Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solar Project topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developers present 50/100 MW Rocky Ford solar plan; board presses on setbacks and water safeguards
Summary
Developer presented two Rocky Ford site plans and asked the board to consider a reduced 75‑foot setback (vs. 300 ft). Supervisors pressed on water quality, wetland delineation, and public hearings; engineers said they will enlarge sediment basins and provide erosion controls.
Developers seeking to site a solar project in the Rocky Ford area presented two site plans — a 50‑megawatt scenario and a 100‑megawatt scenario — and asked the Nottoway County Board for direction on setbacks and process. The team said a reduced 75‑foot setback (compared with the county’s current 300‑foot standard) would significantly increase under‑panel acreage and project efficiency; the developer asked the board to permit moving forward with applications and signing‑agreement language to capture reduced setbacks pending public hearings.
Board members raised several environmental and procedural questions: whether changing the setback would alter easement acreage; how perennial stream buffers would be treated (engineers discussed buffer widths and noted that “100 is required by the state” as a standard in other localities); and what erosion control measures the developer would use. The project engineer, Todd Chalmers, described specific controls his team uses elsewhere: “We increase all our sediment basins and traps by 25%,” he said, and listed measures including stronger silt fence, polymer applications to stabilize denuded land, and minimizing disturbance on steep slopes.
Why it matters: the setback decision affects how much land is encumbered by panels and fenced acreage (the developer showed examples where fenced acreage rose from about 472 to 858 acres under the smaller setback), which in turn changes landowner compensation, hydrology considerations, and required public process. The developer said wetland delineation may require adding parcels and could affect the application timeline; board members asked whether the developer could phase interconnection filings (the team confirmed they could file a second interconnection for another 50 MW to reach 100 MW).
Next steps: the board signaled it was willing to proceed with two public hearings and to consider signing‑agreement language to address reduced setbacks and any necessary zoning text amendments; staff will schedule the planning commission hearings and follow up on wetland delineation results and engineering details.
