation increased the project cost by $114,000, prompting city officials to express uncertainty about completing all planned components. One official stated, “I can’t stand here and tell you what the bids will be...With the way the cost of everything is going up and what the economy is doing, we just don’t know. That’s why the project is set up in phases. We hope it [affordable bids] comes in, and we can do all of it.” The official noted that had the cost increase been anticipated in 2005–2007, the city could have applied for additional funding, but the lack of foresight left them unable to adjust [Source: BHC, July 3, 2008].
Confusion over initial cost estimates further complicated the project. Another city official admitted, “I don’t know where the figures for the first estimate came from...the city doesn’t have anything in its records that shows the source of the figures.” The only documented estimate appeared on a Solar Hill Historic District Association letterhead, raising questions about transparency. Additionally, the city underestimated the number of decorative street lights needed, initially planning for fewer than the 50 now required [Source: BHC, June 24, 2008].
Residents of Solar Street, many of whom are absentee landowners, expressed frustration over the delays. Approximately 50 construction easements remained unsigned, prompting one property owner to remark, “It shouldn’t have taken four years to get this project going,” reflecting broader community discontent. Some residents were “appalled” at the slow progress, particularly as inflation threatened to reduce the scope of the publicly funded improvements they expected [Source: BHC, July 3, 2008].
I visited Solar Street in July 2008 and observed several “for sale” signs. I noted that the existing infrastructure—sidewalks, signs, and lamp posts—was in better condition than neighboring streets like Scott Street. I suggest that the project may primarily benefit absentee landowners looking to sell their properties, as the enhancements could increase property values. Below are photos I took during my visit, illustrating the condition of Solar Street:
The Solar Hill Project’s use of highway funds occurs against the backdrop of a significant transportation funding crisis in Virginia. The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) reported a $1.1 billion shortfall in its six-year plan in 2008, necessitating substantial cuts and delays to infrastructure projects across the state. In Southwest Virginia alone, 13 primary roadway projects were delayed, 14 were cut, 60 secondary and side road projects were deferred, and 30 were eliminated. These projects primarily involved minor road widening, drainage improvements, and paving—essential maintenance that directly impacts public safety and accessibility [Source: BHC, June 14, 2008].
Senior VDOT officials emphasized a focus on safety and maximizing available funds, stating, “We continue our focus on safety and projects that we can advance through the pipeline to make the most of the funds we have available.” However, the diversion of $353,000 in highway funds to a beautification project like Solar Hill raises questions about prioritization, especially as Virginia considers tax increases to address transportation needs [Source: VDOT Six-Year Improvement Program, 2008].
I believe the Solar Hill Project raises questions about spending priorities, particularly given its location near the Rice Terrace public housing project in an economically challenged area of Bristol. I argue that the project does not address pressing local issues like poverty or job scarcity, instead focusing on aesthetic enhancements that may primarily benefit property owners looking to sell. The $30,000 allocated for historic markers and a map dispenser, for instance, is a point of concern, with city officials noting that these elements might need to be deferred to a future phase due to rising costs [Source: BHC, June 24, 2008].
I draw a broader critique by referencing a 1982 article from Human Events by M. Stanton Evans, titled “Where Do All the Welfare Billions Go?” Evans questions the effectiveness of government spending on poverty alleviation, noting, “One has to wonder how it is possible to spend these hundreds of billions to alleviate poverty and still have the same number of poor people that we had, say, in 1968...It prompts the more suspicious among us to ask: What happened to the money?...[A] tremendous chunk of these domestic outlays goes to pay the salaries of people who work for and with the federal government—including well-paid civil servants and an array of contractors and ‘consultants,’ many of whom have gotten rich from housing programs, ‘poverty’ studies, energy research grants, and the like.” I apply this lens to the Solar Hill Project, suggesting that the funds may disproportionately benefit contractors and absentee landowners rather than the broader community [Source: Human Events, February 6, 1982].
Below is an image of Solar Street, illustrating the historic character of the area targeted for beautification:
I’d like to thank Grok, an AI by xAI, for assisting in drafting and refining this article. The final content and perspective are my own.
