CLARKSBURG, W.Va. (WBOY) — Tensions were rising in the Harrison County Commission Wednesday morning when a feasibility study was considered to be accepted for property located on WV Route 279.

The property in question was for the Regional Farm Recreation Facility Feasibility Site, aka a “barn complex.” There was heated conversation between members of the commission regarding whether what was being presented was considered a true “feasibility study.” Investopedia defines a feasibility study as “a detailed analysis that considers all of the critical aspects of a proposed project in order to determine the likelihood of it succeeding.”

Tensions began to rise when Commissioner David Hinkle (R) mentioned that the commission had asked for a “best use of property.” Commissioner Patsy Trecost (D) disagreed and said that they had asked for the “best 10 acres for the piece of property that the barn would be built on.”

Hinkle then questioned Chad Biller, Business Development Manager at the Thrasher Group, on how he determined that this property would be feasible. Biller answered by saying, “when you look at the streams, when you look at the grading, when you look at the utilities that are out there.”

Hinkle continued by saying that they asked for what was going to be most beneficial to the county financially, and what it was going to cost to do with the property. Hinkle said that the Commission never fully received a feasibility study and that it was never performed. His concern was that the other commissioners did not know how it was going to affect the value of the other property, as well as future use.

President of the Commission, Susan Thomas (D), then told Trecost and Hinkle that they needed to stop with their differences and that they should be able to “agree to disagree.” After more remarks were made, Biller was unable to present how many acres of flat land would be taken.

12 News spoke with Commissioner Hinkle after the meeting.

“Without flat, developable land, you can’t attract manufacturers. And so today, we gave up more land for non-manufacturing purposes and we didn’t evaluate the best use of practice for that land,” Hinkle said.

When no further discussion was presented, Susan Thomas motioned to accept the feasibility study.